• Destroying American Democracy – An Inside Job
  Destroying American Democracy – An Inside Job

  Authored by Pete Hoekstra via The Gatestone Institute,

  Over the last few years, there has been much written about the destruction of American democracy. Frequently the threat has been of alleged interference in U.S. elections by Russia, China or other state actors. Government agencies, the name of election integrity, were assigned to identify and disrupt these foreign intrusions. As more and more information is revealed about these agencies, it seems that America’s Intelligence Community participated in these activities domestically, and in a way that poses a grave threat to both election integrity and American democracy.

  

  Just last week it was revealed that the FBI again withheld pertinent information from the American public, for past two months, until after the November 8, 2022 federal election. As with the Bureau’s reported cover-up of evidence influence-peddling reportedly found on Hunter Biden’s laptop, agents knew, since November 2, 2022, about at least some of the three sets of classified material that illegally found their way into the garage and library of President Joe Biden and into the Penn Biden Center think tank at the University of Pennsylvania — to which anonymous members of the Chinese Communist Party have donated $54.6 million.

  Their existence only became known this week, after the newly elected Republican-majority House of Representatives announced that it would hold hearings on “how the [Justice] department handled investigations into classified materials found at former President Donald Trump’s Florida home and those found at President Joe Biden’s office in a Washington think tank bearing his name and his Delaware home…”

  In addition, the recent release of the “Twitter Files” has raised at least two major concerns regarding actions by the Intelligence Community. The first is that the wall of separation between the Intelligence Community and the U.S. media has not only sprung a leak, it has totally collapsed. The report that officials from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) met weekly with Twitter executives to coordinate information is totally inappropriate. Would officials from the ODNI review, affirm or label certain sets of information as false? When ODNI was created, no one intended its officials to have a role in these types of discussions.

  It also appears that intelligence officials in recent years have politically weaponized intelligence. The combination of a politically weaponized Intelligence Community, operating hand-in-hand with organizations that are the main gateways for information to millions of Americans, poses a serious threat to American democracy and the integrity of our elections.

  Let us just briefly look at the steep slope of lying, deceit and corruption that has seeped into the leadership of the U.S. Intelligence Community.

  First, there are not enough words to praise our Intelligence Community and the men and women who risk their lives to keep America safe. These are the rank-and-file professionals that form the core of the Intelligence Community. Most are dedicated to the mission of gathering the necessary information to protect our nation. Their leaders have a responsibility to serve these individuals. Too often, however, as the current array of whistleblowers indicates, those leaders have let these individuals down.

  Imagine their reaction in 2013 when, in response to a question from Senator Ron Wyden to then-Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper about whether the National Security Agency (NSA) collects “any type of data on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans,” Clapper answered, “No sir, not wittingly.” Clapper, who had been given the question the previous day, was asked after the hearing if he wanted to amend the answer, and declined. It was shortly thereafter that a massive NSA program containing millions of pieces of Americans’ data was revealed. Clapper was caught in a huge lie — to U.S. Senator Wyden and the American people.

  On January 12, 2017, CNN reported that President-elect Donald Trump had been briefed by DNI Clapper, FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and NSA Director Michael Rogers. The topic: “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Donald Trump.” It was intended to inform the President-elect that these allegations “are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress, and other government officials in Washington.” The briefing also touched on other major allegations they claimed were “circulating.”

  Having this false information — some of which the FBI actually altered — in the public domain was evidently intended to damage Trump. The Russian “hoax” allegations would haunt and damage the Trump presidency for almost two years. Clapper himself stated:

  “I express my profound dismay at the leaks that have been appearing in the press … they are extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security.”

  Clapper also released a statement that neither he nor anyone else in the Intelligence Community were responsible for the leaks. How did this highly classified information, then, get into the public domain?

  A House Republican investigation provides the answer. Clapper denied leaking the dossier but admitted to discussing the dossier with CNN correspondent Jake Tapper and perhaps other journalists in early January 2017. Later in 2017, Clapper would go on to join CNN as a “national security” contributor and CNN would receive an award for its reporting at the White House Correspondents’ dinner.

  Today we know that the “Russia hoax” was a lie. After a 22-month investigation, no evidence of collusion between any element of the Trump campaign and Russia was uncovered. The supposedly compromising evidence had never existed; the information in the “Steele dossier” was false — and the FBI had known it was from the start. The entire fabrication had been an attempt to attack and politically weaken Trump.

  In October 2020, shortly before the elections 51 former intelligence professionals had even signed a joint letter stating that the Hunter Biden laptop had “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” They stated that their national security experience made them “deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.” They went on:

  “If we are right, this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we strongly believe that Americans need to be aware of this.”

  The New York Times raised questions about the authenticity of the materials found on the laptop. Bill Evanina, the National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director, had indicated in August that Russia was trying to denigrate the Biden campaign. All these manufactured “facts” were apparently intended to create circumstances where reasonable people would have to conclude that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.

  Signatories of the 2020 letter included Clapper, Brennan, Michael Hayden, Jeremy Bash and David Buckley. Clapper and Brennan are familiar names. They were involved in the January 2017 briefing to President Donald Trump on the fake Steele dossier. Jeremy Bash and David Buckley are worth mentioning because they continue to play significant roles in domestic and national security areas in the U.S. government. Buckley was the majority staff director on the House Select Committee investigating January 6th. Bash has been named to co-chair a government commission to review the war in Afghanistan.

  The fraudulent efforts by the U.S. government, Clapper, Brennan and the 49 others — along with Hillary Clinton, her campaign committee, the Democratic National Committee and the suppression of the media and social media (here and here) — to influence the public unfortunately met with some success. For almost two years, the authenticity of the material found on Hunter Biden’s laptop was questioned. Today, its authenticity has been verified; the information is real and damning. As summarized by the New York Post:

  “Yes that letter from the Dirty 51 had all the classic earmarks of a disinformation operation, all right – one designed to ensure Joe Biden won the presidency. And it was essentially a CIA operation, considering 43 of the 51 signatories were former CIA.”

  One final example of the Intelligence Community involving itself in domestic politics comes from the recent release of the “Twitter Files.” According to tweet #20 of the third tranche released:

  “This post about the Hunter Biden laptop situation shows that Roth not only met weekly with the FBI and DHS, but with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.”

  Tweet #17 states: “executives were also clearly liaising with federal enforcement and intelligence agencies about moderation of election-related content.”

  Finally, the FBI paid Twitter $3.5 million reportedly to “handle requests from the bureau.”

  We now know what happened. Twitter suppressed discussion of the Hunter Biden laptop story and suppressed conservative messaging, while at the same time it appears the FBI, DHS and the ODNI had literally had set up shop at Twitter.

  The American people should be outraged. This level of collaboration between federal law enforcement and a private sector company on controlling speech is terrifying. Having our Intelligence Community, which is supposed to be focused on foreign intelligence collection, involved is even more terrifying.

  DNI James Clapper lying to the American people in 2013 about government surveillance of them, the promoting of the Russian hoax theory in 2017 by CIA Director Brennan, DNI Clapper, FBI Director Comey and others, the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story by 51 former intelligence professionals, and the close working arrangement between the FBI, DHS and the ODNI in 2020-2022 raises a staggering series of questions:

  • Can our government, law enforcement, and the Intelligence Community still be trusted?

  • Have those federal government agencies literally weaponized law enforcement and intelligence against political opponents in the U.S.?

  • Has more than one solitary person — former FBI attorney Kevin Clinemith, for altering an email — been held accountable for these egregious abuses of power?

  • Why wasn’t there a more powerful response from the Intelligence Community and the law enforcement community about the disinformation from the 51 former intelligence professionals?

  • Who authorized the cozy relationship between law enforcement, the intelligence community with Twitter?

  • Who in these government agencies reviewed and approved of the output and decisions coming from these joint efforts?

  • Were political appointees in the review loop?

  • Who has the records, notes and decisions that emanated from these groups?

  It is clear that our law enforcement community needs to be investigated, but most importantly we need to investigate how our Intelligence Community has evolved from having literally a non-existent relationship with speech in America to being inside the room determining what speech is allowed.

  There also needs to be a significant investigation by an outside, non-government group to understand how far this massive government overreach into free speech and election manipulation went.

  Clearly the government has been influencing what we get to see and hear. It needs to stop — now — before our democracy is destroyed.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 23:30

• Visualizing The Changing World Population, By Country
  Visualizing The Changing World Population, By Country

  On average, there are 250 babies born every minute around the world. As Visual Capitalist’s Freny Fernandes details below, this adds up to over 130 million new human beings entering the world every year.

  Then it’s no surprise that the world’s population, which now stands at a whopping 8 billion, has more than tripled since the mid-20th century.

  This graphic by Truman Du uses December 2022 population data from the UN and summaries from the French Institute for Demographic Studies (INED) to show the unequal rise and fall of the world’s population by 2050.

  

  Let’s take a closer look at some of these population trends.

  Most Populous Countries: 2022 vs. 2050

  The Asian countries of India and China have topped the rankings of the world’s most populous countries for hundreds of years.

  China currently holds the number one spot on this list. But the population of India is expected to surpass that of China’s by later this year, eventually reaching a total of 1.67 billion in 2050.

  

  The United States, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Indonesia are the next most populous countries in 2022, and they are expected to hold onto these spots until 2050. However, they have a long way to go before catching up with the top two, as their combined population doesn’t add up to half that of India and China’s total.

  Interestingly, it is estimated that Nigeria’s population will shoot up to 375 million by 2050, almost matching the population of the United States. In 2022, the African country’s population was just around 219 million. This expected spike is largely due to a high birth rate and booming economy, and the resultant rural-to-urban migration.

  Countries with Declining Populations

  While many countries will be seeing their populations boom over the next three decades, other nations such as China are expected to experience the opposite.

  

   

  Several countries in the world are expected to see their populations decline over the next 30 years. And the main reason for this: extremely low birth rates.

  South Korea, which has the world’s lowest fertility rate, is expected to see a sharp decline of almost 12% in its population as it falls to 46 million by 2050.

  Changing world population trends like this can pose challenges for economies around the world, such as labor shortages, aging populations, and an increasing financial burden on younger generations.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 23:00

• The Importance Of Being Biden: How Hunter Reached New Low Seeking To Bar Daughter From Using His Name
  The Importance Of Being Biden: How Hunter Reached New Low Seeking To Bar Daughter From Using His Name

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  In Oscar Wilde’s “The Importance of Being Ernest,” the main character’s search for his true name comes to a head when he finally demands “would you kindly inform me who I am?” In an astonishing filing this week, Hunter Biden answered that question for his four-year-old daughter Navy Joan and effectively declared “you are no Biden.”

  

  Hunter Biden’s disgraceful treatment of his daughter has long been on display in Arkansas where he long denied being her father, fought paternity, and was threatened with contempt of court over his failure to supply needed documents. After DNA testing was forced by a court, Hunter was found to be the father but he continued to resist efforts to force him to pay child support and supply financial records.

  Recently, Lunden Roberts sought to have a surname change for her daughter to Biden. Even after his long and abusive treatment of his daughter in court, Hunter Biden’s opposition is breathtaking.  He opposes his daughter using his name and says that, if she does, she will never have a “peaceful existence.”

  Of course, Biden did not feel that way with his other four children. They are all true Bidens and living peaceful existences. It is only Navy Joan who he does not want to bear the family name.

  Hunter’s concern for Navy Joan’s peaceful existence is a bit odd since he has reportedly never even seen his daughter after fighting for years to deny his paternal status and child support.

  While living in a luxurious mansion in Malibu, Hunter continued to fight his obligations under child support and requested in September 2022 to have the payments lowered, bemoaning how his “financial circumstances” were difficult for him.  The public pays more for his security in his mansion than he does in monthly support for his daughter.

  Hunter is asking Circuit Court Judge Holly Meyer to deny Navy Joan the ability to use her father’s surname and claiming that it is in her best interest. The filing is so self-serving and transparently dishonest that it does what was once thought impossible: reach a new low for Hunter. All of his reported selfies having sex and doing drugs with prostitutes were shocking. His attacks on his former sister-in-law, Hallie Biden, widow of the deceased brother (with whom Hunter later had a romantic relationship), were appalling. However, the craven effort to deny this child his name reaches a level of cad that stands unrivaled.

  The position of Hunter in court has been disgraceful, but the media has largely ignored the matter. It has also ignored the utter lack of support from President Joe Biden and the First Lady, who tellingly omitted a stocking for Navy Joan as one of their grandchildren. (The dog and cat did receive stockings). There is no record that Joe or Jill Biden have ever sought to meet, let alone embrace, their grandchild. The President has, however, sought to deny the child security protection (despite his son’s concern for her “peaceful existence”).

  Joe Biden has long campaigned against “deadbeat Dads” but when a Fox reporter asked about Hunter’s refusal to pay child support, President Biden snapped at him and refused to answer the question on the “personal matter.” (The media also ignored Hunter’s deadbeat dad record in fawning interviews about this “bravery” in writing a book on his life).

  The obvious effort of the Biden family in this filing is to preserve distance from this child. The legal standard for a name change in Arkansas has been based on the “best interests of the child,” not the political interest of the father and his family. Indeed, historically, Arkansas courts followed a presumption in favor of a child have the surname of its father.

  More recently, the Arkansas Supreme Court in Huffman v. Fisher laid out various factors to balance including (1) the child’s preference; (2) the effect on the child’s relationship with each parent; (3) the length of time that the child has borne the prior surname; (4) the community respect for the rivaling surnames; (5) the social difficulties that could arise from the adoption of the new surname; and (6) the presence of any parental misconduct or neglect.

  The petition is based on the best interest of the child.  Roberts’ lawyer claims that the Biden name is “now synonymous with being well educated, successful, financially acute, and politically powerful.” The “financially acute” part did jump out for many of us who have followed Hunter Biden’s scandals for years.  The Bidens have certainly made themselves wealthy during Joe Biden’s time in office. However, they are synonymous not with financial acuity but influence peddling. While influence peddling has long been the leading industry in Washington, the Bidens have long taken it to levels unimagined by other powerful families with millions in windfall payments from foreign sources, including some connected to foreign intelligence operations.

  Nevertheless, the child is clearly better off with the Biden surname, particularly in establishing the very connection that Hunter, Joe, and Jill Biden seem committed to conceal or ignore.  Navy Joan is the grandchild of the 47th President of the United States. That alone makes the change beneficial. Navy Joan will be able to benefit from the cache of that connection in applying to college, seeking employment, and other pursuits. It also establishes (despite the efforts of the Bidens) that she is part of the family’s legacy.

  Joe Biden often talks about his Irish roots and his family tree. The familial legacy also includes Navy Joan. Those are her relatives even if they refuse to recognize or embrace her.

  There is no real doubt about the best interests of his child in his filing.  For their part, the Bidens have made it clear what is in their best interest. It is not this child. The court should make fast work of this petition and change Navy Joan’s surname to Biden. That will not make the family more loving or supportive or accepting. She will have to eventually deal emotionally with this latest effort to conceal her true identity.

  Yet, she is a Biden and could easily prove the best of the lot.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 22:30

• How Long Is Compulsory Military Service?
  How Long Is Compulsory Military Service?

  Taiwan is extending its mandatory military service in 2024 from four months to one year, as tensions continue to rise with China. Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen announced early last week that conscription will include more intense training so that the country is better equipped should China invade. Conscripts will also receive a higher monthly stipend, increasing from NT$6,500 (US$211) to NT$26,307 (US$856), which is roughly akin to minimum wage. In a poll conducted by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation in December, 73 percent of respondents supported the move.

  Fewer than 30 countries worldwide still require whole age cohorts to complete military service. But, as Statista’s Anna Fleck details below, among those that do, four months is a relatively short period of time. Taiwan had originally stipulated two years of service, however this was gradually cut down to four months as of 2013, with the intention of relying more heavily on volunteer forces instead.

  As Statista’s chart shows, North Korea stands at the other end of the spectrum in terms of duration, although media reports vary. The Guardian reported 10 years for men and 7 for women as of 2015, while the Indian Express puts the figures closer to 8 years for men and 5 for women. According to media reports, those in the elite class are usually able to avoid conscription.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Israel too has a fairly long and rigorous conscription, albeit far shorter than North Korea. Most Israeli men over the age of 18 who are Jewish, Druze or Circassian must serve in the Israel Defense Forces for 32 months and women for 24 months, according to the IDF. Meanwhile, in Egypt, conscription is compulsory for men aged between 18 and 30 for up to 36 months. As with several countries on the chart, service can be pushed back until students finish their studies and there are a number of clauses that exempt men from joining the forces, for example, if they are the only son/sole breadwinner of the family.

  South Korea, which is technically still at war with North Korea, also has mandatory conscription for all able-bodied men for a period of 18 months to 21 months, depending on the posting. Some athletes and classical artists are allowed to postpone or forgo the draft entirely. The K-Pop group BTS brought the issue to light recently, with debate over whether they could be excused from service. The decision was made that men can delay their military draft until the age of 28 and those working in the entertainment industry are now allowed to postpone their service until they turn 30. The oldest member of BTS, Jin, has now started his mandatory draft.

  There’s huge variation in the rules for how long citizens must join the military in the countries that still have mandatory conscription as well as possible reasons for exemptions. For instance, in Turkey, new laws introduced in 2019 decreed that instead of the mandatory six months of military training, conscripts could do one month and buy-out the remaining five months for a fee of 31,000 Turkish Lira ($1,651), according to the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Conscripts’ levels of higher education can also impact the type and length of their post.

  Punishments for not enlisting vary too. In Eritrea, anyone evading or attempting to evade compulsory military service could face imprisonment of one to three years. According to DFAT, this could increase to 7-10 years imprisonment in a time of emergency or war.

  While most countries with conscription only draft men, a handful of countries including North Korea, Israel, Norway, Sweden, Eritrea and Mozambique conscript women too.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 22:00

• Japan's Experts Baffled By High 'COVID Deaths' Despite High Vaccination Rate
  Japan’s Experts Baffled By High ‘COVID Deaths’ Despite High Vaccination Rate

  Authored by Guy Gin via ‘Making (COVID) Waves In Japan’ Substack,

  After three booster campaigns in 2022, the Japanese are now in a league of their own among mRNA consuming countries, administering far more boosters than countries that had far more coercive vax campaigns.

  

  Japanese over 65 have done their best to reduce Japan’s 612-million-dose stockpile of mRNA jabs, with 3rd, 4th, and 5th jab rates of 91%, 82.5%, and 56%, respectively. But unfortunately, Japan has started 2023 by reporting its highest ever daily Covid death tolls. During the booster era starting in early 2022, each wave has been noticeably higher than the last.

  

  What could possibly explain this? Let’s ask Takaji Wakita, chairman of Japan’s Covid Response Advisory Board.

  

  The cause of the rise in Covid deaths is *hard to explain.*

  What about Dr Satoshi Kamayachi, director of the Japan Medical Association?

  

  JMA director on increased Covid deaths: “There’s a lot we don’t know, and we don’t have evidence.”

  Nice to see an expert admit the limit of his knowledge. But there must be something Dr Kamayachi can tell us, right?

  Dr Kamayachi, citing the rapid spread of Covid infections as one reason, explained that the majority of those who died were over 60 and many had underlying medical conditions. The direct cause of death is often heart failure or kidney disease, and he said that “thorough analysis is needed.”

  Heart failure, you say? Well, it’s not like most Japanese over 60 have been injected multiple times with anything that causes cardiovascular problems, is it? And kidney disease is coincidentally a side-effect of Remdesivir, an approved Covid treatment in Japan.

  Of course, Japan has been counting anyone who dies with a positive test result as a Covid death regardless of actual cause of death since 2020, but Dr Kamayachi and the rest of Japan’s experts haven’t bothered bringing up the issue of attribution until now. In fact, they were more than happy to cite inflated mortality data to help promote the jabs. But now that people may question why daily reported Covid deaths are higher than ever after the majority of over 65s have taken the experts’ advice to get multiple boosters, underlying medical conditions can apparently be discussed.

  But although he’s three years late, Dr Kamayachi has a point. Although reported Covid deaths have been much higher in the booster era, far fewer Covid cases have been receiving mechanical ventilation (the gray line shows the number of ventilators/ECMO secured for Covid patients).

  

  But even if hardly any of them have been struggling for breath on mechanical ventilation, Japan’s elderly have been dying in higher than expected numbers in the booster era. The national figures for December won’t be out until late Feb, but Yokohama (Japan’s second largest city) has already releases its all-cause death numbers for 2022. Somehow I doubt Dr Kamayachi will call for a “thorough analysis” to find out the cause of the increase since August.

  

  All-cause deaths in Yokohama 2016-2022

  Although there’s no good news here for Japan’s vaxed-to-the-max elderly, there is for Japan’s medical establishment: high numbers of Covid deaths mean the publicly funded Covid gravy train will keep going. From The Nikkei.

  On 11th Jan, experts offered their views on reclassifying Covid-19 under the Infectious Diseases Act. In light of the current situation where the number of reported Covid deaths per day is the highest ever, the experts called for the government to continue to provide a certain amount of financial support to cover treatment and hospitalization costs and for securing hospital beds.

  Basically, the government’s selected experts, including Dr. Wakita above, recommend that Covid should be downgraded “gradually”, i.e., medical costs should continue to be covered by public funds rather than health insurance/out-of-pocket payments like every other medical condition. This might seem reasonable. But under the current scheme of Covid support payments, hospitals can be paid ¥436,000 (US$3,370) per day to “secure” a single ICU bed regardless of whether anyone is in it. And overpriced Covid treatments include glorified cold medications like Shinogi’s Xocova.

  So let’s recap what the experts have told us.

  The cause of increased Covid deaths? “Dunno.”

  Should the government keep showering medical institutions and pharma companies with money? “Absolutely!”

  Well, what were you expecting them to say?

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 21:30

• House GOP Bill Would Order Federal Workers Back To Office
  House GOP Bill Would Order Federal Workers Back To Office

  House Republicans have introduced a bill that would command legions of federal employees to stop teleworking and return to the office. 

  The Stopping Home Office Work’s Unproductive Problems Act — or “SHOW UP Act” — was introduced by Kentucky Rep. James Comer, who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. 

  “Americans have suffered from the federal government’s detrimental pandemic-era telework policies for federal bureaucrats,” said Comer. “President Biden’s unnecessary expansion of telework crippled the ability of departments and agencies to fulfill their responsibilities and created cumbersome backlogs.”

  The bill gives federal employees who worked in person prior to the pandemic 30 days to get back to the office. A November Federal News Network survey found that 60% of feds were working in a “hybrid” environment, with a third working entirely remotely.  

  

  Comer says Oversight Committee members have received whistleblower reports indicating that General Service Administration’s (GSA) chief Robin Carnahan has spent the majority of her time away from Washington, DC.   

  The SHOW UP Act would also direct federal agencies to study the impact of tele-work on their missions and report their findings to Congress. “The federal government’s expansion of telework during the pandemic has delayed critical assistance to veterans, tax refunds, passport applications, and other basic services,” said Comer’s office.

  Agencies would also have to provide data on locality pay received by federal employees — who may not actually be spending much time in that locality at all. 

  Locality pay is a substantial layer of compensation that’s added to federal employees’ base pay. As the name implies, it varies depending on where the job is located. The 2022 default locality pay for areas of the country without a customized percentage was 16.5% of base pay.

  However, in Washington DC, it’s a whopping 32.49% of base pay. For 2003, employees in the DC locality received one of the largest locality-pay hikes: 4.86%.  

  The SHOW UP Act alludes to an important question: How many purported Washington DC federal employees are receiving enormous locality pay while living somewhere else and phoning it in? That question isn’t only relevant for DC: The same dynamic would apply federal employees in other localities who’ve left the big city to go live cheap somewhere else and only visit the office when required.  

  In 2021, the federal Office of Personnel Management said employees in “remote work” arrangements — a permanent arrangement with no expectation of coming to the office — should receive locality pay based on their remote location.

  Things get murkier, though, where flexible “telework” is concerned. Telework usually requires reporting in-person twice every two weeks…unless that requirement is waived. Teleworking feds’ locality pay is determined by the office location, not their home. 

  To that point, the SHOW UP Act says agencies must analyze costs attributable to “paying higher rates of locality pay to teleworking employees as a result of incorrectly classifying such employees as teleworkers rather than remote workers.” 

  

  It isn’t just Republicans who are itching to get federal employees out of their pajamas and back to work. Earlier this month, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser urged President Biden to kill the liberal telework policies that have left many office buildings nearly vacant, with corresponding impacts on the city economy. Otherwise, she wants government offices repurposed. 

  The SHOW UP Act, which has no future in a Democrat-controlled Senate, would bolster her case: It commands agencies to assess the cost of “owning, leasing or maintaining under-utilized real property.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 21:00

• The Benefits Of A Savings Culture & The Future Role Of China's Yuan
  The Benefits Of A Savings Culture & The Future Role Of China’s Yuan

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  Savings are a vital component of any successful economy, and the foolishness behind the paradox of thrift is exposed in this article. It has been a huge error for Keynesian policy makers to discourage savings in the interests of temporary boosts to consumerism.

  It is probably too late now but encouraging people to save by removing all taxation from savings makes an enormous contribution to reducing price inflation and trade deficits, while enhancing national wealth. This is evidenced empirically and demonstrated by reasoned theory. 

  Furthermore, there is an error in assuming that there is no alternative to Triffin’s dilemma, which posited that for a nation to produce a meaningful level of reserve currency for external circulation it must run trade deficits. Triffin was describing the problems the United States gave itself under the Bretton Woods agreement, leading to the failure of the London gold pool in the late sixties. It still informs US policy makers today, and wrongly leads American commentators to believe that the dollar cannot be toppled from its pre-eminent position.

  But Triffin’s dilemma assumes that central banks must accumulate currency reserves. Unless a government has foolishly indebted itself in a foreign currency, there is no need for them to do so. Currency reserves add nothing to a domestic currency’s stability. Gold fulfilled this role successfully, and likely to do so again in future.

  It is a savings ratio of 45% which is at the root of China’s power. The lack of savings in America and its western alliance is their Achilles heel.

  

  Empirical evidence

  If there was one taxation policy which would reduce consumer price inflation, stabilise a fiat currency, encourage capital allocation for productive purposes, and improve government finances for the longer-term, what would it be?

  Remove all taxes from savings.

  This is the lesson from past-war West Germany and Japan, both of which suffered absolute defeat and economic destruction in the Second World War. Their currencies were worthless. But they recovered to become economic powerhouses in Europe and Asia respectively in little more than two decades. Both implemented savings-friendly taxation policies, which made capital available at stable interest rates for new industries to invest in production. Germany developed its Mittelstand, and Japan built on her vertically integrated Zaibatsu.

  Germany was fortunate in its Economy Minister, Ludwig Erhard. A free marketeer who on 20 June 1948 took the bull by the horns, Erhard unilaterally ended rationing on the same day as the new mark was introduced, presenting it as a fait accompli to the military governors in the British and American zones. In a week, shops had begun to reopen, and goods became widely available.

  In negotiations with the military governors, Erhard managed to obtain income tax concessions for savings, which through the banking system were invested making capital available for private sector reconstruction. While he struggled against both military governments in the two zones to retain lower taxes and for favourable treatment for savings into the 1950s, Erhard had laid the foundations for a savings driven, free market economy. By the 1980s, the only tax on savings was a 10% withholding tax on bank interest and bond coupons, which was not generally pursued by the German tax authorities in the knowledge that attempts to do so would simply drive savings beyond their reach into Luxembourg and Zurich.

  For this reason, Germany remained a savings driven economy with a strong currency right up to the mark’s incorporation in the new euro. Much to the confusion of British and American neo-Keynesians subscribing to their cherished savings paradox, Germany became the wealthiest of the European nations, other than perhaps Switzerland. In both cases, hard currencies accompanied wealth creation.

  Erhard’s post-war opposition was principally from General Sir Brian Robertson, the head of the British occupation government, and from the French. The commander of the American occupation zone, General Lucius Clay was more sympathetic with free market solutions. The Americans had promoted A Plan for the Liquidation of War Finance and Financial Rehabilitation of Germany (1946), written at Clay’s behest, one of the co-authors being Joseph Dodge. In 1949, Dodge was then appointed to advise the Japanese government on its post-war reconstruction as an aide to General MacArthur. And Dodge was instrumental in ensuring that up to a certain level, post office savings accounts were entirely tax free. It was probably a deliberate oversight on his part, but the tax law didn’t stop an account holder merely opening another savings account when the tax-free limit on an existing account was reached.

  Dodge implemented what became known as “The Dodge Line”. By insisting on a balanced national budget and shutting down the printing presses, he ended hyperinflation. The exchange rate between the yen and the dollar stabilised. Government economic intervention and interference was slashed across the board. Echoing John Cowperthwaite’s free market policies in Hong Kong, Dodge realised that the best economic progress was obtained by eliminating state interference, leaving it to Japan’s businessmen and entrepreneurs who, despite the war, retained the skills and connections to run their businesses. With MacArthur’s support, he ruthlessly eliminated subsidies and price controls. Dodge was eventually recalled to America, becoming Truman’s Director of the Budget where in the space of only a year he had cut the US federal deficit in half.

  Dodge’s free market approach was supplemented by the assistance of another American adviser, W Edwards Denning. Denning introduced quality control techniques to Japanese manufacturing which revolutionised production. As a consequence of Denning’s contribution, Japan rapidly evolved from a source of shoddy goods into a producer of the best consumer technology and the manufacture of world-beating high quality consumer goods.

  Behind this revolution was the tax incentive to save – a simple approach of assuming that taxed earnings put aside should not be taxed again. In both Germany and Japan, these were not the only factors that led to a successful emergence from total desolation, but they are the elements that ensured that both nations continued to flourish. And in Japan, despite the government fully embracing Keynesian philosophy in the wake of the late-eighties speculative bubble, the savings culture of “Mrs Watanabe, the Japanese housewife” persists to this day.

  After his stint in Japan and while Joe Dodge worked his budget magic for Truman, the British were going in the opposite direction, eschewing free markets, embracing Keynesianism, persisting with rationing until 1954, and imposing punitive taxes on savings. The decline of post-war Britain and much of Europe need not enter our narrative, but it was a feature of all nations which implemented economic policies of taxing savings.

  The theory behind savings

  The empirical evidence is clear. Since the Second World War, economies that embraced free markets and the role of personal savings outperformed those which saw savings as an easy source of tax revenue. Furthermore, we can easily explain why free markets succeed in creating wealth for all, while a state directed economy is anti-progress. It was demonstrated by the Austrian economist, Ludwig von Mises, who in an essay written in 1920 explained the futility of central planning due to a lack of the ability to perform economic calculation. Admittedly, he compared the full-blown socialism which Russia had embraced with free markets. But his conclusions, that the state is unable to allocate economic resources including capital as efficiently as profit-seeking capitalists applies equally to less aggressive forms of socialism.

  In a free market economy, individuals are compelled to make provision for the unknown vagaries of the future. Often through the medium of insurance policies and pension plans, they put aside a portion of their income to protect themselves from the financial consequences of ill-health and incapacity, provide for their old age, and to ensure there is something to pass on to their heirs. If the circulating medium is sound, no financial skill is required to preserve the value of savings in these arrangements and in the form of bank deposits. Within the limits of their acumen, those with some financial knowledge can venture into other forms of savings, such as bonds issued by their government agencies and corporations and even to acquire equity interests in ventures.

  As always, investors with skill and knowledge will improve their position relative to those less financially literate, which is anathema to redistributors of wealth. But the corruption of the value of credit that goes with monetary intervention by the state impoverishes those who lack investing skills most, always the poorest in society. It stands to reason therefore, that an economy that benefits most from the savings of the masses must protect the value of credit.

  The Keynesian revolution rode roughshod over this issue. Keynes dismissed capitalist savers as rentiers, a term with emotive connotations suggesting that they are workshy and greedy only for interest on their capital. His academic environment at Cambridge and afterwards the Bloomsbury set in London was certainly populated with these flaneurs. But this was not representative of the wider population which was to be deprived by his desire for the euthanasia of the rentier expressed openly in his General Theory.

  So it was that Keynes came up with the paradox of thrift, while he was working his way towards discarding Say’s law to justify his General Theory. In Chapter 23, he takes preceding crackpot theories on the subject as evidence of the destruction wrought by saving. Earlier in Chapter 3, on Observations of the Nature of Capital, he claimed that excess savings could lead to “the fate of Midas…  assuming that the propensity to consume and the rate of interest are not deliberately controlled in the social interest but are left mainly to the influences of laissez-faire”. In working his way towards a role for the state, which appears to be his objective here, Keynes makes a number of errors, the principal ones being glossing over the role of bank credit (there is only one indexed reference to credit, commercial bank or otherwise in the whole book!), and whether it is the borrower or lender who sets the rate of interest. To be absolutely certain of the role of savings in an economy, and as to whether there can be an excess leading to the fate of Midas, we must explore Keynes’s errors further.

  Variations in the rate of interest are not due to the ephemeral dispositions of rentiers but in large part to fluctuations in the supply of bank credit. It is the expansion of bank credit which leads to an economic boom, which when it leads to excessive demand and speculation by driving up prices engenders caution in the banker’s mind. Naturally, he then restricts the supply of credit, which raises the interest cost. This is why the cycle of bank credit would never permit “the fate of Midas” to occur. Clearly, Keynes’s conclusion that there can be a savings glut is based on his wilful ignorance of the nature of money and credit.[iii]

  Furthermore, Keynes’s basic assumption, that it is the greed of the rentier which forces an unnecessary and arguably immoral cost onto production is also incorrect. It is the same error that leads monetary policy makers today to assume that by manipulating the interest rate the general level of prices can be controlled. It was Keynes himself who earlier noted this error, which he named Gibson’s paradox after Arthur Gibson, who pointed out the lack of correlation between the two. Because Keynes was unable to explain the paradox, he simply proceeded as if it did not exist, and so has every monetary policy committee ever since.

  The paradox is real, and the explanation is simple, falling into two elements. The first is that savers are generally reluctant to save, because it means a deferment of consumption, an immediate satisfaction being exchanged for one in the future of less certain value. Therefore, a business requiring capital for production must bid up the rate of interest it is prepared to pay to a level where the consumer is willing to defer his enjoyment. It is this marginal rate that balances the demands for capital with the availability of savings in an economy. And it is not just a question of setting the rate of interest for recycling credit through the banks’ balance sheets. It sets the rates of return for all financial assets as well and the cost of funding for their issuers.

  The second element is the time-preference for which savers will naturally expect compensation. Time preference describes the value of possession of money or money substitutes. A saver loses the value of possession until his money or credit for money is returned. For simplicity’s sake, we must ignore counterparty risk but include expectations of changes in the purchasing power in the circulating media for the time that possession is lost.

  It becomes clear that if a potential saver is to part with possession of money or credit when the evidence points to its debasement, he will reasonably seek compensation. Therefore, for the saver interest rates are not the cost of money which he demands, except in a strictly minimally additional and marginal sense. For a central bank to assume that by varying the underlying rate of interest it can control the economy is therefore incorrect. Central banks have it the wrong way round, which explains why there is no correlation between their interest rate setting and the rate of price inflation. 

  Furthermore, Gibson pointed out that the correlation was between interest rates and the general level of wholesale prices, and not their rate of change. This correlation is consistent with a businessman’s economic calculation: in order to calculate the profitability of an investment, he must consider the price he will expect for his production, by necessity always referring to current levels. He can then calculate the interest cost he is prepared to pay to secure the capital necessary for his project, and therefore assess its profitability.

  The hope harboured by Keynes, that the state can stimulate the economy at the expense of savings beyond the very short term is incorrect. His paradox of thrift, which Keynes used to try to dissuade a propensity to save, was a conclusion drawn from these errors. They are in large part responsible for the plight in which the US, the UK, and various member states of the EU now find themselves. 

  Savings in the context of national finances

  More than any other factor, the propensity to save is a major influence on national finances, being a “swing factor” between a government’s budget and the national trade position.

  There is an important question most analysts ignore. It is the twin deficit hypothesis, whereby if the savings rate doesn’t change, a budget deficit leads to a matching trade deficit.  The reason the two deficits are linked in this way is because of the following national accounting identity:

  (Imports – Exports) ≡ (Investment – Savings) + (Government spending – Taxes)

  In other words, a trade deficit is the result of a budget deficit not funded by savings but by additional credit. This can be confirmed by following the money. For a budget deficit, there are only two sources of funding. Consumers put aside some of their spending to increase their savings in order to subscribe for government bonds. Otherwise, the banking system comes up with funding in the form of credit issued by the central bank or by commercial banks, putting additional credit into circulation which didn’t exist before.

  The financing of a budget deficit by credit expansion leads to excess credit in an economy without matching production. This is the point behind Say’s law, which defines the division of labour. We produce to consume, and the function of money and credit is one of intermediation between the two. Injecting extra credit into an economy does nothing to raise production, but it does increase overall demand, at least until it is absorbed into the economy in accordance with the Cantillon effect.

  Directly or indirectly, this excess demand can only be satisfied by imported consumer goods, because an increase in domestic production is unavailable. 

  The role of savings in the context of national finances is very important. An increase in savings is at the expense of consumption, which is why economists often refer to savings as consumption deferred. For consumption to remain deferred requires it to be invested, either into production or government debt usually through the banks, pension funds, insurance companies or other financial channels acting on the savers’ behalf.

  If the destination of additional savings is investment in government debt, they are turned into consumption by the government. By not being spent on additional consumer goods, the trade deficit falls relative to the budget deficit. 

  As noted above, despite the destructive Keynesian policies of its government, Japanese savers habitually respond to an increase in credit by retaining it in their savings accounts. Consequently, consumer price inflation is subdued, relative to that in other countries. While the Eurozone has employed similar interest rate policies and is suffering CPI-recorded debasement of over 10%, in Japan it is about 4%. As we note below, in China whose savings ratio is 45%, CPI measured inflation is currently less than 2%.

  The deployment of capital by Japan’s corporations, which is the counterpart of increased savings, is invested in improvements in technology and production methods, keeping consumer prices lower than they would otherwise be. Because Japanese savers are so consistent in their savings culture, Japanese corporations have benefitted from a relatively low and stable cost of capital, making business calculation more reliable. For Japan, savings are the positive swing factor in the twin deficit hypothesis.

  The same is true of any economy where there is a government deficit while at the same time there is a propensity in the population to save rather than spend. It is the driving force behind China’s export surpluses, because with the sole exception of Singapore, the Chinese are the biggest savers on the planet. The position of nations whose economic policies have been to tax savings and to encourage immediate consumption is diametrically different. It is consumption funded by the expansion of money and credit without increases in savings which has led to persistent US trade deficits, twinned with budget deficits. 

  The evidence confirms that a savings driven economy is more successful than a consumption driven economy. Not only does the former protect the currency’s purchasing power by reducing the need for reliance on foreign capital inflows to finance internal deficits, but empirical evidence clearly shows savings-driven economies are more successful at creating wealth for their citizens. Importantly, a currency backed by a savings culture can weather a greater level of credit expansion by its central bank without adverse consequences for prices.

  The condition which must apply is that fiat currencies continue to operate as media of exchange. The moment a major currency such as the US dollar fails, then all fiat currencies are likely to be destabilised. The cure for that risk is to tie currencies to legal money, which is gold. In the absence of that link, even the strongest fiat currency loses purchasing power over time. The Japanese yen has lost 95% of its purchasing power relative to gold since 1970, an average of 1.83% every year. But including tax-free bank interest, the Japanese housewife has probably just about retained the value of her post office savings account, unlike her taxed equivalents in the other major currencies.

  Supplying a reserve currency 

  As Robert Triffin, the Belgian-American economist put it, for a currency to be available internationally to act as the reserve currency requires irresponsible short-term domestic economic and monetary policies. Triffin originally described why this is the case in evidence before the US Congress in 1959. It was a dilemma, which would eventually lead to an erosion of confidence in the currency. He was proved right eight years later when the London gold pool failed, leading to the abandonment of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1971.

  In a twist of Triffin’s earlier warning whereby his predicted outcome is ignored, in recent years the dilemma has been taken to justify continual trade deficits, the counterpart of which is the accumulation of dollars in foreign hands. The eventual consequences are ignored. Currently, these dollars and the US financial assets in which they are invested total over $30 trillion, significantly more than US GDP. This total has fallen by over $3 trillion in the year to September, mainly due to a fall in market valuations. But there has been net foreign selling of existing US dollar assets as well, while the US trade deficit has added to the outflow by an additional trillion dollars.

  The US now appears to be in a similar position to that described by Triffin as the inevitable outcome of providing the world with its reserve currency. Furthermore, the scale of dollar and dollar denominated financial asset accumulation has been encouraged by a bond bull market on the back of a declining interest rate trend which has lasted forty years. Crucially, domestic funding of budget deficits as recorded by the savings rate has failed to match this foreign interest.

  However, domestic investors have made substantial portfolio gains along with foreign holders of dollars. Driving these gains has been the inflation of credit directed into financial activities thereby sustaining the bubble, while the Fed goosed valuations by suppressing interest rates to the zero bound.

  When the rate of consumer price inflation unexpectedly broke the bounds of statistical management — independent analysts had it far higher than official figures for many years citing changes in methodology — it became clear that the bull market in US asset values was over. Being in the early stages of a bear market, this fundamental change is yet to be widely recognised, but with official interest rates well below the CPI rate of increase, foreign investors are certain of yet more portfolio and currency losses. Domestic investors and bulls of their own currency assume foreigners will still demand dollars, when the evidence from the continuing trade deficit and the US Treasury’s TIC figures confirm they are already turning sellers.

  This dichotomy between foreigner and domestic users of a currency is not unusual. An examination of previous episodes of currencies in trouble confirms that the foreign exchanges are usually first to recognise they should be sold, while domestic users usually continue to believe that they will retain their value. 

  If it is not too late, the solution to stabilising today’s fiat currencies is to remove all obstacles to savers, in an attempt to increase the savings ratio. But when a currency is already on its way to eventual extinction, removing tax disincentives may not be enough, and other measures to reduce the budget deficit must be taken in order to reduce the trade deficit. But then we run into Keynes’s savings paradox: discouraging consumption in favour of savings is viewed by neo-Keynesians as recessionary when economic growth is already stalling.

  The Saudi’s decision to ditch dollars in favour of yuan — turning from petrodollars to petroyuan — couldn’t have come at a worse time for the dollar. In addition to facing a bear market for their dollar assets, foreign holders now find its mainstay justification is distinctly frayed. Almost certainly, the dollar is on the verge of a Triffin crisis.

  The future role of China’s yuan 

  This time, it appears that the dollar has nowhere to turn. Asia is now the most important geopolitical region, with some 3.8bn people rapidly industrialising. Member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the Eurasian Economic Union, and BRICS are increasingly determined to move away from dollars, its hegemony, and influence. As the Saudis and the whole Gulf Cooperation Council of oil exporters are demonstrating, China’s yuan is being seen as the dollar’s replacement for inter-Asian payments. The roles of the euro, yen, and sterling in foreign reserves are also likely to diminish with the dollar as well. 

  At this stage the new global currency reserve position is still unclear, with the Eurasian Economic Union planning a trade settlement currency, and the Russians sending vague signals but yet to prognosticate. But in the context of Triffin and savings rates, China could hardly be more different from the US. 

  China has a savings rate of about 45% of its GDP. With this propensity to save, it is unsurprising that consumer price inflation is under two per cent. Moreover, government finances have taken a hit from China’s covid lockdown policies and a property development crisis, leaving a deficit of over $1 trillion equivalent for 2022. But even so, with such a high savings rate the surplus on the balance of trade for 2022 was still positive at $890bn.

  The Triffin dilemma suggests that for the yuan to become a replacement reserve currency the Chinese government will have to start spending like drunken sailors while taxing domestic savings to the hilt. Only then can a trade deficit be expected to arise. But such a volte face in economic policy would surely destroy the yuan’s credibility. After all, it took ten years from the suspension of the Bretton Woods agreement and interest rates rising to 20% for the dollar to then assume the role of a reserve currency in gold’s stead.

  We must question the need for central banks to maintain currency reserves in the future. Not only did the western alliance send a signal that they could be made worthless by its cartel at the stroke of a pen, but the shift from the petrodollar to the petroyuan is symbolic of a currency regime that has had its time. The possession of reserves originated with the requirement for central banks to back their currencies with legal money — gold. It is the abandonment of this link with money that led to possession of currency reserves, with dollar holdings at their core. But other than for limited international intervention purposes there seems to be little reason to hold them, particularly for those central banks who have become aware of the western alliance’s declining influence.

  China with its trade surplus while maintaining a balance in its payments by exporting capital has no need for other currency reserves beyond some minor liquidity. The capital being exported is in yuan in the form of bank credit, and it suits China with her plans for the industrialisation of Greater Asia and its suppliers in Africa and South America to make substantial investments for her greater good. The Chinese government controls its major banks and can direct the application of this surplus credit. There is no need therefore for China to destroy its finances to provide yuan as a reserve currency, as Triffin originally suggested.

  Clearly, there must be a revolution in central bank thinking underway in the broader Asian camp. Central banks are beginning to replace the major currencies in their reserves with yuan and even roubles. But these currencies are not available in sufficient quantities to replace their dollars, euros, yen, and sterling. This is why they are turning the clock back and beginning to accumulate physical gold.

  In a few words, it is China’s high savings rate which gives its government the resources, the power, and the opportunity to displace the American dollar and its hegemony from Greater Asia and much of the developing world. Our mistake leading to our relative decline was to listen to Keynes and his paradox of thrift.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 20:30

• Prediction Consensus: What The Experts See Coming In 2023
  Prediction Consensus: What The Experts See Coming In 2023

  In this fourth year of Visual Capitalist’s Prediction Consensus (now part of their more comprehensive 2023 Global Forecast Series), they’ve learned a few things about the universe of predictions, experts, outlooks, and forecasts.

  1. Experts are reasonably good at predicting the future one year out, though they are also in a strong position to help shape the future through their influential thought leadership and actions.

  2. Situations can and will flare up in unexpected ways, which can have knock-on effects on the whole system (e.g. COVID-19, Ukraine invasion).

  3. Experts are just as susceptible to hype as the rest of us, as evidenced by the glut of Web3 predictions in 2022 and AI predictions this year.

  Of course, as Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley admits, we’re susceptible to hype as well, which is why we asked ChatGPT to write the intro to this article:

  

  Not bad. But, simple curiosity aside, it’s the practical considerations we’ll focus on today. This article serves as an overview of how experts think the markets will move, how trends will develop, and which risks and opportunities to watch over the coming 12 months.

  Let’s gaze into the crystal ball.

  

  The Economic Vibe Check

  First, we’ll look at some big picture themes, and how experts see them playing out over 2023.

  Inflation: This was the top economic story of last year, so it’s a natural starting place. Many of the expert opinions in this year’s database (now at 500+ predictions) are pointing to inflation easing off as the year progresses*. On the downside, few predict that inflation will drop back down to the 2% range that Fed policymakers favor.

  GDP: Forecasters have been revising their economic projections downward in recent weeks. The latest was World Bank, which now sees global growth declining to 1.7% in 2023, down from 3% just six months ago. Most of the predictions in our database see global economic growth in the range of 1.5% to 2%.

  Recession: As 2022 came to a close, the broad sentiment among experts in the financial industry is that recession is all but inevitable in developed markets this year. As dawn breaks in 2023, a few analysts now feel that the U.S.—and possibly Europe—could narrowly avoid recession.

  Markets: Experts on Wall Street and beyond are cautiously optimistic about equities, and after the worst year on record for bonds in 2022, most analysts are declaring that “Bonds are back”.

  *Interestingly, this was also last year’s prediction, but the scale of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was a curve ball that caught many experts off guard.

  AI is Eating the World

  Jobs being displaced by automation is far from a new theme, but given the exponential improvements in AI in recent years, the risk to entire industries feels more existential today.

  As an example, let’s consider art and design. One of the ways many illustrators and artists earn a living is through commissions⁠—essentially being hired and paid to create a specific piece of art in their style.

  Today though, free, powerful AI tools, such as Midjourney, allow users to generate high-quality art in an infinite number of styles with just a few clicks. Real art will never truly go out of style, and accomplished artists will always attract an audience, but this one example shows how quickly technology can disrupt an industry. (Artists can take solace in the fact that AI is still comically bad at rendering hands.)

  

  Of course, there are obvious positive aspects to this technological advancement as well. Generative AI tools are useful for generating ideas and mock-ups, and even functional snippets of code. AI systems like AlphaFold unlock a world of possibilities in scientific domains.

  From the hundreds of predictions we evaluated, it’s clear that experts view AI as a major catalyst this year. AI start-ups are forcing Big Tech to innovate faster, and employees are finding new ways to use AI-powered tools to increase productivity.

  Experts predict that AI will impact peoples’ lives in a much more visible and tangible way in 2023 than in past years.

  The China Factor

  As world’s second largest economy and linchpin of global trade, events in China have a major impact on the world economy.

  Xi Jinping’s reversal of Zero-COVID restrictions should drastically change the trajectory of the country’s economy. For one, reopening will unleash a flood of household spending and consumption.

  

  China’s reopening will also impact other economies as well. For example, the resumption of travel will be a boon to destinations favored by Chinese vacationers. Economically, Hong Kong stands to benefit immensely—its GDP could jump upwards of 8% after reopening is complete. Emerging market commodity exporters could see a lift as well, though inflation could be reinvigorated as a result.

  In the U.S., a storm is brewing over the extremely popular video app, TikTok. Many experts predict that regulators will either ban the app altogether in 2023, or force the sale of the company to an American entity. Regardless how that situation plays out, it underscores the souring relationship between the U.S. and China. The rivalry will continue to have ripple effects on the global markets throughout the year.

  Energy

  Energy was the S&P 500’s top performing sector two years in a row, and many experts feel that more growth is on the horizon.

  The global system that supplies us with energy is breathtakingly complex, with a lot of unpredictable factors at play. Of all factors, conflict can create the most volatility, and 2023 has a number of geopolitical risks that could impact energy supplies. First, Europe will continue to diversify its energy imports away from Russia. Recently, liquefied natural gas from the U.S. has helped fill gaps.

  

  Next, Iran could be a flashpoint in the Middle East this year. A brewing conflict in the region could cause instability, which will have knock-on effects on the energy industry—particularly in the event of attacks on oil and gas infrastructure.

  Here are a few other factors to consider this coming year:

  • The U.S. Energy Department will aim to replenish its Strategic Petroleum Reserve

  • Easing of U.S. sanctions on Venezuela could lay the ground work for increased oil production

  • In post-Zero-COVID China, economic activity will increase, pushing up demand

  • In the UK, the energy price guarantee will rise in April, meaning higher energy bills for households

  The Elon Playbook

  After a lull in December (nobody wants to be the company that fires people during the holiday season) tech and tech-adjacent companies have resumed their zealous slashing of headcounts.

  There had been a slew of layoffs already in 2023, topped by Salesforce, which is trimming 7,000 jobs, and Amazon, which is cutting 18,000 roles—primarily impacting the corporate side of the business.

  Given the influence of Elon Musk in the tech industry, many experts are suggesting that his strategy of ruthlessly slashing headcount at Twitter might serve as inspiration for other technology leaders.

  

  Employees in the tech industry are very well compensated, and many were hired during periods of intense competition between companies to attract talent and capture market share.

  During a downturn, it’s tempting—and often necessary—for companies to course-correct. There were also predictions that the whole start-up and investment ecosystem could be switching from a hypergrowth to a value-focused mindset, which is a theme that is worth consideration in 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 20:00

• LAPD Chief Blasted For "Political Pandering" After Banning 'Blue Lives Matter' Flag From Los Angeles Police Stations
  LAPD Chief Blasted For “Political Pandering” After Banning ‘Blue Lives Matter’ Flag From Los Angeles Police Stations

  Authored by Monica Showalter via AmericanThinker.com,

  So Los Angeles has a new mayor — the far-left Karen Bass, and it hasn’t taken long for changes to kick in, letting the police know she doesn’t have their back.

  Latest news is this diktat from above, as reported by Fox News:

  The Los Angeles Police Department banned the Thin Blue Line flag from public areas within police departments this week over a complaint that the flag represented “violent, extremist views.”

  LAPD Chief Michel Moore defended the controversial move in an email sent to Fox News Digital, saying, “Yesterday, we received a community complaint of the presence of a Blue Line Flag” with “the view that it symbolized support for violent extremist views, such as those represented by the Proud Boys and others.” 

  “I directed to have the item taken down from the public lobby. The U.S. flag should be proudly displayed in our lobbies whenever possible. Memorials for our fallen are also authorized in all public spaces,” he said. 

  

  The banned flag looks like this:

  

  Where’d I take that photo? At a party full of LAPD cops, celebrating the birthday at the home of one of their own. The photo doesn’t include the cops, but there were a lot of them. 

  It was at this party that I learned how much that flag means to these officers, all of whom were black or Hispanic, none of whom were white. This flag is a big deal to them, an emblem of their hard job, an expression of the dangers and death they face, and a rallying point for their reasonable interests.

  They want to ban this? Because of one wokester complaint, a complaint from someone who undoubtedly doesn’t want any cops whatsoever, a cop-hater, and they are out there, as that’s been the party line in the anti-cop wokester-activist community for several years now.

  The excuses from headquarters were really pathetic:

  Moore explained that a flag displayed in one station’s lobby spurred a complaint and he added, “It’s unfortunate that extremist groups have hijacked the use of the ‘Thin Blue Line flag’ to symbolize their undemocratic, racist, and bigoted views.” 

  The LAPD chief ordered all flags with the symbol to be removed from public areas. Moore said officers still can display the flag “their workspace, locker door, or personal vehicle.” 

  While Moore said he viewed the flag as symbolizing “the honor, valor, dedication, and sacrifice of law enforcement to protect our communities,” he said others had undermined the flag with their “racist, bigoted and oppressive values.”

  Really? Let’s hear some names, which naturally, Moore and his ilk didn’t give.

  This has about as much credibility as the Pentagon’s hunt for extremists (read: Trump supporters) in the military’s ranks, or the FBI’s hunt for domestic terrorists among the parents attending school board meetings.

  

  And while we are at it, let’s look at the diversity composition of the LAPD these days since policing is so synonymous with white supremacy and that flag the LAPD brass hates so much.

  According to Wikipedia:

  As of 2019, the Los Angeles Police Department had 10,008 officers sworn in. Of these, 81% (8,158) were male and 19% (1,850) female. The racial/ethnic breakdown:[50]

  • 48.8% or 4,882 was Hispanic/Latino (of any race)

  • 30.9% or 3,090 was non-Hispanic White

  • 9.62% or 962 was African American

  • 7.66% or 766 was Asian

  • 2.46% or 246 was Filipino American

  • remaining were Indian and Other Ethnicities.

  The claim that flag was white supremacist, accompanied by the dog biscuit thrown to the cops, that they can still display the flags on their personal cars and lockers, pretty well pegs any cop who has such stickers as a white supremacist. After all, if they’re going to peg a symbol as white supremacist, why are they allowing it on lockers and cars? Do they allow Klan or White Aryan Brotherhood symbols on cars and lockers of cops, too?

  Don’t think so.

  The concession given is because they know how alienated the cops are by this decision. According to Fox News, a union representing 9,900 Los Angeles police officers fire back with this statement:

  “It is difficult to express the level of utter disgust and disappointment with Chief Moore’s politically pandering directive to remove Thin Blue Line flags and memorials for fallen officers from all public areas within our police stations. This direction came as a result of complaints from anti-police, criminal apologists, and activists who hold too much sway over our city leaders and, unfortunately, our Chief,” the Board of directors for the Los Angeles Police Protective League wrote in a statement.

  The union said they “vehemently” opposed “this disrespectful and defeatist kowtowing by our department leadership to groups that praise the killing of police officers and outright call for violence against those of us in uniform. We have directly expressed our outrage to the Chief.”

  Note that word “vehemently.” 

  We pretty well can tell what the sentiment in the not-so-white ranks is regarding this ban on the only public emblem the cops even have — and which without, they are all alone out there, no rallying symbol for their lives and welfare.

  With the police brass playing politics, as they say, it’s pretty obvious that the “politics” here is the politics of the new mayor, Karen Bass, who’s a wokester fanatic so leftwing she was rejected by the Biden team for the vice presidency, which handed the slot of the giggly and less competent Kamala Harris instead. Obviously, they’ve been read the Riot Act by Bass, and are looking to save their skins. The bad part here is that the line officers have been sent a message — that politicians and the police brass don’t have their backs now. Already thousands of officers, including many at that very party, have retired, or retired at their desks.

  This flag message sends the message in the already crime-plagued city, one of the country’s worst, that it’s time to quit and move someplace where they want the blue in place and are willing to support the blue.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 19:30

• Fully Priced-In: Even Goldman Expects Sharp Contraction In Profit Margins In 2023
  Fully Priced-In: Even Goldman Expects Sharp Contraction In Profit Margins In 2023

  There has been a bizarre episode of cognitive dissonance developing within Goldman’s trading desk and research departments over the past three months: as readers may recall, some time in late September, just as stocks slumped near their 2022 lows for the second time, Goldman’s chief equity strategist David Kostin – who had heretofore been one of the staunchest equity bulls – slashed his market outlook and his S&P price target, which he now sees closing unchanged from its Friday level, or right at 4,000. That’s right, Goldman clients can now take a 11 and a half month vacation, spare themselves the emotional rollercoaster that is to follow, and come back for the last day of trading in 2023 when Goldman expects stocks to be… unchanged.

  Of course, when Goldman started turning bearish some three months ago (which just happened to coincide with that other permabull Marko Kolanovic also turning bearish), we said that that was the bottom and so far, some 400 S&P points higher, our cynicism has been proven correct.

  Kolanovic turned bearish. Bottom https://t.co/bXVFOHDoRS

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) September 30, 2022

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

  But as so often happens, with Goldman so bearishly positioned at a time when the Fed is hinting that a rate hike pause is imminent and the market is expecting at least 50bps of rate cuts in the second half, last week saw the first tentative signs that Goldman’s strategists and economists are starting to turn bullish again, which means that the countdown to a material upgrade in Goldman’s year-end price target (to, say, 4,500) has begun.

  Indeed, in the past week, two top Goldman strategists, Jan Hatzius and Dominic Wilson highlighted the “improving investing landscape” in two notes this week: “Mostly Better News” (available to pro subs here) and “A Bit More Room to Grow” (also available to pro subs), pointing out that after the latest payrolls and CPI data, “markets are now pricing in the soft landing for the US economy that we forecast; Europe no longer appears to headed towards a recession either (Goldman also raised its GDP growth forecast into positive territory earlier this week in “10 Questions for 2023” and no longer expects a European recession)” and Goldman even saw upside to its China growth forecast which now anticipates a 4Q23/4Q22 GDP growth pace of over 7%.

  But, as Goldman strategist Chris Hussey notes in his Friday weekly recap, “just like in Legoland, this ‘Everything is awesome!’ environment may still be riddled with risks that our strategists and analysts also highlight this week from macro to micro.”

  One such risk was brought up by none other than David Kostin, who remains one of the bearish holdouts withing Goldman (not for long) and continues to sound a cautious tone in a fresh note this week, urging the bank’s clients to “buy protection” in his note “strategies for soft and hard landings.” According to Kostin, the biggest red flag: downward earnings revisions have been extreme and have only looked like this in past recessions (2000 and 2008).

  

  

  As such, Kostin is hesitant to look through this dependable market indicator and believe prudent portfolio managers should at least consider the implications if a hard landing transpires.

  Over the weekend, Kostin continued this game of good cop (Hatzius, Wilson) vs bad cop (Kostin), writing in his latest weekly Kickstart note (available to pro subs here) that “negative consensus earnings revisions and analyst expectations for a lackluster 4Q 2022 earnings season continue the trend of weakening corporate profitability in recent quarters.” Additionally, the S&P’s trailing 4-quarter return on equity declined by 29 bp to 20.6% in 3Q 2022 driven by a contraction in margins: as Kostin calculates, “at a sector level 7 of 11 S&P 500 sectors experienced declining ROE, with Info Tech suffering the largest drop and Energy expanding the most.” Looking ahead, Kostin warns that an upwards inflection in S&P 500 ROE will be difficult to achieve in 2023, “as headwinds from a higher cost of capital and higher taxes will place further strain on profitability.”

  Of course, this is all taking place as Q4 earnings season kicked off in earnest on Friday with large banks reporting mixed results, and with consensus expecting the aggregate S&P 500 index to post -1% EPS growth in 4Q 2022 vs. 4Q 2021 and decline by 5% excluding the Energy sector. As shown in the charts above, earnings revisions have recently been very negative, adding to many investors’ concerns about a potential recession on the horizon.

  What does all of this mean for corporate profitability? Clearly, nothing good: according to Kostin, the increasingly negative consensus earnings revisions and current analyst expectations for a lackluster 4Q 2022 earnings season continue the trend of weakening corporate profitability in recent quarters. To wit, S&P 500 trailing 4-quarter return on equity declined by 29 bp to 20.6% in 3Q 2022. The decline in ROE represented the third consecutive quarterly decline following the metric’s all time high of 22% in 4Q 2021 (despite the recent declines the latest figure still ranks in the 99th percentile of S&P 500 ROE going back to 1975, meaning there is a lot more downside from here).

  

  The Goldman strategist finds that contraction in profit margins was the main reason for the ROE decline last quarter: “We use a five-factor DuPont decomposition to analyze the drivers of ROE.Falling EBIT margins drove 69 bp of ROE contraction (Exhibit 2). Margins had already begun to decline in both 1Q and 2Q 2022 after a full year of expansion in 2021, and the trend continued in 3Q 2022. Index-level LTM EBIT margins contracted q/q by 48 bp in 3Q (vs. -90 bp in 2Q and -47 bp in 1Q). Slightly higher interest and tax expenses also weighed on ROE during 3Q (contributing -20 bp total). These headwinds were offset by higher asset turnover, which contributed +62 bp to ROE.”

  

  Financial jargon aside, while most sectors saw ROEs fall last quarter, they also enjoy profitability well above historical averages. 7 of 11 S&P 500 sectors experienced declining ROE, with Info Tech suffering the largest drop (-237 bp) and Energy expanding the most (+518 bp). The increase in Energy ROE was driven by margin expansion, contrasting with contracting margins in every other sector except for Real Estate. In addition to Energy, Consumer Discretionary, Industrials, and Utilities saw slight ROE gains. Despite lackluster ROE growth over the past three quarters, 9 of 11 sectors’ levels of ROE still stand above their historical sector averages, and 6 have ROEs currently in the top decile vs. their sector’s history.

  Ironically, while to some this may mean that Energy – which was the blowout outperforming segment in 2022 – is overvalued, the reality is just the opposite, and with most sector P/B valuations currently well-ordered based on ROE, Energy and Utilities remain outliers. Energy remains below the P/B implied by its expected ROE while Utilities’ valuation appears stretched. In the case of Energy, the lackluster valuation is likely due to consensus expectations for -15% EPS growth in 2023 (after +161% growth in 2022) and lower long-term growth expectations relative to other sectors. Meanwhile, utilities valuations have benefitted in part due to the attractiveness of the sector’s defensive attributes amid heightened recession concerns.

  

  Looking ahead, the bearish Goldman strategist concedes that “an upwards inflection in S&P 500 ROE will be difficult to achieve in 2023” and he expects margins for most sectors to contract while also expecting further cut in current consensus EPS estimates to bring them closer to Goldman’s baseline and recession scenarios (which is odd since Goldman chief economist Jan Hatzius is adamant that a recession will not happen, but that’s all part of Goldman’s “good cop, bad cop” CYA routine). As other ROE headwinds, Kostin lists taxes, leverage, and borrow costs.

  

  Taking a closer look at margin hurdles, Goldman notes that historically, higher leverage and lower taxes have been the largest contributors to ROE. Indeed, since 1975, declining interest rates and corporate tax rates have been the strongest tailwinds to corporate profitability. Declining interest rates have allowed firms to utilize higher leverage to bolster equity holder returns, resulting in a cumulative contribution of +1463 bp to ROE while lower borrow costs have contributed +476 bp to ROE over the period. Similarly, declining corporate tax rates have contributed +900 bp. On the other hand, lower asset turnover has been the largest detractor from ROE, shaving off -2522 bp over time.

  

  Here, Kostin warns that “near-term improvements to ROE from higher leverage will be unlikely given higher cost of capital”, i.e. the Fed’s tightening. The weighted average cost of capital (WACC) for US firms has spiked by 200 bp to 6%, the highest level in a decade and the largest 12-month rise in 40 years, or since the Volcker Fed.

  

  Goldman expects the WACC in 2023 will remain near the current level (which of course, is as good as tell as any that Powell will very soon be slashing rates). The direct consequence of a higher WACC is costlier leverage, which will ultimately disincentivize firms from boosting ROE through this channel in 2023. As an aside, despite higher WACC, borrow costs will be less of a dramatic headwind, as most S&P 500 debt is fixed rate with long maturities. 75% of S&P 500 debt is fixed, and only 24% of total debt is expected to mature between 2023 and 2025.

  Finally, Goldman warns that higher taxes in 2023 will also be a headwind for ROE expansion. While new corporate taxes from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) should reduce S&P 500 EPS by less than 2% in 2023, the direction of the change in tax expense will now weigh on ROE instead of supporting it.

  

  According to the Goldman strategist, This impact should be pronounced for sectors with low effective tax rates such as Info Tech and Health Care which will face a larger impact from minimum tax provisions. Sunsetting provisions from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and the new 1% excise tax on buybacks introduced in the IRA will place additional tax-related strain on ROE.

  Of course, none of what Kostin claims above is incorrect (he goes on to note that in a challenging environment for ROE growth, stocks that were expected to grow ROE outperformed the S&P 500 by 10 pp in 2022 and then pitches Goldman’s ROE growth basket which contains 50 stocks with the highest consensus-expected ROE growth during the next 12 months, the full list available to pro subs) but what we find most notable is that now that even Goldman fully embraces the core pillar of the 2023 bear case (as laid out by Michael Wilson some 6 months ago), the reality is that while sellside analysts may be slow to trim their optimistic outlooks, most on Wall Street have applied their own personal discounts to consensus, and more importantly, the margin contraction and EPS shrinkage narratives are both fully priced in by now, and only a full-blown recession can lead to further downward repricings. In other words, now that a sharp slide in inflation is the base case, the longer the Biden Dept of Labor ignores reality and pretends that job growth is there, the higher stocks will rise.

  More in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 19:00

• The Rise And Fall (And Rise Again) Of Music Sales, By Format (1973-2021)
  The Rise And Fall (And Rise Again) Of Music Sales, By Format (1973-2021)

  We live in a world of music. Whether when driving to work or jamming out at home, people around the world like to have their favorite tunes playing in the background.

  But while our love for music has been constant, the way we consume media has evolved drastically. The past 50 years have seen many different music formats used to access these tunes, mirroring society’s shift from analog to digital.

  This video, created by James Eagle vis Visual Capitalist using data from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), highlights sales of different music formats in the U.S. over the last 50 years.

  Vinyl

  Up until the late 1980s, vinyl dominated the music format industry, earning billions of dollars in sales annually. Records of Bruce Springsteen’s Born to Run or Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon were some of the top selling albums available.

  Vinyl is said to provide its listeners with analog sounds that reverberate and the warm notes of almost-live music. For vinyl users and enthusiasts to this day, the music produced by these sleek yet massive records is unparalleled.

  8-Track

  If you’re a millennial (or younger), you may have never heard of the 8-track. But this music format played an integral part in the history of music.

  When the booming automotive vehicle industry found it challenging to translate the music experience to cars using vinyl, it looked to the “Stereo 8” eight-track cartridge, better known as the 8-track. This cartridge used an analog magnetic tape and provided 90 minutes of continuous music play time.

  8-track carved a niche for itself much before the advent of cassettes and CDs. And through the proliferation of vehicles, 8-track sales climbed to reach a peak revenue of $900 million in 1978.

  Cassettes

  The era of cassettes pushed 8-tracks into the history of music in the early 1980s. These pocket-sized tapes were more convenient to use than 8Tracks and quickly spread worldwide.

  By 1989, the cassette format reached its peak revenues of $3.7 billion.

  CDs

  First released in 1982, the Compact Disc or CD came into the music market as the successor to the vinyl record.

  Developed by Philips and Sony, sales of the sleek and portable CD grew quickly as home and car stereos alike added CD functionality. The format brought in $13.3 billion in revenue in both 1999 and 2000. To date, no other music format has reached the same milestone since.

  Digital Music Formats

  When it comes to preferred music formats over time, convenience (and cost) seem to have been the biggest catalysts of change.

  From the start of the early 2000s, CDs had started to be replaced by other forms of digital storage and distribution. The massive shift to internet consumption and the introduction of digital music, available through downloads, pushed audio CD sales down rapidly.

  The launch of streaming platforms like Spotify in 2006 exacerbated this decline, with CD sales dropping by around $4 billion in five years.

  Digital sales continued to evolve. Ringtone sales alone brought in $1.1 billion in 2007, and in 2012, the revenues from downloads shot up to a peak of $2.9 billion. But music streaming platforms kept climbing through 2021, and will likely continue to be the future face of music consumption.

  RankMusic formatsRevenue in 2021

  1Streaming$11.5 billion

  2Vinyl$1.0 billion

  3CD$0.6 billion

  4Downloads$0.5 billion

   Other$1.4 billion

   Total$15.1 billion

  Music streaming and subscription services pushed the accessibility of music to new highs, especially with free ad-supported platforms.

  In 2021, streaming secured the music industry a whopping $11.5 billion in sales, good for 76% of the total. If it keeps growing in popularity and accessibility, the format could potentially challenge the peak popularity of CDs in the late 90s.

  The Vintage Comeback?

  There’s no doubt that digital music formats are getting increasingly popular with every passing year. However, one of our vintage and beloved music formats—the vinyl record—seems to be making a comeback.

  According to the RIAA database, the revenue earned by LP/EP sales has shot up to $1.0 billion in 2021, its highest total since the mid-1980s.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 18:00

• Morgan Stanley: "We Are Focusing On These Three Key Global Transitions"
  Morgan Stanley: “We Are Focusing On These Three Key Global Transitions”

  By Michael Zezas, Head of Global Thematic Research at Morgan Stanley

  What do you get when 45 global research analysts gather in a room for two days to debate secular market trends? A plan. Amid rapid change, Morgan Stanley Research views concentrating on multiyear secular trends as an opportunity. In markets where short-term focus has become the norm (i.e., the average equity holding period has declined from eight years in the 1960s to six months today), it stands to reason that there’s less competition and more potential alpha to be found from analyzing the market impacts of longer-term trends. A collaborative, cross-asset culture has long been core to our mission, and in the spirit of debate and collaboration, we gathered analysts from around the globe to identify the key secular themes that Morgan Stanley Research should focus on this year.

  Our dialogue made it clear that collaboration can eliminate blind spots for investors who are grappling with complex global themes. The agenda for our meeting included over 30 topics, none of them unfamiliar to market participants. But the discussion raised questions of broader concern, suggesting their answers could impact markets beyond what analysts could plausibly perceive or analyze individually. Many of these questions centered on knock-on impacts to inflation, interest rates, and the structure of markets themselves as the world undergoes major geopolitical and technological transformations.

  This year, we’re taking our collaborative, in-depth work a step further, focusing on three key global transitions. We think these shifts will have a profound impact on markets for many years, but that a collaborative, cross-asset approach is required to master their complexity and produce meaningful insights for investors. The three transitions are: 1) Rewiring global commerce for a multipolar world; 2) Decarbonization; and 3) Accelerated technology diffusion. We plan to address them this year in collaborative in-depth reports, briefs, and podcasts.

  • Rewiring global commerce for a multipolar world: With the shift from unbridled globalization to a world with more than one meaningful power base and commercial standard, companies and countries can no longer seek efficiencies through global supply chains and market access without factoring in geopolitical risks. While we first flagged this secular trend in 2018, we believe it became the consensus following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the West’s policy response, which created fresh trade barriers and incentives to realign supply chains.

    What our analysts believe is less well understood are the practical implications of this rewiring. It makes sense in theory but is exceedingly complicated to execute in practice. Questions that surfaced in our discussions included: How long will it take? Will it lead to higher inflation and, if so, for how long? How will bond markets cope with financing the transition? Which companies and countries will benefit or suffer because of it? Having come early to this theme, we believe we are well placed to address these questions through a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach across economists, market strategists, and equity analysts.

  • Decarbonization: Between 1) Europe’s problematic reliance on imported natural gas being laid bare by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; 2) Growing EU policy support for energy transition infrastructure via the REPowerEU plan; and 3) The US appropriation of $400 billion+ to speed the adoption of clean energy technology, we think it’s fair to say that the developed world is accelerating its efforts to reduce carbon emissions. Still, this is a tall order. To reach ‘Net Zero by 2050’, carbon emissions would need to start falling by ~8% per year. Even during 2020, when the lockdowns heavily impacted mobility and global GDP shrank, emissions fell only 5%. In addition, the cost would be significant. The IEA estimates that the energy transition will cost an extra ~$70 trillion over the next 30 years, taking energy spending to 4.5% of global GDP from its current run rate of 2.5%.

    Investors will need to grapple with both the positive and negative impacts of this transition. Our assessment of which companies, sectors, and macro markets will benefit or be challenged will be shaped by answers to the following questions: What are plausible scenarios for timelines? Which technological and policy developments and failures could speed or slow the transition? Which markets will finance it and how must they change and expand? Which companies will benefit and which are exposed to downside risks? What are the macroeconomic and geopolitical impacts of different paths to Net Zero?

  • Tech diffusion: While this is hardly a new theme, what’s different and noteworthy are the speed and breadth with which tech diffusion can impact sectors that were previously untouched. Fragmented industries or those with high regulatory barriers – which have typically not reaped as much tech-driven productivity benefit – suddenly look poised for a multi-year transition via tech diffusion. Opportunities range from embedded finance in consumer user experience and payments, to tokenized assets allowing for greater global financial inclusion, to modernizing healthcare data ownership and biopharma R&D breakthroughs. We expect the next five years of tech diffusion to move meaningfully faster than the last five.

  And what if we’ve identified the wrong themes? We’ll regroup and tell you about it. Our analyst group stressed the importance of remaining flexible. While not fans of the source, we see wisdom in the truism that “there are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen”. The past three years certainly underscored how unforeseen events, e.g., a global pandemic and a war in Europe, can give rise to new, dominant secular themes. Hence, if similar events occur in 2023, we’ll be quick to reorganize our thematic efforts, let you know, and deliver the collaborative insights you need to navigate new transitions.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 17:30

• Putin Hails "Positive" Momentum In Ukraine, "Stable" Economy In Surprisingly Upbeat Remarks
  Putin Hails “Positive” Momentum In Ukraine, “Stable” Economy In Surprisingly Upbeat Remarks

  Fresh off the Russian armed forces declaring victory in the strategic Donetsk town of Soledar days ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin surprised officials in the West by touting the ‘positive dynamic’ of the Ukraine operation overall, despite the prior months of setbacks and a slower-going operation than Moscow expected. 

  He said in fresh weekend comments to Rossiya 1 state television when asked about the successful Soledar operation that “The dynamic is positive.” He described that “Everything is developing within the framework of the plan of the Ministry of Defense and the General Staff.” Putin followed with, “And I hope that our fighters will please us even more with the results of their combat.”

  

  He also made comments on the state of the economy while confirming that Russia will turn for trade to Asian powers, China and India in particular. 

  “The situation in the economy is stable,” Putin said. “Much better than not only what our opponents predicted but also what we forecast.” For this he cited low unemployment, saying: “Unemployment is at a historic low. Inflation is lower than expected and has, importantly, a downward trend.”

  Despite his county finding itself more isolated than ever before in its modern history, and despite unprecedented Western-led sanctions, Putin showed no signs of backing down from objectives previously set in Ukraine, as Reuters summarizes of the new remarks…

  “Putin now casts the war in Ukraine as an existential battle with an aggressive and arrogant West, and has said that Russia will use all available means to protect itself and its people against any aggressor.”

  Further the report characterized the Western stance in the following: “The United States and its allies have condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as an imperial land grab, while Ukraine has vowed to fight until the last Russian soldier is ejected from its territory.”

  Meanwhile, as we previewed recently, there are reasons to believe Russia is readying an escalation in response to the West sending tanks and deepening its military involvement in support of Ukraine forces. 

  

  But for now, the defense ministry is continuing its strategy of pummeling Ukraine’s energy grid and civilian and military infrastructure through major air strikes. Attacks on Sunday and Saturday marked about the 12th large wave to come in recent months. Air alert sirens have been sounding across the country on Sunday. 

  Russia’s army described that it targeted “the military command and related energy facilities,” and said that “all targets were reached.”

  Ukraine’s national energy operator Ukrenergo said it’s again working to quickly restore power in impacted places but acknowledged this latest attack has “increased the energy deficit.”

  “The period of outages may increase,” it acknowledged, already after the national grid having been severely degraded for months, and as emergency blackouts continue for most of the country, with more severely impacted areas with permanent blackouts.

  The weekend airstrikes may have included high civilian casualties, compared to prior waves, given the Ukrainian government says a large residential tower was directly hit in the central Ukrainian city of Dnipro.

  A Russian missile struck a residential building in Dnipro. https://t.co/ArXCn2oRfMhttps://t.co/bSWkrwfVZj pic.twitter.com/oJq66JVQev

  — Rob Lee (@RALee85) January 14, 2023

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

  The New York Times details of the Saturday afternoon strike at a moment a rescue operation is still underway, “Rescuers on Sunday continued to comb the rubble of a nine-story apartment building that was cut in half by a Russian strike, as the death toll from the attack in the central Ukrainian city of Dnipro a day earlier climbed to 30,” and noted: “It was one of the largest losses of civilian lives far from the front line since the beginning of the war.”

  “By Sunday evening, 30 people had been confirmed dead, according to Ukraine’s State Emergency Service,” the Times continued. “At least 75 people were injured, and more than 30 people were still believed to be missing, local officials said.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 17:00

• 7 Factors Bitcoin Investors Should Watch In 2023
  7 Factors Bitcoin Investors Should Watch In 2023

  Authored by Craig Deutsch, Dylan LeClair, and Same Rule via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  The below is an excerpt from a recent year-ahead report written by the Bitcoin Magazine PRO analysts. Download the entire report here.

  

  Bitcoin Magazine PRO sees incredibly strong fundamentals in the Bitcoin network and we are laser-focused on its market dynamic in the context of macroeconomic trends. Bitcoin aims to become the world reserve currency, an investment opportunity that cannot be understated.

  In our year-ahead report, we analyzed seven notable factors that we recommend investors pay attention to in the coming months.

  1. CONVICTED BITCOIN INVESTORS

  We can put investor conviction into perspective by looking at the number of unique Bitcoin addresses holding at least 0.01, 0.1 and 1 bitcoin. This data shows that bitcoin adoption continues to grow with a growing number of unique addresses holding at least these amounts of bitcoin. While it is entirely possible for individual users to hold their bitcoin in multiple addresses, the growth of unique Bitcoin addresses holding at least 0.01, 0.1 and 1 bitcoin indicate that more users than ever before are buying bitcoin and holding it in self-custody.

  

  Unique bitcoin addresses continues to grow across the board.

  Another promising metric is the amount held by long-term holders, which has increased to almost 14 million bitcoin. Long-term holder supply is calculated using a threshold of a 155-day holding period, after which dormant coins become increasingly unlikely to be spent. As of now, 72.49% of the bitcoin in circulation is not likely to be sold at these prices.

  

  Long-term holder supply reached 72.52% of the circulating bitcoin supply.

  There is a large subset of bitcoin investors who are accumulating the digital asset no matter the price. In a December 2022 interview on “Going Digital,” Head of Market Research Dylan LeClair said, “You have people all over the world that are acquiring this asset and you have a huge and growing cohort of people that are price-agnostic accumulators.”

  With a growing number of unique addresses holding bitcoin and such a significant amount of bitcoin being held by long-term investors, we are optimistic for bitcoin’s advancement and rate of adoption. There are many variables that demonstrate the potential for asymmetric returns as demand for bitcoin increases and adoption increases worldwide.

  2. TOTAL ADDRESSABLE MARKET

  During monetization, a currency goes through three phases in order: store of value, medium of exchange and unit of account. Bitcoin is currently in its store-of-value phase as demonstrated by the long-term holder metrics above. Other assets that are frequently used as stores of value are real estate, gold and equities. Bitcoin is a better store of value for many reasons: it is more liquid, easier to access, transport and secure, easier to audit and more finitely scarce than any other asset with its hard-cap limit of 21 million coins. For bitcoin to acquire a larger share of other global stores of value, these properties need to remain intact and prove themselves in the eyes of investors.

  

  Estimations of global stores of wealth.

  As readers can see, bitcoin is a tiny fraction of global wealth. Should bitcoin take even a 1% share from these other stores of value, the market cap would be $5.9 trillion, putting bitcoin at over $300,000 per coin. These are conservative numbers from our viewpoint because we estimate that bitcoin adoption will happen gradually, and then suddenly.

  3. TRANSFER VOLUME

  When looking at the amount of value that was cleared on the Bitcoin network throughout its history, there is a clear upward trend in USD terms with a heightened demand for transferring bitcoin this year. In 2022, there was a change-adjusted transfer volume of over 556 million bitcoin settled on the Bitcoin network, up 102% from 2021. In USD terms, the Bitcoin network settled just shy of $15 trillion in value in 2022. 

  

  Bitcoin transfer volume was higher than ever in USD terms.

  Bitcoin’s censorship resistance is an extremely valuable feature as the world enters into a period of deglobalization. With a market capitalization of only $324 billion, we believe bitcoin is severely undervalued. Despite the drop in price, the Bitcoin network transferred more value in USD terms than ever before.

  4. RARE OPPORTUNITY IN BITCOIN’S PRICE

  By looking at certain metrics, we can analyze the unique opportunity investors have to purchase bitcoin at these prices. The bitcoin realized market cap is down 18.8% from all-time highs, which is the second-largest drawdown in its history. While the macroeconomic factors are something to keep in mind, we believe that this is a rare buying opportunity.

  

  The realized cap drawdown in 2022 was the second largest in bitcoin’s history.

  Relative to its history, bitcoin is at the phase of the cycle where it’s about as cheap as it gets. Its current market exchange rate is approximately 20% lower than its average cost basis on-chain, which has only happened at or near the local bottom of bitcoin market cycles.

  Current prices of bitcoin are in rare territory for investors looking to get in at a low exchange rate. Historically, purchasing bitcoin during these times has brought tremendous returns in the long term. With that said, readers should consider the reality that 2023 likely brings about bitcoin’s first experience with a prolonged economic recession.

  5. MACROECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

  As we move into 2023, it’s necessary to recognize the state of the geopolitical landscape because macro is the driving force behind economic growth. People around the world are experiencing a monetary policy lag effect from last year’s central bank decisions. The U.S. and EU are in recessionary territory, China is proceeding to de-dollarize and the Bank of Japan raised its target rate for yield curve control. All of these have a large influence on capital markets.

  Nothing in financial markets occurs in a vacuum. Bitcoin’s ascent through 2020 and 2021 — while similar to previous crypto-native market cycles — was very much tied to the explosion of liquidity sloshing around the financial system after COVID. While 2020 and 2021 was characterized by the insertion of additional liquidity, 2022 has been characterized by the removal of liquidity.

  Interestingly enough, when denominating bitcoin against U.S. Treasury bonds (which we believe to be bitcoin’s largest theoretical competitor for monetary value over the long term), comparing the drawdown during 2022 was rather benign compared to drawdowns in bitcoin’s history. 

  

  As we wrote in “The Everything Bubble: Markets At A Crossroads,” “Despite the recent bounce in stocks and bonds, we aren’t convinced that we have seen the worst of the deflationary pressures from the global liquidity cycle.”

  In “The Bank of Japan Blinks And Markets Tremble,” we noted, “As we continue to refer to the sovereign debt bubble, readers should understand what this dramatic upward repricing in global yields means for asset prices. As bond yields remain at elevated levels far above recent years, asset valuations based on discounted cash flows fall.” Bitcoin does not rely on cash flows, but it will certainly be impacted by this repricing of global yields. We believe we are currently at the third bullet point of the following playing out:

  

  Source: Dylan LeClair

  6. BITCOIN MINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE

  While the multitude of negative industry and worrying macroeconomic factors have had a major dampening on bitcoin’s price, looking at the metrics of the Bitcoin network itself tell another story. The hash rate and mining difficulty gives a glimpse into how many ASICs are dedicating hashing power to the network and how competitive it is to mine bitcoin. These numbers move in tandem and both have almost exclusively gone up in 2022, despite the significant drop in price.

  

  Bitcoin mining difficulty continues to rise.

  

  Bitcoin hash rate continues to rise.

  By deploying more machines and investing in expanded infrastructure, bitcoin miners demonstrate that they are more bullish than ever. The last time the bitcoin price was in a similar range in 2017, the network hash rate was one-fifth of current levels. This means that there has been a fivefold increase in bitcoin mining machines being plugged in and efficiency upgrades to the machines themselves, not to mention the major investments in facilities and data centers to house the equipment.

  Because the hash rate increased while the bitcoin price decreased, miner revenue took a beating this year after a euphoric rise in 2021. Public miner stock valuations followed the same path with valuations falling even more than the bitcoin price, all while the Bitcoin network’s hash rate continued to rise. In the “State Of The Mining Industry: Survival Of The Fittest,” we looked at the total market capitalization of public miners which fell by over 90% since January 2021.

  

  The market cap of all public mining equities has dropped by 9

  We expect more of these companies to face challenging conditions because of the skyrocketing global energy prices and interest rates mentioned above.

  7. INCREASING SCARCITY

  One way to analyze bitcoin’s scarcity is by looking at the illiquid supply of coins. Liquidity is quantified as the extent to which an entity spends their bitcoin. Someone that never sells has a liquidity value of 0 whereas someone who buys and sells bitcoin all the time has a value of 1. With this quantification, circulating supply can be broken down into three categories: highly liquid, liquid and illiquid supply.

  Illiquid supply is defined as entities that hold over 75% of the bitcoin they deposit to an address. Highly liquid supply is defined as entities that hold less than 25%. Liquid supply is between the two. This illiquid supply quantification and analysis was developed by Rafael Schultze-Kraft, co-founder and CTO of Glassnode.

  

  Bitcoin’s illiquid supply continues to grow.

  2022 was the year of getting bitcoin off exchanges. Every recent major panic became a catalyst for more individuals and institutions to move coins into their own custody, find custody solutions outside of exchanges or sell off their bitcoin entirely. When centralized institutions and counterparty risks are flashing red, people rush for the exit. We can see some of this behavior through bitcoin outflows from exchanges.

  In 2022, 572,118 bitcoin worth $9.6 billion left exchanges, marking it the largest annual outflow of bitcoin in BTC terms in history. In USD terms, it was second only to 2020, which was driven by the March 2020 COVID crash. 11.68% of bitcoin supply is now estimated to be on exchanges, down from 16.88% back in 2019. 

  

  Exchanges saw a massive decrease in the bitcoin balances on their platforms.

  

  Bitcoin balance on exchanges decreased in 2022.

  These metrics of an increasingly illiquid supply paired with historic amounts of bitcoin being withdrawn from exchanges — ostensibly being removed from the market — paint a different picture than what we’re seeing with the factors outside of the Bitcoin network’s purview. While there are unanswered questions from a macroeconomic perspective, bitcoin miners continue to invest in equipment and on-chain data shows that bitcoin holders aren’t planning to relinquish their bitcoin anytime soon.

  CONCLUSION

  The varying factors detailed above give a picture for why we are long-term bullish on the bitcoin price going into 2023. The Bitcoin network continues to add another block approximately every 10 minutes, more miners keep investing in infrastructure by plugging in machines and long-term holders are unwavering in their conviction, as shown by on-chain data.

  With bitcoin’s ever-increasing scarcity, the supply side of this equation is fixed, while demand is likely to increase. Bitcoin investors can get ahead of the demand curve by averaging in while the price is low. It’s important for investors to take the time to learn how Bitcoin works to fully understand what it is they are investing in. Bitcoin is the first digitally native and finitely scarce bearer asset. We recommend readers learn about self-custody and withdraw their bitcoin from exchanges. Despite the negative news cycle and drop in bitcoin price, our bullish conviction for bitcoin’s long-term value proposition remains unfazed.

  *  *  *

  For the full report, follow this link to subscribe to Bitcoin Magazine PRO. Our team of experts covers macroeconomics, on-chain data, derivatives markets, the bitcoin mining industry & more to unpack the most important market trends.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 16:30

• House Republicans Prepare To Execute Emergency Strategy For Breaching Debt Limit
  House Republicans Prepare To Execute Emergency Strategy For Breaching Debt Limit

  House Republicans are preparing to give the Treasury Department guidance if the White House and Congress can’t agree to lift the nation’s debt ceiling.

  

  The plan was part of the private deal struck between House conservatives and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) in order for McCarthy to win speakership, according to Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who helped broker the deal. Roy told the Washington Post that McCarthy agreed to adopt a payment prioritization plan by the end of the first quarter of the year.

  According to the Post, the emergency contingency plan will need to include major spending cuts from the Biden administration, in exchange for which Republicans will sign off on raising the current limit of $31.4 trillion before the Treasury Department can’t borrow any more.

  On Friday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that the Treasury department will enact “extraordinary measures” next week so the government can keep its payment obligations – however she couldn’t guarantee that the US will make it beyond early June without default.

  Also on Friday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre made clear that the administration will not negotiate.

  In the preliminary stages of being drafted, the GOP proposal would call on the Biden administration to make only the most critical federal payments if the Treasury Department comes up against the statutory limit on what it can legally borrow. For instance, the plan is almost certain to call on the department to keep making interest payments on the debt, according to four people familiar with the internal deliberations who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations. House Republicans’ payment prioritization plan may also stipulate that the Treasury Department should continue making payments on Social Security, Medicare and veterans benefits, as well as funding the military, two of the people said. –WaPo

  That said, Democrats are preparing to push back on the plan, and will likely note that any hypothetical proposal to triage Social Security, Medicare and benefits for veterans and the military would still leave out ‘huge swaths of critical federal expenditures on things such as Medicaid, food safety inspections, border control and air traffic control,’ etc. Democrats will also likely accuse Republicans of pandering to bondholders, which include Chinese banks, vs. Americans.

  “Any plan to pay bondholders but not fund school lunches or the FAA or food safety or XYZ is just target practice for us,” said one senior Democratic aide.

  In other Kevin McCarthy news, the newly minted speaker may be trying to win back the MAGA crowd, announcing on Thursday that he’s open to the idea of “expunging” one or both of former President Trump’s impeachments.

  As the Epoch Times notes,

  When asked about the possibility of erasing the impeachments during a Jan. 12 press conference at the Capitol, McCarthy replied that he would “have to look” at the situation, saying, “I understand why members would want to bring that forward.”

  “Our first priority is to get our economy back on track, secure our borders, make our streets safe again, give parents the opportunity to have a say in their kids’ education, and actually hold government accountable,” he added. “But I understand why individuals want to do it, and we’d look at it.”

  Trump was first impeached by the House in December 2019 over a phone call he had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He was charged with abuse of power for allegedly pressuring Zelenskyy to investigate a political opponent, and with obstruction of Congress, but was ultimately acquitted of those charges by the Senate.

  In 2021, Trump was impeached again for alleged “incitement of insurrection” following the Jan. 6 Capitol breach. Again, he was acquitted.

  Previous Expungement Attempts

  Last year, then-Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) led House Republicans’ attempts to expunge Trump’s impeachment record, introducing a resolution to erase the former president’s 2019 impeachment in March.

  “So, what we’re doing with the resolution is just simply saying, ‘Hey, listen, Congress made a mistake,’” Mullin, now a senator, said at the time. “‘We impeached a president under Article One, Section Two, that shouldn’t have ever taken place.’”

  In May, Mullin followed up the first bill with a second resolution to expunge Trump’s 2021 impeachment. That bill (pdf), citing 2020 election irregularities and the impeachment’s rushed nature, held that the impeachment process had failed to prove that the former president had committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” or engaged in an insurrection.

  Although both of Mullin’s resolutions garnered some Republican support, neither was ever considered by the Democrat-controlled House.

  A ‘Political Hoax’

  Trump, for his part, has maintained that both the impeachments and the Jan. 6 Select Committee’s subsequent criminal referrals were simply partisan attempts to “sideline” him and prevent him from holding elected office again.

  “The Fake charges made by the highly partisan Unselect Committee of January 6th have already been submitted, prosecuted, and tried in the form of Impeachment Hoax # 2,” the former president noted on Dec. 19 after the committee referred him to the Justice Department for prosecution.

  In February 2020, after his first acquittal by the Senate, Trump was asked by reporters about the potential of a future expungement.

  “That’s a very good question,” he said. “Should they expunge the impeachment in the House? They should because it was a hoax. It was a total political hoax.”

  At the time, it was McCarthy who floated the idea, vowing to erase the impeachment if the Republican Party regained control of the House and he became speaker.

  “I don’t think it should stay on the books,” McCarthy said.

  Despite opposition from several Trump-aligned Republicans, McCarthy achieved his goal of becoming speaker of the House—with Trump’s backing—last week.

  After a contentious week of intraparty negotiations, McCarthy secured the speakership in the 15^th vote, attributing the victory to the former president’s support.

  “I do want to especially thank President Trump,” he told reporters on Jan. 7. “I don’t think anybody should doubt his influence. He was with me from the beginning.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 16:00

• The Gas Stove Scare Is A Fraud Created By Climate Change Authoritarians
  The Gas Stove Scare Is A Fraud Created By Climate Change Authoritarians

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  In the past I have often tried to take a big picture approach to the issues facing the American public and how there is almost always a deeper connection between a variety of political and economic events. And, what has become increasingly clear to me is that in order to understand government actions and geopolitics, you must always ask yourself “Who benefits?”

  

  The bottom line is this – At the heart of nearly every conflict and every crisis the same group of power mongers usually benefits, and they have taken a keen interest in the climate change narrative in particular. But like I said, this is the big picture. Right now I’d like to take a look at a relatively small issue and how the little dominoes lead up to a bigger con game and a bigger disaster. Let’s talk about gas stoves…

  Frankly, I don’t care about what my stove uses to cook with as long as it works. That said, around 38% of US households use natural gas for cooking and heating. That’s a significant percentage of people that rely on gas based energy for their daily needs. Here’s the problem, though – Natural gas is not politically correct these days. Nearly all carbon emitting energy sources have been marked by climate activists and western governments as a threat that needs to be erased between 2030 to 2050.

  Globalist institutions and climate change grifters have put natural gas on the naughty list, but there are a couple of realities that must be addressed. First, as noted, a vast portion of the western world including the US and Europe rely on natural gas for numerous energy applications. Ban natural gas and civilization faces an immediate plunge in economic activity, as well as much higher prices on all remaining energy sources due to increasing demand. There is NO green energy solution that can fill the same roll as gas.

  All you have to do is look at Europe and the UK today and see how they are struggling with vastly higher costs due to sanctions on Russian gas exports. It’s a mess, and they are lucky that the winter has so far been rather mild, because the moment things freeze, they are in trouble. There are not enough alternative energy resources available to fulfill Europe’s shortages if the temperatures plummet.

  But what does this have to do with banning gas stoves in the US? Isn’t that a health issue rather than an environmental issue? No, it’s not a health issue, it’s a climate agenda issue being rebranded as a health issue.

  There has been a coordinated government and media blitz on the gas stove narrative this week, with an avalanche of claims that natural gas causes everything from asthma in children to a slowdown in cognitive development. What is the evidence for these claims? The Biden Administration and the agency weighing a potential ban, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), have not given specific sources yet.

  The assertions are most likely rooted in a single study published in December by the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health in December. The group is privately funded and this particular study on gas stoves was led by RMI, a non-profit research entity that advocates for aggressive green policies and works to “transform global energy systems across the real economy.” The two lead authors, Talor Gruenwald and Brady Seals, are RMI researchers who have contributed to the group’s “carbon-free buildings” initiative.

  In other words, the study is written by people with a built in bias, and since science these days is now being linked to activism, no single study funded by a private ideological group can be trusted. RMI is not only part of the climate cult, they also promote “equity” theory and general woke politics. These concepts and real science cannot coexist.

  The American Gas Association made this exact point in a responding statement, noting that the study’s testing did not include real life appliance usage, and:

  “Ignored [previous] literature, including one study of data collected from more than 500,000 children in 47 countries that ‘detected no evidence’ of an association between the use of gas as a cooking fuel and either asthma symptoms or asthma diagnosis.”

  The push for a gas stove ban is not about health, it’s about control. It is an attempt to falsely link carbon emissions and energy products to negative health concerns as a way to trick the public into supporting decarbonization out of fear. But why revert to such a strategy? Is the climate cult really that desperate?

  Yes, yes they are.

  You see, the truth about climate change is beginning to spread to the masses, and the debunking of anti-carbon propaganda is picking up momentum. Here are the facts:

  The average global temperature is not climbing to dangerous levels. The Earth’s temps have increased according to the NOAA by less than 1°C in the past century.

  There is no evidence that this kind of temperature increase represents a threat to the environment or human health. In fact, the Earth’s temps have been much higher than they are today multiple times in the Earth’s history long before man-made carbon emissions were a thing. The official temperature record used by climate scientists only goes back to the 1880s – That is a TINY sliver of time in comparison to the epic lifespan of the Earth’s atmosphere.

  

  And what about all those arguments that there are more dangerous weather patterns emerging due to global warming? That’s a lie. There is no significant difference between storm patterns today compared to 100 years ago.

  

  And let’s not forget that global warming propaganda has been going on a long time now. Back when I was a kid in the 1980s, they used to tell us in school that large parts of continents would be under water by the year 2000. This obviously never happened and likely never will. Many of us who grew up in that era are still waiting around for the icecaps to melt.

  

  The climate change agenda is about giving governments and globalist institutions the power to bottleneck energy usage, tax carbon emissions and thus control almost every aspect of our daily lives. Without the free flow of carbon based energy almost all industry will collapse. Green energy is inefficient and cannot fill the void left behind by gas, petroleum and coal. All that would be left is a minimal manufacturing base, minimal food production and a shrinking human population. Those that survive would be slaves to carbon restrictions; it would be a living nightmare.

  There are very rich and powerful people out there that greatly benefit from such a scenario.

  The globalists have been scheming to use environmentalism as an excuse for centralization since at least 1972, when the Club Of Rome, a think-tank attached to the UN, published a treatise titled ‘The Limits To Growth’. Twenty years later they would publish a book titled ‘The First Global Revolution.’ In that document they specifically recommend using global warming as a vehicle:

  “In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

  The statement comes from Chapter 5 – The Vacuum, which covers their desire for global government. The quote is relatively clear; a common enemy must be conjured in order to trick humanity into uniting under a single banner – The globalist banner. And the elites see environmental catastrophe, caused by mankind itself, as the best possible motivator.

  How does this agenda start? It starts with gas stoves. It starts with something we might see as small, and then it grows from there. Pretty soon, they will be banning natural gas for heating. They will ban wood stoves. They will artificially induce gas price inflation. Then they will implement carbon taxation on manufacturers which will in turn cause prices to rise for consumers. Then there will be carbon taxes for the average individual. They will use whatever means at their disposal to make it impossible to use “fossil fuels.”

  Again, it’s not about health, it’s about control. It’s always about control. The gas stove issue is a fraud; one domino in a long chain that leads to carbon totalitarianism.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 15:30

• Why Was Hunter Paying Joe Biden $50k Per Month To Rent House Where Classified Documents Found?
  Why Was Hunter Paying Joe Biden $50k Per Month To Rent House Where Classified Documents Found?

  A Thursday tweet from the NY Post‘s Miranda Devine containing a background check for Hunter Biden has people asking questions.

  

  “The now-52-year-old began listing the Wilmington home as his address following his 2017 divorce from ex-wife Kathleen Buhle — even falsely claiming he owned the property on a July 2018 background check form as part of a rental application,” the Post reported.

  Of note, this is the same house where classified documents were found.

  Yet, upon closer inspection, Hunter lists the “Monthly Rent” as $49,910 – or roughly $550,000 for the 11 months he indicated he lived there?

  In 2018 Hunter Biden claimed he owned the house where Joe Biden kept classified documents alongside his Corvette in the garage Via @jj_talking pic.twitter.com/L7c80MRRiS

  — Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) January 12, 2023

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

  A Zillow search reveals that the most expensive home currently for rent in Wilmington, Delaware is going for $6,000 per month.

  

  According to Town & Country magazine, Biden’s home is worth around $2 million.

  Could Hunter, a crackhead, have accidentally listed the annual rent payment to his father for the house which contained classified documents? Sure. But why was his wealthy ex-VP dad charging him rent in the first place, when Hunter was allegedly broke?

  Trending Politics asks the quiet part out loud; was this Hunter’s way of funneling money to his father?

  After Hunter’s divorce was finalized in May of 2017, he was included in an email from his business partner James Gilliar about a venture with Chinese state-funded energy company CEFC China Energy. The email stated that Hunter and his partners would receive 20% of the shares in the new business, with 10% going to Hunter’s uncle James Biden and the other 10% being “held by H for the big guy.”

  Tony Bobulinski, another one of Hunter’s former business partners, claims that he had a meeting with Joe Biden regarding the CEFC venture on May 2, 2017, and that the president was the individual referred to as the “big guy” in Gilliar’s email. Additionally, Gilliar himself confirmed that Joe Biden was the “big guy” mentioned in a message found on the laptop.

  And as the NY Post reports, “The following year, federal investigators began looking into whether Hunter and his business associates violated tax and money laundering laws during their dealings in China and other countries. Emails and other records related to the deals were found on the laptop, which Hunter dropped off at a Delaware repair shop in 2019 and never reclaimed.“

  “I hope you all can do what I did and pay for everything for this entire family for 30 years,” Hunter told his daughter Naomi in January, 2019. “It’s really hard. But don’t worry, unlike pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary.”

  Of course, Hunter paid his daddy $50k a month in rent.

  Here’s a text message Hunter sent his daughter in 2019 saying he gives JOE BIDEN “half” his salary.

  This was found on Hunter’s laptop.https://t.co/Ys1TzTlq3l pic.twitter.com/gsO8hP8r3b

  — kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) January 14, 2023

  As the Post continues:

  The laptop doesn’t contain any direct evidence of such money transfers but shows Hunter was routinely on the hook for household expenses — including repairs to the Wilmington home.

  In December 2020, weeks after his father was elected president, Hunter Biden announced that his “tax affairs” were being investigated by federal authorities in Delaware, and said he was “confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately.”

  Recent reports have indicated investigators believe they have enough evidence to charge the first son with tax crimes — as well as with lying about his drug abuse on a federal form so he could buy a gun in 2018.

  So, was the $49,910 ‘monthly’ rent a simple crackhead mistake when that was in fact the annual payment amount, or did Hunter create “Exhibit A” for any honest prosecutors to pursue? We aren’t holding our breath on the latter.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 15:00

• "For The Record"
  “For The Record”

  By Peter Tchir, chief strategist at Academy Securities

  Since it is the start of the year, it seems like as good of a time as any to put a few things on record before diving into the meat of this T-Report. There are things that I want to refer back to over the course of the year because they relate to the business of strategy.

  For the Record #1

  Everyone hates strategists who claim to have called every move correctly. I can guarantee you that if someone called every move right in the markets, they wouldn’t be sitting in front of a computer typing missives because they’d be bazillionaires!

  A close second for the most annoying behavior by strategists is touting their good calls and completely ignoring their bad calls (Bitcoin is back to $21,000 this weekend).

  Some of this is human nature. We all “want” to be right and all tend to emphasize the “good” rather than the “bad”.

  For the Record #2

  Many of our readers have P&Ls. That is a discipline like no other and while I try to think of our strategies in terms of P&L generation, risk management, etc., it isn’t the same as having an actual P&L.

  Having said that, we have people who live and die by daily/weekly/monthly P&Ls (which is ideal for Bloomberg IB as a form of communication). We also have people with weekly/monthly/quarterly timeframes (the T-Report is geared for these people). Finally, we have some who even think in years (which seems important for corporate strategy, but it is difficult to manage a portfolio around).

  For the Record #3

  One thing that strategists dislike is when people discuss their “idea” with them but don’t realize that it was the strategist’s “idea”! That is largely a failing on the strategist’s part. Either the work isn’t getting distributed well enough (a good time to check mailing lists, ensure things aren’t going to junk, etc.), the work/titles are too confusing (though I’m not sure I could live without writing I Like Big Banks and I Can Not Lie), or I just need to write more clearly.

  Last weekend’s A Simple View is part of the process of addressing this issue going forward. 8 Seconds served the function of letting people know that our positioning had changed, but maybe the title was confusing (though the image of trying to ride a wild bull felt “informative” to me).

  Finally, while the Fed is apolitical, I couldn’t help but send out the Shifting Politics of Inflation on Friday, because that has the potential to shift the national narrative and could either influence the Fed or (at least in the case of the WSJ) might be the conduit the Fed is using to signal a change.

  On the Record

  We will “subtly” shift from “for the record” to “on the record”.

  Rachel Washburn hosted a fun and interesting webinar on Friday that started with World War III possibilities but ended in a better place. Generals (ret.) Walsh and Marks were spot on, and I was able to add a few points on how their geopolitical input is impacting our macro market and economic outlooks (replay will be available shortly).

  Academy was one of three firms that participated in Friday’s half-hour Real Yield show on Bloomberg TV. You know a show covers a lot of fixed income ground when CLO ETFs get mentioned and it seemed to be a fluid part of the conversation (rather than forced). Some really interesting views and ideas from the other guests made this a great show to watch if you have about 20 minutes or so this long weekend.

  On the Road

  My favorite part of my job has kicked off in earnest! From D.C. and Princeton last week, to San Francisco, Palo Alto, Newport Beach, and San Diego this week, seeing clients is back in vogue. There is nothing more fun than sitting with people in a variety of jobs/industries and sharing ideas. I’m even excited for Minneapolis in early Feb (it will be cold, but should be fun) and look forward to another opportunity to speak to a group of municipal issuers in Alabama!

  Travel and seeing such a diverse group of people allows me to learn about so many aspects of the economy and it makes my job so much easier!

  Consensus is Neutral

  Back to the meat of the report. If I’ve done a good job explaining myself this year, you should know that I’m basically neutral on stocks, bonds, and credit here. That view seems to be rather consensus.

  The CNN Fear & Greed Index has bumped up to 63 (which is technically in greed territory, but just above neutral).

  The AAII Sentiment Survey is in neutral territory (though very close to being too pessimistic). What was most interesting is that the number of bears has dropped from 52.3% to 39.9% since December 21st, but almost all of those people piled into the “neutral” camp as the number of bulls remained quite low.

  I’m not big on technical charts, but this chart sticks out so much that I couldn’t help but use it to illustrate my “neutral” point (I’m not opposed to charts, but they just aren’t my first choice of things to highlight).

  

  The S&P has snuggled right up against the 200 day moving average. From my limited understanding of charts, this is a crucial level. The S&P has failed to breach the 200 DMA since the sell-off took hold in late March. It could easily be rejected again. On the other hand, if it breaks through, we could see buyers emerge. Not only from all of those positioned as “neutral”, but from bears and particularly CTAs which have a reputation for being formulaic/algorithmic and tied to big levels (like the 200 DMA).

  So maybe I should refine my view from simply “neutral” to “neutral, waiting to pounce on the next move – if only I knew what that next move would be”.

  Even though at the start of today’s report we wrote about providing more “clarity” on views, I’d lean towards owning some tail risk in either direction! If we fail around here, many could press shorts and get out of recently acquired risk. If we break above, the opposite happens.

  Yes, at some level this happens all the time, but the “neutral” positioning coupled with a major, very visible level (which happens to coincide with the big round number of 4,000) makes the next few days particularly interesting for me!

  What’s Next for Inflation?

  I think that inflation will continue to fall and we will see more monthly CPI prints that are negative and even Core CPI will have a negative print this quarter.

  Many disagree, but I think that with Q4 coming in at 0.8% (3.2% simply annualized) we’ve “beaten” inflation.

  What Will the Fed Do?

  I’d be shocked if they did more than 25 bps at their next meeting.

  Yes, they will talk about “financial conditions” (aka the S&P 500), but they are starting to get the political and media aircover to back down from 50 bps and some of their higher terminal rate calls.

  There are still over 2 weeks until their meeting and we will get more data. I’m betting that if anything, that data steers them to “25 bps and done” messaging (probably too late for them to do zero, which is what I think that they should do).

  The Fed will NOT be quick to cut. They should stop hiking, but even I’m not advocating for cuts (it would have been easier if they started on the glide path to stopping rate hikes a few meetings ago).

  They will continue to do QT. This, to me, acts as an anchor on markets as every month we need to absorb more bonds from the system than if QE had not started in the first place. Why QT gets so little attention still baffles me.

  The Bank of Japan is expected to let the 10-year yield rise to as much as 1%. I view this as “on par” with QT. It is another drag on asset prices in the U.S. as Japanese investors can allow some of their FX hedged/dollar denominated bonds to roll-off when the hedges come due and just buy domestic bonds. It isn’t alarming and won’t be all at once, but it adds to the pressures of finding dollar denominated asset buyers. With the 10-year bund at 2.16% this is already happening in Europe, but it also tells me that 1% is probably getting to the low end of the range that the JGB 10-year would naturally trade at given their domestic savings rate and still low levels of inflation.

  What Will the Economy Do?

  Yes, jobs still seem good, but that isn’t as important as it should be. What I’m seeing is a couple industries acting as the epicenter of the problems for the economy!

  Big tech, fueled by everyone (from private equity, to vehicle manufacturers) took 5 steps forward in the past few years! Will we see one or two steps back as companies become more cost conscious and not every tech investment will be cheered by equity holders. Have manufacturers changed what chips they rely on as they’ve battled supply chains? Without a doubt, in 5 years technology will play an even bigger role in society and the economy, but it doesn’t mean that we haven’t already priced too much in.

  I see a potential problem in this market that it is radiating out. The local economies are incredibly interconnected.

  The homebuilder ETF (XHB) is up almost 20% in the past 3 months! This is a contrarian play that I probably should have gotten on board with, but this is an industry still in the early stages of digesting the spike in mortgage rates and overall loss of wealth in this country. I’m keeping an eye on this.

  We will get some clarity and resolution on the inventory side of the equation in the coming weeks as we get the regular data and we also have companies discussing it in detail. I’m not optimistic, but maybe this will be a pleasant surprise.

  Services could be the key. Was the print that we highlighted last weekend an anomaly or a harbinger of more bad news? Even as a bear on the economy, that data seemed surprisingly weak, so I expect something not quite so bad, but “less good” than most bulls are building into their forecast.

  What About Earnings?

  I will start by quoting my friend Peter Boockvar. He “guarantees” every quarter that about 70-75% of companies will beat earnings. His point, as I take it, is that expectations get pushed down to the point that most companies beat them, so there is little to be gleaned from the parade of “beats” that we will get.

  We will all be listening to how CEOs portray their vision for the rest of the year. Their views will mean a lot, but they usually do.

  My gut is that they will be more cautious than expectations, in part because some of the “wiggle” room that they had late last year has already been used. Also, they are in jobs where they want to outperform expectations, and even if your company is doing well, you might be cautious because you see companies around you going through tougher times.

  The one thing I “know” for certain is that we will get a lot of chatter about stock repurchases post earnings announcements and unless something changes, that will help support equities.

  It’s a Moving Picture, not a Snapshot

  The biggest mistake people may be making is looking at the data as though it is static.

  If we take a snapshot of recent data, it is easy to craft a “soft” landing narrative.

  But we don’t live in a static world. Decisions made months ago (on the policy side, on the household side, on the corporate side, etc.) take time to play out. It would be fun if economists could drive the economy like a jet ski, but it is a huge tanker, and once underway it is difficult to turn or even change speed.

  So, I 100% agree that the current data has a “soft” landing feel, but I don’t believe there is a chance that the weakening of economic data (alongside lower inflation) will stop here!

  We had to be setting up to “catch” the fall here, and if anything, we are still pushing on this well past the point we should be.

  Maybe I’m wrong here, but simple Newtonian physics tells us that an object, once set in motion, will stay in motion and that is what the Fed has done and we are going to blow right through the “soft” landing station and enter into some unsafe territory.

  Bottom Line

  Stocks

  • Neutral.
  • Own options that cost very little, but generate profits if the S&P 500 breaks 4,100 or 3,900 by the end of next week (yes, resolution will be rapid and I hope that I don’t miss it between now and when futures open, let alone in the actual market).
  • “Gun to head” I’d bet that the rally continues and we test 4,200 on the S&P 500 which means I’ve got to get back on that bucking bronco (or I got off too early).
  • We will break 2022’s lows, but that isn’t my gut for the next move.

  Rates

  • The 10-year at 3.5% isn’t particularly appealing. We should see corporate issuance spike after earnings announcements. 3.5% is quite inverted versus the front end with a Fed that will hike at least 25 bps more. The BOJ won’t help things. Positioning has become a bit bullish on bonds (at least from the chatter I hear). So, even in my deflationary view, I would not be long 10s here.
  • I like 5-years better than other points. It is “only” 3.6%, so not much of a pick-up, but I like the risk/reward better in 5s. Maybe, the 2-year is more obvious, but it has so little duration and if I’m right and the Fed won’t hike (but also won’t cut), then there isn’t a lot of room.
  • For now, I’d be short Treasuries/sovereign debt. Yes, I think that deflation will be the discussion point of this quarter, but for now, I just don’t see much value in sovereign debt.

  Credit

  • A “weird” barbell. I’m most concerned about leveraged loans (more so than high yield, because of the type of issuer that tapped that market, versus the bond market), but I like “senior” tranches of CLOs (anything IG rated and even BB). It is difficult to go lower in the cap structure of CLOs given the fact that the building blocks are my least favorite part of the credit market. Prices of various CLO tranches have bounced nicely in the past couple of months and new deals could accumulate some good collateral at really interesting levels.
  • I’m “meh” on high yield and even investment grade.
    • High yield is so hated but while it is interesting, the combination of rate risk and credit risk isn’t a screaming buy to me (though certainly more of a buy than leveraged loans).
    • Investment grade is ok, but I think if Treasury yields rise, spreads will contract by 25% or so of the move in Treasuries, so I expect higher overall yields and lower dollar prices. If sovereign yields drop, spreads will widen on at least a 50% basis (if not closer to 100%). So, in a falling yield environment, IG yields won’t change much and dollar prices won’t do a lot (kind of a difficult risk/reward to pitch).
  • So, I am equal weight IG and underweight sovereign debt. I am underweight leveraged loans and would use those funds to buy CLO tranches or some high yield bonds instead.

  That’s what I’ve got for now. Will be an interesting week or two and it is difficult being so bearish on the economy, but neutral (and maybe “gun to the head” bullish) on risk in the very short-term.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 14:30

• Adam Schiff Admits Possible National Security Jeopardized With Biden Documents
  Adam Schiff Admits Possible National Security Jeopardized With Biden Documents

  You know it’s bad when…

  

  No lessor liar than Rep. Adam Schiff (R-Calif.), the now former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, admitted this morning that it’s possible national security was jeopardized after President Joe Biden’s lawyers confirmed classified documents were found in various locations.

  “I don’t think we can exclude the possibility without knowing more of the facts,” the California Democrat said of the Biden documents when pressed by “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl about any national security risks.

  “We have asked for an assessment in the intelligence community of the Mar-a-Lago documents,” Schiff said.

  “I think we ought to get that same assessment of the documents found in the think tank as well as the home of President Biden. I’d like to know what these documents were. I’d like to know what the [intelligence community’s] assessment is, whether there was any risk of exposure and what the harm would be and whether any mitigation needs to be done.”

  Of course, Schiff was quick to get back on track with the narrative, as echoing the media and most other Democrats, the Russia collusion hoaxer asserted that Biden’s and Trump’s cases are different because Biden, he said, is cooperating.

  “The Biden approach was very different in the sense that it looks that it was inadvertent that these documents were at these locations,” Schiff said.

  “There was no effort to hold onto them, no effort to conceal them, no effort to obstruct the Justice Department’s investigation.”

  Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff says he’s “going to reserve judgment” on the Biden classified document scandal because it was probably “inadvertent” that Biden left classified documents lying around his office, garage, and home.#Democrat #Schiff #ClassifiedDocuments

  via @RNCresearch pic.twitter.com/kq8k0f0pVU

  — TRUTH PUKE (@TruthPuke) January 15, 2023

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

  It’s worth noting, however, that the National Archives had confirmed last year that Trump’s lawyers were cooperating with the agency before the FBI raided his Florida residence in August.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/15/2023 – 14:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• How Can We Trust Institutions That Lied?
  How Can We Trust Institutions That Lied?

  Authored by Abir Ballan via The Brownstone Institute,

  Trust the Authorities, trust the Experts, and trust the Science, we were told.

  Public health messaging during the Covid-19 pandemic was only credible if it originated from government health authorities, the World Health Organization, and pharmaceutical companies, as well as scientists who parroted their lines with little critical thinking. 

  

  In the name of ‘protecting’ the public, the authorities have gone to great lengths, as described in the recently released Twitter Files (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) that document collusion between the FBI and social media platforms, to create an illusion of consensus about the appropriate response to Covid-19. 

  They suppressed ‘the truth,’ even when emanating from highly credible scientists, undermining scientific debate and preventing the correction of scientific errors. In fact, an entire bureaucracy of censorship has been created, ostensibly to deal with so-called MDM— misinformation (false information resulting from human error with no intention of harm); disinformation (information intended to mislead and manipulate); malinformation (accurate information intended to harm). 

  From fact-checkers like NewsGuard, to the European Commission’s Digital Services Act, the UK Online Safety Bill and the BBC Trusted News Initiative, as well as Big Tech and social media, all eyes are on the public to curtail their ‘mis-/dis-information.’ 

  “Whether it’s a threat to our health or a threat to our democracy, there is a human cost to disinformation.” — Tim Davie, Director-General of the BBC

  But is it possible that ‘trusted’ institutions could pose a far bigger threat to society by disseminating false information?

  Although the problem of spreading false information is usually conceived of as emanating from the public, during the Covid-19 pandemic, governments, corporations, supranational organisations and even scientific journals and  academic institutions have contributed to a false narrative. 

  Falsehoods such as ‘Lockdowns save lives’ and ‘No one is safe until everyone is safe’ have far-reaching costs in livelihoods and lives. Institutional false information during the pandemic was rampant. Below is just a sample by way of illustration.

  The health authorities falsely convinced the public that the Covid-19 vaccines stop infection and transmission when the manufacturers never even tested these outcomes. The CDC changed its definition of vaccination to be more ‘inclusive’ of the novel mRNA technology vaccines. Instead of the vaccines being expected to produce immunity, now it was good enough to produce protection. 

  The authorities also repeated the mantra (at 16:55) of ‘safe and effective’ throughout the pandemic despite emerging evidence of vaccine harm. The FDA refused the full release of documents they had reviewed in 108 days when granting the vaccines emergency use authorisation. Then in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, it attempted to delay their release for up to 75 years. These documents presented evidence of vaccine adverse events. It’s important to note that between 50 and 96 percent of the funding of drug regulatory agencies around the world comes from Big Pharma in the form of grants or user fees. Can we disregard that it’s difficult to bite the hand that feeds you?

  The vaccine manufacturers claimed high levels of vaccine efficacy in terms of relative risk reduction (between 67 and 95 percent). They failed, however, to share with the public the more reliable measure of absolute risk reduction that was only around 1 percent, thereby exaggerating the expected benefit of these vaccines. 

  They also claimed “no serious safety concerns observed” despite their own post-authorisation safety report revealing multiple serious adverse events, some lethal. The manufacturers also failed to publicly address the immune suppression during the two weeks post-vaccination and the rapidly waning vaccine effectiveness that turns negative at 6 months or the increased risk of infection with each additional booster. Lack of transparency about this vital information denied people their right to informed consent. 

  They also claimed that natural immunity is not protective enough and that hybrid immunity (a combination of natural immunity and vaccination) is required. This false information was necessary to sell remaining stocks of their products in the face of mounting breakthrough cases (infection despite vaccination). 

  In reality, although natural immunity may not completely prevent future infection with SARS-CoV-2, it is however effective in preventing severe symptoms and deaths. Thus vaccination post-natural infection is not needed. 

  The WHO also participated in falsely informing the public. It disregarded its own pre-pandemic plans, and denied that lockdowns and masks are ineffective at saving lives and have a net harm on public health. It also promoted mass vaccination in contradiction to the public health principle of ‘interventions based on individual needs.’ 

  It also went as far as excluding natural immunity from its definition of herd immunity and claimed that only vaccines can help reach this end point. This was later reversed under pressure from the scientific community. Again, at least 20 percent of the WHO’s funding comes from Big Pharma and philanthropists invested in pharmaceuticals. Is this a case of he who pays the piper calls the tune? 

  The Lancet, a respectable medical journal, published a paper claiming that Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) — a repurposed drug used for the treatment of Covid-19 —  was associated with a slight increased risk of death. This led the FDA to ban the use of HCQ to treat Covid-19 patients and the NIH to halt the clinical trials on HCQ as a potential Covid-19 treatment. These were drastic measures taken on the basis of a study that was later retracted due to the emergence of evidence showing that the data used was false. 

  In another instance, the medical journal Current Problems in Cardiology retracted —without any justification— a paper showing an increased risk of myocarditis in young people following the Covid-19 vaccines, after it was peer-reviewed and published. The authors advocated for the precautionary principle in the vaccination of young people and called for more pharmacovigilance studies to assess the safety of the vaccines. Erasing such findings from the medical literature not only prevents science from taking its natural course, but it also gatekeeps important information from the public.

  A similar story took place with Ivermectin, another drug used for the treatment of Covdi-19, this time potentially implicating academia. Andrew Hill stated (at 5:15) that the conclusion of his paper on Ivermectin was influenced by Unitaid which is, coincidentally, the main funder of a new research centre at Hill’s workplace —the University of Liverpool. His meta-analysis showed that Ivermectin reduced mortality with Covid-19 by 75 percent. Instead of supporting Ivermectin use as a Covid-19 treatment, he concluded that further studies were needed.

  The suppression of potentially life-saving treatments was instrumental for the emergency use authorization of the Covid-19 vaccines as the absence of a treatment for the disease is a condition for EUA (p.3).

  Many media outlets are also guilty of sharing false information. This was in the form of biased reporting, or by accepting to be a platform for public relations (PR) campaigns. PR is an innocuous word for propaganda or the art of sharing information to influence public opinion in the service of special interest groups. 

  The danger of PR is that it passes for independent journalistic opinion to the untrained eye. PR campaigns aim to sensationalise scientific findings, possibly to increase consumer uptake of a given therapeutic, increase funding for similar research, or to increase stock prices. The pharmaceutical companies spent $6.88 billion on TV advertisements in 2021 in the US alone. Is it possible that this funding influenced media reporting during the Covid-19 pandemic? 

  Lack of integrity and conflicts of interest have led to an unprecedented institutional false information pandemic. It is up to the public to determine whether the above are instances of mis- or dis-information. 

  Public trust in the Media has seen its biggest drop over the last five years. Many are also waking up to the widespread institutional false information. The public can no longer trust ‘authoritative’ institutions that were expected to look after their interests. This lesson was learned at great cost. Many lives were lost due to the suppression of early treatment and an unsound vaccination policy; businesses ruined; jobs destroyed; educational achievement regressed; poverty aggravated; and both physical and mental health outcomes worsened. A preventable mass disaster. 

  We have a choice: either we continue to passively accept institutional false information or we resist. What are the checks and balances that we must put in place to reduce conflicts of interest in public health and research institutions? How can we decentralise the media and academic journals in order to reduce the influence of pharmaceutical advertising on their editorial policy?

  As individuals, how can we improve our media literacy to become more critical consumers of information? There is nothing that dispels false narratives better than personal inquiry and critical thinking. So the next time conflicted institutions cry woeful wolf or vicious variant or catastrophic climate, we need to think twice.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 23:30

• Visualizing The Biggest Global Risks Of 2023
  Visualizing The Biggest Global Risks Of 2023

  The profile of risks facing the world is evolving constantly. Events like last year’s invasion of Ukraine can send shockwaves through the system, radically shifting perceptions of what the biggest risks facing humanity are.

  Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley created the graphic below to summarize findings from the Global Risks Report, an annual publication produced by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

  It provides an overview of the most pressing global risks that the world is facing, as identified by experts and decision-makers.

  

  These risks are grouped into five general categories: economic, environmental, geopolitical, societal, and technological.

  Let’s dive into this year’s findings.

  2023’s Risk Profile

  In the lower–middle portion of the chart are the risks that could have serious impacts—such as attacks involving nuclear or biological weapons—but that were highlighted by fewer experts.

  Over in the top-right quadrant of the chart are the risks that a number of experts mentioned, and that are causing a strain on society. Not surprisingly, the top risks are related to issues that impact a wide variety of people, such as the rising cost of living and inflation. When staples like food and energy become more expensive, this can fuel unrest and political instability—particularly in countries that already had simmering discontent. WEF points out that increases in fuel prices alone led to protests in an estimated 92 countries.

  One risk worth watching is geoeconomic confrontation, which includes sanctions, trade wars, investment screening, and other actions that have the intent of weakening the countries on the receiving end. Efforts to mitigate this risk result in some of the key themes we see for the coming year. One example is the onshoring of industries, and “friend-shoring”, which is essentially moving operations to a foreign country that has more stable relations with one’s home country.

  How Prepared Are We?

  It’s one thing to be aware of risks, but it’s quite another to have the ability to head off negative events when they come to fruition.

  The chart below is a look at how prepared we are globally to deal with specific types of risks that could arise in the next few years.

  At the top of the chart are risks that experts feel society is better equipped to handle with current plans and resources. Moving towards the bottom of the chart are risks that experts feel are more of a threat since mechanisms for handling them are weak or non-existent.

  

  Experts are generally more confident in solutions in the military or healthcare domains. Environmental and societal challenges leave policy and decision-makers less confident.

  One telling observation from the data above is that none of the risks left a majority of experts feeling neither confident in our ability to prevent the risk from occurring, or prepared to mitigate its impact. As the 2020s are shaping up to be a turbulent decade, that could be a cause for concern.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 23:00

• ATF Declares Braced Pistols Illegal, Demands Registration Or Face Jail Time
  ATF Declares Braced Pistols Illegal, Demands Registration Or Face Jail Time

  Submitted by Gun Owners Of America.,

  The ATF has finally unveiled its “final rule” regarding pistol braces.

  This rule, also called “Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces,” could result in serious criminal charges for owners of up to 40 million guns if they do not register their braced firearms with ATF.  

  🚨BREAKING🚨

  The @ATFHQ just released @JoeBiden‘s unconstitutional pistol brace ban that affects as many as 40,000,000 lawfully purchased firearms.

  Read the new rule here ⤵️https://t.co/dVWgf3isNo pic.twitter.com/6dYftjaDXQ

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) January 13, 2023

  GOA’s Legal & Federal Affairs team are currently going over the final rule with a fine-toothed comb, but here’s what we know so far.  

  According to the final rule, gun owners who possess braced firearms will have 120 days to destroy, reconfigure, register, turn in their firearms to ATF, or face NFA violations which include $250,000 in fines and a hefty prison sentence. 

  

  In addition, ATF has released a list titled “Commercially available firearms equipped with a stabilizing brace that are short-barreled rifles.”

  ATF claims that the list is representative of how the agency will apply the definition of “rifle” to firearms equipped with a stabilizing brace.

  The immediate logistics of this final rule have been called into question by even the anti-gun corporate media. It is a well-known fact that ATF’s NFA division consistently misses its own performance benchmarks and routinely sees wait times for ATF form approvals and tax stamps in the 300-400 day range. If 40 million firearms are added to that waitlist, it is logical to assume that gun owners forced to comply with this unconstitutional registration scheme may wait years in limbo.

  But don’t despair! Gun Owners of America is currently pursuing multiple actions to defeat this unconstitutional ATF overreach on America’s 2nd Amendment Rights. 

  The first is to work with members of Congress to overturn the rule via the Congressional Review Act.

  The Congressional Review Act allows members of Congress to introduce a Joint Resolution of Disapproval to reverse any agency rule or action they deem unconstitutional.

  Of course, if Congress doesn’t cooperate, GOA will not give up. We are prepared to file a lawsuit immediately and fight this subversion of the lawmaking process in the court system. 

  Erich Pratt, Gun Owners of America’s Senior Vice President, had this to say: 

  “This administration continues to find new ways to attack gun owners, and this time their target is brace-equipped firearms that allow persons with disabilities to safely and effectively use pistols. We will continue to work with our industry partners to amplify the disapproving voices in the firearms industry, and the Gun Owners Foundation, our sister legal arm, will be filing suit in the near future.”  

  Aidan Johnston, GOA’s Director of Federal Affairs, added:  

  “President Biden just initiated the largest federal gun registration scheme in our nation’s history without even the passage of a new law. GOA is actively working with Congress to pass a resolution blocking this rule under the Congressional Review Act, and we continue to lobby lawmakers to support Rep. Clyde and Sen. Marshall’s Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today (SHORT) Act. If President Biden will not sign such legislation, then Congress must defund this rogue agency.”  

  GOA has a history of overturning these unconstitutional rule changes. In 2020, when the ATF under the Trump administration attempted to regulate pistol braces, GOA rallied our members to take action. GOA members flooded the proposed rule with comments. Because of this, ATF abandoned its attempt and withdrew the rulemaking. 

  While GOA is prepared to take the ATF to court over this issue, we’re interested in cutting the ATF’s ability to regulate Short Barreled Rifles, Short Barreled Shotguns, and similar types of firearms.   

  To strip the ATF of its ability to regulate these types of firearms, we’re targeting the core of the issue, the National Firearms Act. The outdated and unconstitutional NFA allows ATF the leeway to make these unconstitutional rule changes. We’re working with Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas and Congressman Andrew Clyde of Georgia to pass the SHORT Act, which would remove Short Barreled Rifles and Shotguns from the NFA. 

  But we can’t do it alone. We need your help fighting back against the rogue ATF and the anti-gun Biden administration. Help us fight by calling your Senators and Congress members and asking them to support the SHORT Act and the Joint Resolution of Disapproval. 

  *   *   * 

  We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 22:30

• USDA Reveals US Corn-Harvested Acres At 2008 Levels Amid Megadrought
  USDA Reveals US Corn-Harvested Acres At 2008 Levels Amid Megadrought

  Last year was a bad year for corn — the latest US Department of Agriculture (USDA) report shows drought conditions and extreme weather wreaked havoc on croplands. 

  USDA unexpectedly slashed its outlook for domestic corn production amid a severe drought across the western farm belt. Farmers in Nebraska, Kansas, and Texas were forced to abandon drought-plagued fields. 

  

  The agency estimated farmers harvested 79.2 million acres, a decline of 1.6 million acres versus the previous estimate — the smallest acres harvest since 2008. 

  The unexpected cut to US harvested corn acres means grain supplies are a lot tighter than realized. A report Thursday showed the corn area in the world’s largest producer is at the smallest since 2008 with crops failing in states such as Texas and Nebraska. That’s due to persistent drought conditions in the western part of the country that could also hit harvests for wheat plants that are currently dormant for the winter. — Bloomberg

  The crop-failed lands reduced total harvest corn acreage to levels not seen since 2008. 

  

  Less acreage tightens supply and might continue to put a bid under corn prices. 

  

  Global food prices remain at crisis levels.

  

  Here’s the current drought situation across the farm belt. 

  

  Corn production woes from the US don’t bode well in the fight to crush food inflation. It seems as if the prices for our food will remain high well through 2023. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 22:00

• Doctor Calls For Withdrawal Of Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines Following New Research
  Doctor Calls For Withdrawal Of Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 Vaccines Following New Research

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  An American doctor is joining the calls for the withdrawal of the messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines, pointing to new research that highlights a connection between the shots and adverse events.

  

  Dr. Joseph Fraiman, a doctor based in Louisiana who also conducts research on COVID-19 and other health issues, says it’s time to halt the administration of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines until new clinical trials prove the benefits from the vaccines outweigh the harms.

  The new research, including a reanalysis of the trials for the vaccines, raise concerns about whether the benefits from the vaccines outweigh the harms, according to the doctor.

  “I don’t see how anyone couldn’t be certain that the benefits are outweighing the harms on a population level, or even in the high-risk groups. I don’t see the evidence to support that claim,” Fraiman told The Epoch Times. “But I also can’t say that there’s evidence to support that it’s potentially more harmful, but there’s also uncertainty here. … Given that scenario, I believe that people should not be given the [vaccines] outside of a clinical trial, because we need to figure out … if their benefits outweigh harm or if harm outweighs benefits.”

  “The only thing that can answer that question is going to be a randomized trial,” he added.

  Pfizer and Moderna did not respond to requests for comment.

  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which cleared the shots and has never stopped promoting them, did not return an inquiry.

  The Data

  Fraiman led a study that reanalyzed the original Pfizer and Moderna trials. He and his colleagues concluded in a study published following peer review that the vaccinated were at higher risk of serious adverse events.

  That’s one data point. Another is the identification of safety signals, or adverse events, that are potentially caused by the vaccines but require further study. The FDA revealed in December 2022 that the Pfizer vaccine was linked to blood clotting in elderly individuals. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which recommends the vaccines for virtually all Americans, found hundreds of other signals in its research, according to records obtained by The Epoch Times.

  Several serious problems that can lead to death have been causally linked, or proven to be caused by the vaccines. They include myocarditis, or heart inflammation.

  While U.S. health officials have repeatedly downplayed the severity of myocarditis and a related condition, pericarditis, German researchers who dug into the deaths of 25 people who died suddenly at home after vaccination ruled out every potential cause except for vaccination for five of the people. They reported their results in a study that was published after peer review in late 2022.

  “Given alternative causes are unlikely to cause myocarditis within one week of vaccination, this is essentially conclusive evidence that we’re seeing sudden cardiac deaths from the vaccines,” Fraiman said.

  Fraiman also noted that excess mortality, or deaths from all causes, have risen during the pandemic—with spikes correlating with the introduction of the vaccines. Vaccines may not have caused the additional deaths, he says, but some researchers, including British professors Norman Fenton and Martin Neil, have examined the data and found a signal that the vaccines were linked to at least some of the excess deaths. U.S. officials say some of the deaths may be from COVID-19.

  Initial Thoughts

  When the vaccines were first introduced, Fraiman backed giving them to the elderly and others at high risk from COVID-19, or people of all ages with serious underlying health conditions. He says he also did not recommend against vaccination for any ages, though he told younger family members he was not sure if it was a good idea to get a jab.

  Fraiman also says the vaccines likely reduced hospitalizations in the first two quarters of 2021, recalling how he did not see a single vaccinated person in his hospital until June of that year.

  When he and the other scientists discovered the vaccinated were at higher risk of serious problems, he shifted to a stance of the harms likely outweighing the benefits among healthy people.

  With the new evidence of harm, along with Omicron being less dangerous and more likely to evade vaccine immunity, Fraiman questions whether the benefits outweigh the serious harms even among the elderly and otherwise infirm.

  “I see the likelihood that the harm could outweigh the benefit in the group who stood to benefit the most from the vaccine,” he said.

  Standards Fall

  Clinical trial data on the vaccines have been hard to come by, especially trials not run by the vaccine makers themselves, and the standards for the trials have been lowered over time.

  The FDA authorized shots for children based on immunobridging, or trial data that found the vaccines triggered a similar antibody response in kids than that in adults. For the new bivalent boosters, created because the original vaccines have been providing much lower levels of protection against Omicron and its subvariants, no clinical data, not even antibody measurements, was provided at all. Months later, that data is still not available to the public.

  Some observational studies have estimated the boosters provide subpar protection against infection and solid protection, at least initially, against hospitalization. Randomized, controlled trials are typically considered superior.

  Fraiman recommends withdrawing the vaccines and U.S. officials going to the vaccine makers and asking them to demonstrate the benefits outweigh the harms in light of the changed dynamics of the pandemic. The trials should feature investigators looking closely at each COVID-19 hospitalization to distinguish whether they were caused by COVID-19, or the COVID-19 diagnosis was incidental. That distinction is known widely as being hospitalized, or dying, with COVID-19 versus from COVID-19.

  The trial would take five or six months, similar to the original ones, Fraiman says.

  Other Calls

  Some countries, such as Denmark, meanwhile, have stopped offering booster shots to certain segments of the population. A growing number of experts, meanwhile, are calling for the administration of the Moderna and Pfizer shots, which are by far the most administered in the United States, to be halted.

  The group includes Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a British doctor who turned against the vaccines in 2022 due to the growing evidence of side effects. Malhotra’s citations included the Moderna and Pfizer trials, which showed no reduction in mortality or severe disease, and the research led by Fraiman.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 21:30

• FEMA Distributed Nonsense Emergency Brochures To Native Alaskans
  FEMA Distributed Nonsense Emergency Brochures To Native Alaskans

  FEMA hired a California government contractor to translate disaster-assistance information into two native Alaska languages, but all it and the natives got was a big heap of nonsense. 

  After a typhoon hammered the west coast of Alaska in September, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hired a Berkeley-based company, Accent on Languages, to translate instructions for applying for disaster aid. 

  

  FEMA quickly turned the company’s work into tri-fold, glossy brochures that left native Alaskans utterly perplexed, as they encountered phrases like: 

  • “Your husband is a polar bear, skinny.”
  • “Tomorrow he will go hunting Alaska very early, and will (bring) nothing”  
  • “When she said so, the dog ran farther off from the curtain.”

  University of Alaska Fairbanks linguist Gary Holton says one of the translations is a random assortment of phrases copied from a compilation of far-eastern Russian folklore: “Yupik Eskimo Texts from the 1940s.” 

  “They clearly just grabbed the words from the document and then just put them in some random order and gave something that looked like Yup’ik but made no sense,” Holton told AP. He summed up the work as a “word salad.” 

  In a publicly-posted letter, Accent on Languages CEO Caroline Lee said her firm will reimburse FEMA $5,116. “We make no excuses for erroneous translations, and we deeply regret any inconvenience this has caused to the local community.” 

  Lee said when the “horrifying,” botched translations came to her attention, that her company hired a new team of translators to do the project over again. FEMA has fired the company. 

  Former Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Tara Sweeney wants more than a reimbursement, saying the company is guilty of fraud — “and you can’t put a price on the impact of denying services to vulnerable communities because of misinformation.” The grandstanding Sweeney even called for congressional hearings. 

  We wonder if Accent on Languages was itself a victim of fraud on the part of whomever it assigned to do the original translation. 

  Associated Press presented the fiasco as new evidence of systemic racism. Reporter Mark Thiessen called it “an ugly reminder for Alaska Natives of the suppression of their culture and languages from decades past,” and quoted Sweeney as she linked the bogus translations to her mother being beaten in school for speaking her native tongue.  

  Like so many government contractors with ownership and leadership optimized for affirmative-action-driven contract awards, Accent on Languages touts itself as a “female, minority-owned business.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 21:00

• COVID-Narrative Dissenters File Lawsuit Against Legacy Media Over Coordinated Censorship
  COVID-Narrative Dissenters File Lawsuit Against Legacy Media Over Coordinated Censorship

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

  A coalition of outspoken critics and skeptics of the mainstream narratives on COVID-19 has brought an antitrust lawsuit against some of the world’s largest news organizations, accusing them of working in collaboration to suppress dissenting voices surrounding the pandemic.

  

  The lawsuit (pdf), filed on Tuesday in a federal court in Texas, targets The Washington Post, the British Broadcasting Corp (BBC), The Associated Press (AP), and Reuters—all of which are members of the “Trusted News Initiative (TNI),” a self-described “industry partnership” formed in 2020 among legacy media giants and big tech companies.

  “By their own admission, members of the TNI have agreed to work together, and have in fact worked together, to exclude from the world’s dominant internet platforms rival news publishers who engage in reporting that challenges and competes with TNI members’ reporting on certain issues relating to COVID-19 and U.S. politics,” the complaint reads.

  Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a critic of the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccination policies, led the lawsuit. He is joined by Creative Destruction Media, Trial Site News, Truth About Vaccines founders Ty and Charlene Bollinger, independent journalist Ben Swann, Health Nut News publisher Erin Elizabeth Finn, Gateway Pundit founder Jim Hoft, Dr. Joseph Mercola, and Ben Tapper, a chiropractor.

  The plaintiffs, the lawsuit alleges, are among the many victims of the TNI’s “group boycott” tactic, defined as a coordinated effort to facilitate monopoly by cutting off the competitors’ access to supplies and necessities.

  In this case, the TNI members are accused of engaging in group boycott—in concert with their big tech partners—against small, independent news publishers by denying them access to internet platforms they need to compete and even survive in the online news market.

  “As a result of the TNI’s group boycott, [the plaintiffs] have been censored, de-monetized, demoted, throttled, shadow-banned, and/or excluded entirely from platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, and Linked-In,” the lawsuit states.

  For example, the lawsuit claims, TNI members have been working with Big Tech to censor what they condemned as “misinformation,” such as reports that COVID may have originated in a laboratory in the Chinese city of Wuhan, that the COVID vaccines do not prevent infection, and that vaccinated people may still transmit COVID to others.

  This alleged effort to establish a dominant media narrative by shutting off nonestablishment outlets, according to the lawsuit, has violated both federal antitrust and freedom of speech laws.

  “Federal antitrust law has its own name for this kind of ‘industry partnership,’” the lawsuit states. “It’s called a group boycott and is a per se violation of the Sherman Act.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 20:30

• At NCAA Convention, Athletes Oppose Trans Intrusion In Women's Sports
  At NCAA Convention, Athletes Oppose Trans Intrusion In Women’s Sports

  The NCAA convention in San Antonio had some unwelcome publicity on Thursday, in the form of dozens of protesters speaking out against the collegiate athletics organization’s insertion of transgender athletes into women’s competition. 

  Among the demonstrators against NCAA’s policies was former Kentucky Wildcat swimmer Riley Gaines, who had to compete against transgender athlete Lia Thomas, the University of Pennsylvania Quaker who was crowned the NCAA women’s champion in the 500-yard freestyle. 

  

  “Today, we intend to personally tell the NCAA to stop discriminating against female athletes by handing them a petition that we have garnered nearly 10,000 signatures on in just a couple of days,” said Gaines. 

  The NCAA has allowed transgender athletes to cross gender lines since 2010. Full implementation of a 2022 update of that policy was set to happen by August 2023, but, amid growing pushback from women and those with empathize with them, the NCAA Board of Governors his week opted to delay it to the 2023-24 academic year “to address operational considerations.” 

  “I want to show the NCAA their discrimination against female athletes like me does not go unnoticed,” protestor and former Lee University volleyball player Macy Petty told Daily Caller. “I will not stand by as they allow biological men to take over female athletics.” Petter had to compete against a trans athlete in USA Volleyball qualifiers.

  

  While Thursday’s action against the NCAA’s transgender policies consisted of speeches and signs, opponents of the status quo are likely to take the NCAA to court with the aim of proving its policies violate Title IX, the legislation that, among other things, requires that female collegiate athletes be afforded the same athletic opportunities as men at the same school. 

  This week, attorneys for the Independent Council on Women’s Sports (ICONS), a network of current and former collegiate and professional women athletes and their families, published a letter to the NCAA, declaring ICONS was putting the NCAA “on official notice that your practice of allowing male athletes on women’s teams constitutes illegal discrimination against women on the basis of sex…it is impossible to provide equal opportunities for both sexes (as required by Title IX) without female-only teams.” 

  At the protest, alluding to potential legal avenues, Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Christiana Kiefer said:

  “I think that could look like a Title IX complaint. And I think it could look like even universities starting to actually push back against the NCAA and saying, ’Hey, we have a legal obligation to protect fair athletic opportunities for female athletes and if we fail to do that, you’re kind of binding our hands and not allowing us to fulfill our legal obligations to the female athletes at our schools.’”

  The resistance to NCAA’s transgender-athlete campaign now includes state governments that have barred transgender athletes from women’s sports. Earlier this month, a federal judge upheld West Virginia’s ban, saying that “one’s sex…dictates physical characteristics that are relevant to athletics.” 

  Our NCAA protest made the @AP_Sports, @washingtonpost and @espn — we came from across the political spectrum and from around the country, united for #OurBodiesOurSports #TitleIX #SexDiscrimination https://t.co/SdyTkUUWJM https://t.co/Pyc09SEK40 pic.twitter.com/wkUoIzxtoG

  — Nancy Hogshead-Makar, JD, Oly (@Hogshead3Au) January 12, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 20:00

• Detailed Report Exposes CIA-Backed 'Zero Units' In Afghanistan
  Detailed Report Exposes CIA-Backed ‘Zero Units’ In Afghanistan

  Via Consortium News/ProPublica,

  In 2019, reporter Lynzy Billing returned to Afghanistan to research the murders of her mother and sister nearly 30 years earlier. Instead, in the country’s remote reaches, she stumbled upon the C.I.A.-backed Zero Units, who conducted night raids — quick, brutal operations designed to have resounding psychological impacts while ostensibly removing high-priority enemy targets.

  So, Billing attempted to catalog the scale of civilian deaths left behind by just one of four Zero Units, known as the 02, over a four year period. 

  

  The resulting report represents an effort no one else has done or will ever be able to do again. Here is what she found:

  • At least 452 civilians were killed in 107 raids. This number is almost certainly an undercount. While some raids did result in the capture or death of known militants, others killed bystanders or appeared to target people for no clear reason.
  • A troubling number of raids appear to have relied on faulty intelligence by the C.I.A. and other U.S. intelligence-gathering services. Two Afghan Zero Unit soldiers described raids they were sent on in which they said their targets were chosen by the United States.
  • The former head of Afghanistan’s intelligence agency acknowledged that the units were getting it wrong at times and killing civilians. He oversaw the Zero Units during a crucial period and agreed that no one paid a consequence for those botched raids. He went on to describe an operation that went wrong: “I went to the family myself and said: ‘We are sorry. … We want to be different from the Taliban.’ And I mean we did, we wanted to be different from the Taliban.”
  • The Afghan soldiers weren’t alone on the raids; U.S. special operations forces soldiers working with the C.I.A. often joined them. The Afghan soldiers Billing spoke to said they were typically accompanied on raids by at least 10 U.S. special operations forces soldiers. “These deaths happened at our hands. I have participated in many raids,” one of the Afghans said, “and there have been hundreds of raids where someone is killed and they are not Taliban or ISIS, and where no militants are present at all.”
  • Military planners baked potential “collateral damage” into the pre-raid calculus — how many women/children/noncombatants were at risk if the raid went awry, according to one U.S. Army Ranger Billing spoke to. Those forecasts were often wildly off, he said, yet no one seemed to really care. He told Billing that night raids were a better option than airstrikes but acknowledged that the raids risked creating new insurgent recruits. “You go on night raids, make more enemies, then you gotta go on more night raids for the more enemies you now have to kill.”

  

  • Because the Zero Units operated under a CIA program, their actions were part of a “classified” war, with the lines of accountability so obscured that no one had to answer for operations that went wrong. And U.S. responsibility for the raids was quietly muddied by a legal loophole that allows the C.I.A. — and any U.S. soldiers lent to the agency for their operations — to act without the same level of oversight as the American military.
  • Congressional aides and former intelligence committee staffers said they don’t believe Congress was getting a complete picture of the C.I.A.’s overseas operations. Lawyers representing whistleblowers said there is ample motivation to downplay to Congress the number of civilians killed or injured in such operations. By the time reports get to congressional oversight committees, one lawyer said, they’re “undercounting deaths and overstating accuracy.”
  • U.S. military and intelligence agencies have long relied on night raids by forces like the 02 unit to fight insurgencies around the globe. The strategy has, again and again, drawn outrage for its reliance on sometimes flawed intelligence and civilian death count. In 1967, the C.I.A.’s Phoenix Program famously used kill-capture raids against the Viet Cong insurgency in south Vietnam, creating an intense public blowback. Despite the program’s ignominious reputation — a 1971 Pentagon study found only 3 percent of those killed or captured were full or probationary Viet Cong members above the district level — it appears to have served as a blueprint for future night raid operations.
  • Eyewitnesses, survivors and family members described how Zero Unit soldiers had stormed into their homes at night, killing loved ones at more than 30 raid sites Billing visited. No Afghan or U.S officials returned to investigate. In one instance, a 22-year-old named Batour witnessed a raid that killed his two brothers. One was a teacher and the other a university student. He told Billing the Zero Unit strategy had actually made enemies of families like his. He and his brothers, he said, had supported the government and vowed never to join the Taliban. Now, he said, he’s not so sure.
  • Little in the way of explanation was ever provided to the relatives of the dead — or to their neighbors and friends — as to why these particular individuals were targeted and what crimes they were accused of. Families who sought answers from provincial officials about the raids were told nothing could be done because they were Zero Unit operations. “They have their own intelligence and they do their own operation,” one grieving family member remembered being told after his three grandchildren were killed in an airstrike and night raid. “The provincial governor gave us a parcel of rice, a can of oil and some sugar” as compensation for the killings. At medical facilities, doctors told Billing they’d never been contacted by Afghan or U.S. investigators or human rights groups about the fate of those injured in the raids. Some of the injured later died, quietly boosting the casualty count.

  In a statement, C.I.A. spokesperson Tammy Thorp said, “As a rule, the U.S. takes extraordinary measures — beyond those mandated by law — to reduce civilian casualties in armed conflict, and treats any claim of human rights abuses with the utmost seriousness.” She said any allegations of human rights abuses by a “foreign partner” are reviewed and, if valid, the C.I.A. and “other elements of the U.S. government take concrete steps, including providing training on applicable law and best practices, or if necessary terminating assistance or the relationship.” Thorp said the Zero Units had been the target of a systematic propaganda campaign designed to discredit them because “of the threat they posed to Taliban rule.”

  The Department of Defense did not respond to questions about Zero Unit operations.

  

  With a forensic pathologist, Billing drove hundreds of miles across some of the country’s most volatile areas — visiting the sites of more than 30 raids, interviewing witnesses, survivors, family members, doctors and village elders.

  To understand the program, she met secretly with two Zero Unit soldiers over the course of years, wrangled with Afghanistan’s former spy master in his heavily fortified home and traveled to a diner in the middle of America to meet with an Army Ranger who’d joined the units on operations.

  She also conducted more than 350 interviews with current and former Afghan and American government officials, Afghan commanders, U.S military officials, American defense and security officials and former C.I.A. intelligence officers, as well as U.S. lawmakers and former oversight committee members, counterterrorism and policy officers, civilian-casualty assessment experts, military lawyers, intelligence analysts, representatives of human rights organizations, doctors, hospital directors, coroners, forensic examiners, eyewitnesses and family members — some of whom are not named in the story for their safety.

  

  While America’s war in Afghanistan may be over, there are lessons to be learned from what it left behind. Billing writes:

  “The American government has scant basis for believing it has a full picture of the Zero Units’ performance. Again and again, I spoke with Afghans who had never shared their stories with anyone. Congressional officials concerned about the CIA’s operations in Afghanistan said they were startled by the civilian death toll I documented.

  As my notebooks filled, I came to realize that I was compiling an eyewitness account of a particularly ignominious chapter in the United States’ fraught record of overseas interventions.

  Without a true reckoning of what happened in Afghanistan, it became clear the U.S. could easily deploy the same failed tactics in some new country against some new threat.”

  Read her full report here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 19:30

• CDC Says Stroke Concerns Over Pfizer Jab Warrant Investigation
  CDC Says Stroke Concerns Over Pfizer Jab Warrant Investigation

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that data collected on the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine merits an investigation into potential stroke risks for people aged 65 and older.

  

  “Following the availability and use of the updated (bivalent) COVID-19 vaccines, CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), a near real-time surveillance system, met the statistical criteria to prompt additional investigation into whether there was a safety concern for ischemic stroke in people ages 65 and older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent,” reads a Friday statement.

  “Rapid-response investigation of the signal in the VSD raised a question of whether people 65 and older who have received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent were more likely to have an ischemic stroke in the 21 days following vaccination compared with days 22-44 following vaccination,” the release continues.

  The bivalent vaccine includes “a component of the original virus strain to provide broad protection against COVID-19 and a component of the omicron variant to provide better protection against COVID-19 caused by the omicron variant,” according to the FDA.

  The agency notably did not see the same “preliminary signal” that prompted the investigation in the Moderna vaccine.

  The agency added that it’s “very unlikely that the signal in VSD represents a true clinical risk,” and doesn’t recommend any changes to vaccine protocols at this time.

  According to Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), who chairs the House Commmerce Committee, has called on the CDC to “rapidly investigate” the matter.

  “The lack of transparency over the past three years has broken Americans’ trust in our public health agencies,” said McMorris in a Friday statement. “CDC and FDA have systems in place to monitor vaccine safety that have identified this preliminary signal.”

  “Now these agencies must rapidly investigate, in an open and transparent manner, whether or not the vaccine may have contributed to the reported strokes.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 19:00

• Lawmakers Warn Gas Stove Ban Would Eliminate Affordable Cooking Method
  Lawmakers Warn Gas Stove Ban Would Eliminate Affordable Cooking Method

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Lawmakers, particularly on the Republican side of the aisle, are continuing to voice their opposition to the idea of a ban on gas stoves.

  

  Concerns about a gas stove ban have risen after a recent study linked their use to childhood asthma and after U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. discussed regulating gas stoves in a recent interview with Bloomberg News.

  “This is a hidden hazard,” Trumka told Bloomberg. “Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”

  In a Wednesday press statement, the new chairwoman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), said this proposed ban is the latest example of President Joe Biden’s “war on American energy.”

  “It is not about public safety. It is about telling the American people the federal government knows best and will decide what kind of car they can drive, how they can heat their house, and now how they’re allowed to cook food for their families,” Rodgers said.

  

  In a similar comment to Fox News, Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) said, “Consumers should be able to choose how they cook their food, heat their homes and power their cars, and they should be able to do it affordably.”

  Gas Stoves Linked to Childhood Asthma

  A peer-reviewed research paper that was published last month in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, said about 35 percent of homes in the United States use indoor gas-powered stoves.

  The paper said such gas stove use is “associated with an increased risk of current asthma among children” and said about 12.7 percent of current childhood asthma cases in the United States are “attributable to gas stove use.”

  Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) organized a Dec. 22 letter to the CPSC, requesting the agency consider a series of new regulations on gas stoves, such as requiring stoves to be sold with range hoods that meet mandatory performance standards, assessing their efficiency of removing the pollutants.

  “As you know, the CPSC has broad authority under the Consumer Product Safety Act to regulate consumer products that pose an unreasonable risk of injury,” the letter reads. “We urge the Commission to protect consumers from these harmful emissions. The Commission itself expressed concerns over gas stove emissions in 1985. Since then, evidence for the danger of these emissions has only increased.”

  

  ‘Unrealistic’

  Several lawmakers opposed to a ban on gas stoves raised concerns that such measures would eliminate an affordable means of cooking and strain the U.S. energy grid with more demands on electricity with consumers having to switch to electric stoves as an alternative.

  “This decision could lead to Americans paying higher electric bills and strain our electric grid even further,” Rep. Daniel Meuser (R-Pa.) told Fox News.

  “As the representative of one of the highest natural gas producing regions in the country, I am once again dismayed by these proposals. Natural gas is among the cleanest, safest, most affordable and abundant form of energy in the United States. Discouraging its use by banning gas stoves is a perplexing and misguided policy.”

  Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) called the idea of banning gas stoves, which are used in millions of American homes, “unrealistic.”

  “Gas stoves are affordable, practical and popular. Democrats are simply grasping at straws to push their Green New Deal agenda,” he said.

  “Americans who are already suffering under record-high inflation can already barely afford to heat their homes this winter, and now the Biden administration wants them to go out and buy a new stove. It’s out of touch and unrealistic.”

  While the negative response to Trumka’s comments about banning gas stoves largely came from Republican lawmakers, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) has also voiced his opposition to the idea.

  “This is a recipe for disaster. The federal government has no business telling American families how to cook their dinner,” Manchin said in a Tuesday press statement.

  Republican Bill

  Concerns about a potential ban on gas stoves have inspired a pair of lawmakers to introduce a bill that would preempt any attempted ban.

   

  On Wednesday, Reps. Bill Huizinga (R-Mich.) and Alex Mooney (R-W.Va.) introduced a bill called the “Stop Trying to Obsessively Vilify Energy” (STOVE) Act.

  “The last thing Americans need or want is another big government bureaucratic decision telling us which appliance we can have in our home,” Huizenga said.

  “The STOVE Act is a common-sense measure that will stop bureaucrats from banning gas stoves or ranges. Americans should have the ability to choose the most affordable and most available way to cook food in their own home. It is absolutely ridiculous how out of control and out of touch the nanny state in Washington has become.”

  Regulator Says He’s Not Seeking a Ban

  Members of the CPSC have offered some mixed messaging on their plans to regulate gas-powered stoves.

  After Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) voiced his opposition to a gas stove ban, Trumka said via Twitter that CPSC “isn’t coming for anyone’s gas stoves” and that regulations would “apply to new products.”

  “For Americans who CHOOSE to switch from gas to electric, there is support available – Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act which includes a $840 rebate,” he said.

  On Wednesday, CPSC Chair Alexander Hoehn-Saric said via Twitter that the regulator has “no proceeding” to impose a ban on gas stoves.

  “Research indicates that emissions from gas stoves can be hazardous, and the CPSC is looking for ways to reduce related indoor air quality hazards,” Hoehn-Saric said via Twitter. “But to be clear, I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so.”

  “CPSC is researching gas emissions in stoves and exploring new ways to address health risks,” Hoehn-Saric added.

  “CPSC also is actively engaged in strengthening voluntary safety standards for gas stoves. And later this spring, we will be asking the public to provide us with information about gas stove emissions and potential solutions for reducing any associated risks. This is part of our product safety mission – learning about hazards and working to make products safer.”

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 18:30

• School Searched 6-Year-Old's Backpack Before He Shot Teacher
  School Searched 6-Year-Old’s Backpack Before He Shot Teacher

  The same day that a 6-year-old boy shot his teacher in a Newport News, Virginia classroom, a school staff member searched his backpack on a tip that the child might be packing heat, school officials disclosed.  

  The revelation occurred during a virtual town hall with parents of Richneck Elementary School. It was first reported by WAVY, which was given access to the video feed by a parent. 

  “The book bag for the student was searched after it was reported that he potentially had a weapon,” said Newport News Superintendent George Parker. “At least one administrator was notified of a possible weapon.”

  Police, however, were not. The search — which failed to find the pistol — took place when the shooter arrived at school around 11:30 am.

  Two and a half hours later, the boy shot 25-year-old first-grade teacher Abby Zwerner in the chest, causing injuries that were initially life-threatening. Her condition has been upgraded to stable. The bullet first passed through her hand, which she’d raised defensively. 

  

  Contrary to initial reports, authorities now say there was no confrontation before the shooting. Zwerner was in the midst of a lesson when the boy suddenly pulled out a handgun at his desk and fired a single shot at her, reports The New York Times. 

  “The firearm was displayed from his person, not from his backpack,” said Newport News Police chief Steve Drew. 

  Zwerner urged her class to flee into the hallway, and another school employee rushed in and restrained the shooter. 

  Police say the 6-year-old used his mother’s 9mm Taurus handgun, which was legally purchased. “The child had obtained that firearm, placed it in his backpack and brought it to school,” said Drew. In Virginia, it’s a misdemeanor crime to leave a loaded gun where a child under 14 can access it. 

  Calling the shooting 100% preventable, the superintendent Parker alluded to pending but unspecified administrative changes at the school, but didn’t specify beyond suggesting the changes are driven by a district review of the incident’s timeline. 

  

  The district announced it will install metal detectors at all schools, and is considering the imposition of a clear-backpack requirement at Richneck Elementary and reconstruction of its front entrance. The shooting occurred Jan 6 yet the school still hasn’t reopened for in-person instruction. 

  The New York Times notes that metal detectors are more likely to be found in schools with a high proportion of non-white students. More than half the students in the Newport News Public Schools system are black and nearly a quarter are white. 

  Parent Tom Aman told WAVY that “Empowering our teachers to take back their classrooms and get rid of disruptive students is a start. But once again, it comes back to the culture. If the teachers don’t feel like they’re being heard and if the teachers and the students don’t feel safe, they can’t teach and they can’t learn.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 18:00

• Macleod: The Evolution Of Credit & Debt In 2023
  Macleod: The Evolution Of Credit & Debt In 2023

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  The evidence strongly suggests that a combined interest rate, economic and currency crisis for the US and its western alliance will continue in 2023.

  This article focuses on credit, its constraints, and why quantitative easing has already crowded out private sector activity. Adjusting M2 money supply for accumulating QE indicates the degree to which this has driven the US tax base into deep recession. And the wider effects on credit in the economy should not be ignored. 

  After a brief partial recovery from the covid crisis in US government finances, they are likely to start deteriorating again due to a deepening recession of private sector activity. Funding these deficits depends on foreign inward investment flows, which are faltering. Rising interest rates and an ongoing bear market make funding from this source hard to envisage.

  Meanwhile, from his public statements President Putin is fully aware of these difficulties, and a consequence of the western alliance increasing their support and involvement in Ukraine makes it almost certain that Putin will take the opportunity to push the dollar over the edge.

  

  Credit is much more than bank deposits

  Economics is about credit, and its balance sheet twin, debt. Debt is either productive, in which case it can extinguish credit in due course, or it is not, and credit must be extended or written off. Money almost never comes into it. Money is distinguished from credit by having no counterparty risk, which credit always has. The role of money is to stabilise the purchasing power of credit. And the only legal form of money is metallic; gold, silver, or copper usually rendered into coin for enhanced fungibility.

  Credit is created between consenting parties. It facilitates commerce, created to circulate existing commodities, and to transform them into consumer goods. The chain of production requires credit, from miner, grower, or importer, to manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer and customer or consumer. Credit in the production chain is only extinguished when the customer or consumer pays for the end product. Until then, the entire production chain must either have money or arrange for credit to pay for their inputs. 

  Providers of this credit include the widest range of economic actors in an economy as well as the banks. When we talk of the misnamed money supply as the measure of credit in an economy, we are looking at the tip of an iceberg, leading us to think that debt in the form of bank notes and deposit accounts owed to individuals and businesses is the extent of it. Changes in the banking sector’s risk appetite drive a larger change in unrecorded credit conditions. We must accept that changes in the level of officially recognised debt are merely symptomatic of larger changes in payment obligations in the economy. 

  The role of credit is not adequately understood by economists. Keynes’s General Theory has only one indexed reference to credit in the entire book, the vade mecum for all macroeconomists. Even the title includes “money” when it is actually all about credit. Von Mises expounds on credit to a considerable degree in his Human Action, but this is an exception. And even his followers today are often unclear about the distinction between money and credit.

  Economists and commentators have begun to understand that credit is not limited to banks, by admitting to the existence of shadow banking, a loose definition for financial institutions which do not have a banking licence but circulate credit. The Bank for International Settlements which monitors shadow banking appears to suspect shadow banks of creating credit without the requirement of a banking licence. There appears to be a confusion here: the BIS’s starting point is that credit is the preserve of a licenced bank. The mistake is to not understand the wider role of non-bank credit in economic activity.

  But these institutions, ranging from insurance companies and pension funds to various forms of financial intermediaries and agents, unconsciously create credit by allowing time to elapse between a commitment giving rise to an obligation, and its settlement. Even next day settlement is a debt obligation for a buyer, or credit extended by a seller. Delivery against settlement is a credit obligation for both parties in a transaction. Futures, forwards, and options are credit obligations in favour of a buyer, which can be traded. And when a broker insists a client must have a credit in his account before investing, or to deliver securities before selling, credits and obligations are also created.

  Therefore, credit has the same effect as money (which is very rarely used) in every transaction, financial or non-financial. All the debts in the accounts of businesses are part of the circulating medium in an economy, including bills of exchange and other tradable obligations. And at each transfer a new credit, debt, or right of action is created, while others are extinguished.

  A banking system provides a base for further credit expansion because all credit transactions are ultimately settled in bank notes, which are an obligation of the note issuer (in practice today, a central bank) or through the novation of a bank deposit, being an obligation of a commercial bank. Banks are simply dealers in credit. As such, they facilitate not just their own dealings, but all credit creation and expunction. 

  The reason for making the point about the true extent of credit is that it is a mistake to think that the statistical expansion, or contraction of it, conventionally measured by the misnamed money supply, is the true extent of a change in outstanding credit. Central banks in particular act as if they believe that by influencing the height of the visible tip of the credit iceberg, they can simply ignore the consequences for the rest. 

  It is also worth making this point so that we can assess how the economies of the western alliance will fare in the year ahead — the American-led NATO and other nations adhering to its sphere of influence. With signs of bank credit no longer expanding and, in some cases, contracting, and with price inflation continuing at destructive levels and a recession threatened, it is rarely so important to understand credit and its role in an economy. 

  We also need to have a true understanding of credit to assess the prospects for China’s economy, which appears to be set on a different course. Emerging from lockdown and in the light of favourable geopolitical developments while the western alliance is tipping into recession, the prospects for China’s economy are rapidly improving.

  Interest rates in 2023

  That the long-term trend of declining interest rates for the major fiat currencies over the last four decades came to an end in 2021 is now beyond question. That this trend fostered a continuing appreciation of asset values is fundamental to an understanding of the consequences. And that the expansion of bank credit supporting a widening plethora of financial credit has stopped, is now only beginning to be register. If we look at the quarterly rate of change in US M2 money supply, this is now evident.

  

  Since the Bretton Woods agreement was abandoned in 1971, there has not been as severe a contraction of US dollar bank credit as witnessed today. It follows a massive covid-related spike when the US Government’s budget deficit soared. And its rise and fall is contemporaneous with a collapse in government revenues and soaring welfare costs.

  In fiscal 2020 (to end-September), the Federal Government’s deficit was $3.312 trillion, compared with revenue of $3.42 trillion. It meant that spending was nearly twice tax income. Some of that excess expenditure was helicoptered directly into citizens’ bank accounts. The rest was reflected in bank balances as it was spent into public circulation by the government. Furthermore, from March 2020 the Fed commenced QE at the rate of $120bn per month, adding a total of $2.6 trillion in bank deposits by the end of fiscal 2021. 

  Deflating M2 by QE to get a feel for changes in the aggregate level of bank deposits strictly related to private sector origination tells us that private sector related credit was already contracting substantially in fiscal 2020—2021. This finding is consistent with an economy which suffered a suspension of much activity. This is illustrated in our next chart, taken from January 2020.

  

  In this chart, accumulating QE is subtracted from official M2 to derive the red line. In practice, one cannot make such a clear distinction, because QE credit goes directly into the financial sector, which is broadly excluded from the GDP calculation. Nevertheless, QE inflates not just commercial bank reserves at the Fed, but their deposit liabilities to the insurance companies, pension funds, and other members of the shadow banking group. A minor portion of QE might relate to the commercial banks themselves, which for practical purposes can be ignored.

  Through QE, state-origination of credit effectively crowds out private sector-origination of credit. A Keynesian critic might dismiss this on the basis that he believes QE stimulates the wider economy. That may be true when a monetary stimulus is first applied, since it takes time for market prices to adjust to the extra quantity of credit. Furthermore, QE stimulates financial market values and not the GDP economy, only affecting it later in a roundabout way.

  But when QE eventually leaks out into the wider economy, it leads to higher prices for consumer goods, confirmed by the dramatic re-emergence of consumer price inflation. Furthermore, regulated banks are limited in their ability to create credit by balance sheet constraints, so to accommodate QE they are necessarily restricted in their credit creation for private sector borrowers.

  Given the far larger quantities of non-bank credit which depend for its facilitation on bank credit, the negative impact on the economy of banks becoming risk averse is poorly understood. It is ignored on the assumption that state-origination of credit through budget deficits stimulates economic activity. What is less appreciated is that QE has already driven the non-government portion of the US economy into a deepening recession, yet to be reflected in government statistics. Furthermore, that the extra credit burden on the commercial banking system has exceeded their collective balance sheet capacity is confirmed by the Fed’s reverse repo facility, which offers deposit facilities additional to the commercial banking system. Currently standing at $2.2 trillion, it represents the bulk of excess credit created by QE since March 2020.

  Adjusted for QE, the falling level of private sector deposits in the M2 statistic is consistent with an economic slump, only concealed statistically by the expansion of state spending and the loss of the dollar’s purchasing power. The economic distortions arising from QE are not restricted to America but are repeated in the other advanced economies as well. The only offset to the problem is an increase in private sector savings at the expense of immediate consumption and the extent to which they absorb increasing government borrowing. That way, the consequences for price inflation would have been lessened. But in America, much of the EU, and the UK, savings have not increased as a proportion of GDP, so there has been little or no savings offset to soaring budget deficits.

  A funding crisis is in the making

  Returning to the US as our primary example, we can see that national monetary statistics are concealing a slump in economic activity in the “real economy”. This real economy represents the state’s revenue base. On its own, this is going to lead to higher government borrowing than expected by forecasters as tax revenues fall and welfare commitments rise. And interest expense, already estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to cost $442bn in the current fiscal year and $525bn in fiscal 2024, are bound to be significantly higher due to unbudgeted extra borrowing.

  Officialdom still assumes that a recession will be mild and brief. Consequently, the CBO’s calculations are unrealistic in what is clearly an unfolding economic slump given the evidence from bank credit. Even without considering additional negative factors, such as bankruptcies and bank failures which always attend a deep recession, borrowing cost estimates are almost certainly going to be far higher than currently expected.

  In addition to domestic spending, the western alliance appears to be stepping up its war in Ukraine against Russia. US Defence spending is already running at nearly $800bn, and that can be expected to escalate significantly as the conflict in Ukraine worsens. The CBO’s estimate for 2024 is an increase to $814bn; but in the face of a more realistic assessment of an escalation of the Ukraine conflict since the CBO forecast was made last May, the outturn could easily be over $1,000bn. 

  To the volume of debt issuance must also be added variations in interest cost. Bond investors currently tolerate negative yields in the apparent belief that falling consumer demand in a recession will reduce the tendency for consumer prices to rise. This is certainly the official line in all western central banks. But as we have seen, this “transient inflation” argument has had its timescale pushed further into the future as reality intervenes. 

  This line of thinking, which is based on interpretations of supply and demand curves, ignores the plain fact that a general fall in consumption is tied irrevocably to a general fall in production. It also ignores the most important variable, which is the purchasing power of a fiat currency. It is the loss of purchasing power, which is primarily reflected in the consumer price index following the dilution of the currency by its debasement. In the absence of a sheet anchor tying credit values to legal money there is the thorny question of its users’ confidence being maintained in it as the exchange medium. Should that deteriorate, not only have we yet to see the consequences of earlier QE work their way through to undermining the dollar’s purchasing power, but the cost of government borrowing is likely to remain higher and for longer than official forecasts assume. 

  Funding difficulties are ahead

  We can now identify sources of ongoing credit inflation, which at the least will serve to continue to undermine the dollar’s purchasing power and ensure that a rising trend for interest rates will continue. This conclusion is markedly different from expectations that the current catalogue of problems facing the US authorities amounts to a series of one-off factors that will diminish and disappear in time.

  We can see that in common with the Eurozone, Japan, and the UK, the US financial system will be required to come up with rising levels of credit to fund government debt, the consequence of continuing high levels of budget deficits. Furthermore, after a brief respite from the exceptional levels of deficits over covid, there is every likelihood that these deficits will increase again, particularly in the US, UK, and the PIGS grouping in the Eurozone. Not only do these nations have a problem with budget deficits, but they have trade deficits as well. This is bad news particularly for the dollar and sterling, because both currencies are overly dependent on inward capital flows to balance their governments’ books.

  It is becoming apparent that with respect to credit policies, the authorities in America (and the UK) are faced with mounting funding difficulties to resolve. We can briefly summarise them as follows:

  • Though they have yet to admit it, despite all the QE to date the evidence of a gathering recession is mounting. It has only served to conceal a deteriorating economic condition. The Fed is prioritising tackling rising consumer prices for now, claiming that that is the immediate problem.

  • Along with the US Treasury, the Fed still claims that inflation is transient. This claim must continue to have credibility if negative real yields in bond markets are to endure, a situation which cannot last for very long.

  • Monetary stimulus is confined by a lack of commercial banking balance sheet space. Further stimulation through QE will come up against this lack of headroom. 

  • With early evidence of a declining foreign appetite for US Treasuries, it could become increasingly difficult to fund the government’s deficits, as was the case in the UK in the 1970s.

  This author has vivid recollections of a similar situation faced by the UK’s monetary authorities between 1972—1975. In those days, the Bank of England was instructed in its monetary policy by the Treasury, and often its market related advice was overridden by Treasury mandarins lacking knowledge of financial markets. During the Barbour boom of 1971—1972, the Bank suppressed interest rates and encouraged the inflation of credit. Subsequently, price inflation started to rise and interest rates belatedly followed, always reluctantly conceded by the authorities.

  This rapidly became a funding crisis for the government. The Treasury always tried to issue gilt-edged stock at less than the market was prepared to pay. Consequently, sterling’s exchange rate would come under pressure, and with a trend of rising consumer prices continuing, interest rates would have to be raised to get the gilt issue of the day subscribed. Having reflected a deteriorating situation, bond yields then fell when it was momentarily resolved. The crunch came in Autumn 1973, when the Bank of England’s minimum lending rate was increased from 9% on 26 July in steps to 13% on 13 November. A banking crisis suddenly ensued among lenders exposed to commercial property, and a number of banks failed. This episode became known as the secondary banking crisis.

  As bond yields rose, stock markets crashed, with the FT30 Share Index falling from 530 in May 1972, to 140 in January 1975. The listed commercial property sector was virtually wiped out. In an air of crisis, inept Treasury policies continued to contribute to a growing fear of runaway inflation. Long maturity gilt issues bore coupons such as 15 ¼% and 15 ½%. And finally, in November 1976, the IMF bailed Britain out with a $3.9bn loan. 

  Today, these lessons for the Fed and holders of dollar denominated financial assets are instructive. Future increases in interest rates were always underestimated, and as the error became apparent bond yields rose and equities fell. While the Fed is notionally independent from the US Treasury, the Federal Open Market Committee’s approach to markets is one of control, which was not so much shared by the Bank of England in the 1970s but reflected the anti-market Keynesian view of the controlling UK Treasury. 

  In common with all other western central banks today, official policy at the Fed is to deny that price inflation is related to the quantity of credit. It is rare that money or credit in the context of a circulating medium is even mentioned in FOMC policy statements. Instead, interest rate setting is the dominant theme. And there is no acknowledgement that interest rates are primarily compensation to depositors for loss of purchasing power — a dangerous error when national finances are dependent on foreigners buying your treasury bonds. 

  Foreign ownership of dollars and dollar assets

  In the 1970s, sterling’s troubles were compounded by a combination of trade deficits and Britain’s dependence on inward (foreign) investment. In short, the nation was, and still is savings deficient. Consequently, at the first sign of rising interest rates foreign holders recognised that the UK government would drag its heels at accepting reality. They would turn sellers leading to perennial sterling crises.

  Today, the dollar has been protected from this fate because of its status as the world’s reserve currency. Otherwise, it shares the same characteristics as sterling in the 1970s — twin deficits, reliance upon foreign investment, and rising yields on government bonds. 

  According to the US Treasury’s TIC statistics, in the 12 months to September last, foreign holders purchased $846bn long-term securities. Breaking these figures down, private sector foreigners were net buyers, while foreign governments were net sellers. This reflects the difference between the trade deficit and the balance of payments: in other words, importers were retaining and investing most of their dollar payments on a net basis.

  

  Table 1 shows the most recent position. Over the last year, the total value of foreign long-term and short-term investments in dollars (including bank deposits) fell by $3.531 trillion to $30.270 trillion. $2.532 trillion of this decline was in equity valuations, and with the recent rally in equity and bond markets, there will be some recovery in these numbers. But they are an indication of market and currency risks assumed by foreign holders of these assets if US bond yields start to rise again. And here we must also consider relative currency attractions.

  The decline of the petrodollar and rise of the petroyuan

  It is in this context that we must view Saudi Arabia’s move to replace petrodollars with petroyuan. Through its climate change policies, the western alliance against the Asian hegemons has effectively told its oil and natural gas supliers in the Gulf Cooperation Council that their carbon fuel products will no longer be welcome in a decade’s time. It is therefore hardly surprising that the Middle East sees its future trade being with China, along with her associates in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the Eurasian economic Union, and the BRICS. Saudi Arabia has indicated her desire to join BRICS. Along with Egypt, Qatar, Emirates, Kuwait, and Bahrain, Saudi Arabia are also on the list to become dialog partners of the SCO.

   Binding the membership of the SCO together is China’s plans to accelerate a communications and industrial revolution throughout Asia, and with a savings rate of 45% she has the capital available to invest in the necessary projects without undermining her currency. While America stagnates, China’s economy will be powering ahead.

  There are further advantages to China’s plans with respect to the security and availability of cheap energy. While the Asians pay lip service to the western alliance’s insistence that fossil fuels must be reduced and then eliminated, in practice SCO members are still building coal-fired power stations and increasing their demand for all forms of fossil fuel. Members, associates, and dialog partners of the SCO, representing over 40% of the world’s population now include all the major oil and gas exporters in Asia.

  The economic consequences are certain to impart significant advantages to China and her industrialisation plans, compared with the western alliance’s determination to starve itself of energy. While it will take some time for the Saudis to fully declare the petrodollar dead, the signal that she is prepared to accept petroyuan is an important one with more immediate consequences. We can be sure that besides geopolitical imperatives, the Saudis will have analysed the relative prospects between the two petro-currencies. They appear to have concluded that the risk of loss of the yuan’s purchasing power is at least no greater than that of the dollar. And if the Saudis are arriving at this conclusion, we can assume that other Asian governments holding dollars in their reserves will as well.

  Russia is likely to stir the currency pot

  With the western alliance increasing its support and involvement in the Ukraine proxy war, the military pressure on Russia is mounting. If President Putin has learned anything, it should be that military attempts to secure Eastern Ukraine carry a high risk of failure. Furthermore, with the alliance bringing more lethal weaponry to bear on his army, his prospects of military success are declining.

  Compounding his military problems is the recent decline in oil and gas prices, particularly of the latter which has taken the energy squeeze off the EU. There can be little doubt that the greater these negative factors become, the greater the pressure on Putin to resort to a financial solution.

  Putin’s strategy is likely to be simple and has already been telegraphed in his speech to the delegates at the St Petersburg Economic Forum last June. In short, he understands the weakness for the dollar’s position and by extension those of the other alliance currencies. Ideally, a cold snap in Middle and Eastern Europe will help lift oil and gas prices, increasing the prospects for price inflation, thereby bringing renewed pressure for interest rates in the alliance currencies to rise. This will lead to renewed losses on US and EU bonds, further falls in equities, and therefore dollar liquidation by foreigners. The eventual outcome of Triffin’s dilemma, a final crisis for the reserve currency, is certainly in the wings.

  With the situation in Ukraine likely to escalate, Putin can ill afford to delay. On another front, he has authorised Russia’s National Wealth Fund to invest up to 60% in Chinese yuan and 40% in physical gold. This is probably a move to protect the fund from Putin’s view of future currency trends and from their declining value in gold. It is consistent with what the Saudis are doing with respect to getting out of dollars into yuan, and probably some gold bullion through the Shanghai International Gold Exchange. If this demand for gold extends beyond both Russia and Saudi Arabia, then the mechanism for dollar destruction could be accelerating demand for gold from multiple governments and entities in the Russian Chinese axis.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 17:30

• Watch: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Set To Launch US Military Payloads
  Watch: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Set To Launch US Military Payloads

  SpaceX’s powerful Falcon Heavy rocket will attempt to put two US military satellites into geosynchronous orbit on Saturday evening. 

  Weather for NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida is predicted to be favorable for this evening. Launch time is expected at 5:55 pm EST.

  Looking forward to seeing Falcon Heavy fly tonight! Launch is schedule for 5:55 pm Eastern just after sunset. Should be spectacular! pic.twitter.com/bXLdKWaewG

  — Michael Baylor (@nextspaceflight) January 14, 2023

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

  The partially classified mission for the Space Force is called USSF-67. The rocket’s payload is two military satellites that support communications and technology demonstration experiments. 

  

  The most recent Heavy launch was in early November. Its classified payload was for the Space Force. Today’s launch will be the fifth Heavy launch, and three more are planned for the first half of 2023. 

  In addition to the Heavy launches, SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket launched 60 times in 2022. A lot of attention has turned to SpaceX to help propel the American space race. 

  Weeks ago, CNBC reported SpaceX raised $750 million in a new round of funding that values the company at $137 billion. 

  SpaceX was just considered a possible option for astronauts leaving the International Space Station as their return to Earth could be jeopardized by the Russian Soyuz spacecraft that sprang a coolant leak. 

  *  *  *

  Watch the launch live here:

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 17:00

• Heavy Storms Help California To Almost Eliminate Extreme Drought From State
  Heavy Storms Help California To Almost Eliminate Extreme Drought From State

  Authored by Naveen Anthrapully via The Epoch Times,

  California, which has been reeling under the grip of drought, has received respite due to the multiple storms that hit the state and elsewhere in the past weeks, helping it deal with drought conditions in several regions and filling up many of the smaller reservoirs.

  “A long-term drought, dating back to the 2019–2020 winter, continues across California, the Great Basin, and parts of the Pacific Northwest,” according to the National Drought Summary on Jan. 10.

  “However, the intense precipitation in California the past few weeks—particularly late December and early January—has significantly reduced drought intensity in California. Most of the state saw a 1-category improvement this week.”

  According to the Jan. 12th drought map for California, regions classified as facing extreme drought conditions, dubbed “D3,” have almost disappeared from the interior areas of the state.

  

  In just a single week, the portion of the state facing D3 conditions declined from 27.1 percent to 0.32 percent. Regions classified as facing severe drought, D2, fell from 71.14 percent to 46 percent during this period.

  During the past couple of weeks, 24.5 trillion gallons of water fell in California owing to a series of atmospheric river storms. Since Dec. 26, 2022, seven atmospheric rivers have dumped up to 30 inches of rain in some regions of the state.

  Filling Up Reservoirs

  The heavy rains have resulted in small reservoirs getting filled in several communities across California. In, for example, the Marin Municipal Water District, in the north of the state, all seven reservoirs recently hit 100 percent capacity.

  Four of the 10 reservoirs owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District are also full. Seven reservoirs run by the East Bay Municipal Utility District are 84 percent full. However, the largest reservoirs are not yet full, officials warn, because drought conditions in the state are not yet over.

  The Oroville reservoir up north in Butte County, the second-largest reservoir in California, is only 49 percent full, which is 90 percent of its historical average. Shasta Lake is only 44 percent full, which is 77 percent of its historical average.

  “The sum of the state’s six largest reservoir stores increased from 5 million as of Nov. 30, 2022, to 7.3 million as of Jan. 10, 2023 (from 54 percent of long-term average to 74 percent of long-term average),” the National Drought Summary said.

  “Only one of the six largest reservoirs is near its long-term average, and three of them hold only 43–61 percent of their long-term averages as of Jan. 10.”

  Drought Conditions Elsewhere

  A study published in the journal Nature last year found that the past 22 years have been the driest period in the American Southwest’s last 1,200 years. To completely get rid of drought conditions in the region, multiple seasons of precipitation at 120–200 percent of the normal levels are estimated to be needed.

  

  The current storm conditions are not, however, a guarantee that California’s drought conditions would end soon. In December 2021, the conditions were very wet, which raised hopes that the drought was ending. However, the months of January, February, and March ended up being the driest in California’s recorded history.

  The same happened in 2013, when a wet December was followed by a very dry January and February. Though big snow totals are welcome, there is still a “long way to go before the critical April 1 total,” said Sean de Guzman, manager of the snow surveys and water supply forecasting unit at the California Department of Water Resources, according to a news release on Jan. 31.

  “It’s always great to be above average this early in the season, but we must be resilient and remember what happened last year. If January through March of 2023 turns out to be similar to last year, we would still end the water year in severe drought with only half of an average year’s snowpack,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 16:30

• We Must Have The Truth
  We Must Have The Truth

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  I have been trying to tackle the “fringe” issues (read: the issues the mainstream won’t give way on) regarding Covid since the pandemic first began in 2020. So far, I think I’ve done a decent job in helping flesh out many “conspiracy theories” about Covid that instead, have turned out to be “conspiracy facts”.

  Among them, I’ve written about managing our Orwellian response to Covid, the notoriously sensitive nature of PCR testing, the CDC moving its data goalposts, the likely nature of Covid coming from a lab leak (here and here and here) and the U.S.’s role in said leak and the media’s hysterical coverage of ivermectin.

  Additionally, for those that haven’t heard it yet, in an attempt to continue the “other side” of Covid discourse, I published a new podcast with Dr. Peter A. McCullough, who has dozens of peer-reviewed publications on Covid-19 and has commented extensively on the medical response to the COVID-19 crisis in The Hill, America Out Loud, and cable networks like ABC and Fox News. 

  I am always happy to welcome new content from The Brownstone Institute, one of the last few beacons of common sense left in the world of actual journalism.

  This week they published a new piece on Covid and our response to it, called We Must Have The Truth. I reached out to the publication last year and requested permission to share their content when I enjoy it, in full, with my readers, which they kindly granted. If you’re interested in the topic – or simply just having a grasp on the objective truth – I believe it is a “must read”.

  The article is written by Pat Fidopiastis, who is a Professor of Microbiology at California Polytechnic State University.

  ---

  On April 2, 2020, a paddle boarder was chased by authorities and taken into custody. This event should have caused unanimous outrage over the absurdity of what happened – law enforcement arrested a lone paddle boarder on Santa Monica Bay for the crime of “flouting coronavirus closures.” 

  Traditional voices that could have questioned unscientific authoritarian policy instead provided cover. The Los Angeles Times justified law enforcement’s ridiculous response by quoting a scientist who made the claim (presumably with a straight face): “..[SARS-CoV-2] could enter coastal waters and transfer back into the air.” Setting aside the absurdity of this and every other justification for closing beaches, hiking trails, and parks, think of the narrative it perpetuated — the virus is so insidious that even those who dared to paddle board alone on the ocean might somehow spread it to the rest of us. 

  The paddler’s arrest was an early indication that something had changed in our country. A “new normal” was spawning from the chaotic, unscientific, politicized pandemic messaging mainly coming from biased news media and the once venerable Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Dr. Anthony Fauci. The result was bitter contempt between two sides of the COVID-19 debate that metastasized into a deep distrust for science. 

  In an understatement of the century, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky recently summed up her agency’s role in promoting distrust in science by stating that they did not “reliably meet expectations.” Thus, it’s pretty clear that for their part, nothing much will change. Dr. Fauci proclaimed that because he “represents science” any criticism of him is a direct attack on science. Translation, we shouldn’t expect any productive capitulation from him either. 

  Although the CDC acknowledged playing a role in the growing distrust in science, none of their professed forms of atonement, such as promising to share data faster and doing a better job of translating science into policy will restore trust without a process that includes honest debate. 

  Over the past two years, the CDC cherry-picked data from articles rushed to print in their own journal (Morbidity Mortality Weekly Report) to justify a lot of bad policy, including masking schoolchildren, which is still happening today, or pushed the completely unscientific assertion that vaccine immunity is superior to natural immunity. 

  On the other hand, they buried data showing that upon reinfection, vaccinated people without prior COVID-19 diagnosis were at greater risk of hospitalization than the unvaccinated with prior COVID-19. 

  Dr. Walensky also boldly stated that, “Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick.” The untruthful messaging that vaccination stopped infection and transmission was justification for an appalling trend of people mocking the COVID-19-related deaths of the unvaccinated. 

  It’s unlikely the families targeted by such attacks will hear any apologies, even though Dr. Fauci’s four shots did not protect him from reoccurring COVID-19, or that Dr. Birx admitted that inflated vaccine efficacy claims were based on hope, not science. 

  ---

  Get 60% Off: If you enjoy pieces like this and you are still not a subscriber of QTR’s Fringe Finance, here’s 60% off: Get 60% off forever

  ---

  At the start of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci told us not to buy masks because they do not work. When the politics changed, Fauci reversed himself and became the proponent of wearing not just one mask – but several. Dr. Fauci’s excuse for the flip-flop was his only truth on the matter – he admitted that he lied, albeit “nobly.”

  For his encore, Dr. Fauci confidently opined on the level of vaccine uptake required for herd immunity. Eventually he admitted to guessing at numbers to frighten people into compliance. To be clear, Dr. Fauci used deception, not science, to support his version of public health policy. 

  Anybody who was “on the fence” about trusting Fauci, the self-proclaimed embodiment of “the science,” should have been forcefully pushed off after his attempts to obfuscate when testifying to Congress on whether the US government funded “gain of function” research that very likely created SARS-CoV-2. 

  The loss of trust was greatly amplified by activist scientists and most of the news media. Dr. Fauci refused to say anything critical of the nationwide social justice protests that might have discouraged people from participating in behaviors known to spread respiratory viruses. 

  However, scientists and news sources eagerly reported alleged death tolls purportedly caused by Trump rallies, while claiming “no evidence of protest spread.” 

  How could scientists determine whether the protests caused any disease transmission or death if contact tracers were not allowed to ask if someone attended a protest?

  The weaponization of science to censor, persecute, delegitimize, and threaten those who had differing opinions has never happened on this scale in this country. 

  

  Fig. 1. Comparison of daily per capita cases between Texas (orange), which lifted its mask mandate in March 2021, California (red), and New York (Green), which continued their masking policies. 

  Even President Biden capitalized on the politicization of mask-wearing by accusing the elected leader (and by extension the citizens) of Texas of “Neanderthal thinking” for removing the mask mandate in 2021. Meanwhile, states such as California and New York were praised for “following the science.” 

  A simple comparison of the epidemic curves between these states did not justify the divisive rhetoric (Fig. 1). But rather than have these conversations, it was easier to just slander dissenters and censor intelligent discussion. 

  As the old saying goes, “a lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on.” Thankfully, the truth finally has its boots on and is catching up on many fronts, such as the questionable effectiveness of mask mandates. 

  The “Neanderthal thinking” jab was uttered around the time the news media, outraged by Governor Ron DeSantis’ steady leadership in Florida, hoped to get “Ron DeathSantis” trending on social media. 

  Not surprisingly, the data told a different story about Florida (Fig. 2). It’s clear that “follow the science” was just a slogan. Politics, lies, and vindictive moral superiority are baked into our nation’s COVID-19 policy.

  

  Fig. 2. Age-adjusted COVID-19 deaths in Florida and California. The circles are proportional to state population. Although these states adopted dramatically different policies, they had comparable outcomes.

  Trust in science might never be restored in people who lost their livelihood to unscientific lockdowns or vaccine mandates. But, here’s some advice for people like Dr. Walensky and Dr. Fauci to get back some of the trust.

  1) Go back to the basics of Public Health: “Voluntary measures are more likely to induce cooperation and protect public trust than coercive measures, and are more likely to prevent attempts to avoid contact with the healthcare system.” 

  2) Invite dissenting experts to the table for open policy debate. Excess malaria and opioid deaths in young people, while millions of children were thrusted into acute starvation, are examples of significant COVID-19 policy failures. Great Barrington Declaration scientists warned about such collateral damage, but were maligned and censored. At the very least, the public would have benefitted from a different perspective on the risk of catching COVID-19 from ocean spray. 

  3) Vindictive moral superiority is terrible public health messaging. Heed the advice from an article in The Atlantic: “Viruses are not moral agents, and infection is not a personal failure.”  

  4) Sincerely apologize to people who were fired, maligned, censored, or physically harmed, then tell us your justification for ignoring counter data and continuing policy that encouraged these unnecessary outcomes.

  5) none of the above will matter if public health officials do not tell the truth, including the nuance, and trust that the American people can handle it. George Santayana famously said, “Those that cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Let’s hope we’ve learned from our mistakes, because given the state of the world right now, we cannot afford to repeat them. 

  ---

  About The Brownstone Institute

  The Brownstone Institute is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization founded May 2021. Its vision is of a society that places the highest value on the voluntary interaction of individuals and groups while minimizing the use of violence and force including that which is exercised by public or private authorities. This vision is that of the Enlightenment which elevated learning, science, progress, and universal rights to the forefront of public life. It is constantly threatened by ideologies and systems that would take the world back to before the triumph of the ideal of freedom.

  The motive force of Brownstone Institute was the global crisis created by policy responses to the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020. That trauma revealed a fundamental misunderstanding alive in all countries around the world today, a willingness on the part of the public and officials to relinquish freedom and fundamental human rights in the name of managing a public health crisis, which was not managed well in most countries. The consequences were devastating and will live in infamy.

  About the Author

  Pat Fidopiastis is a Professor of Microbiology at California Polytechnic State University.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 15:30

• Wind Farms Eyed In Surge Of Dead Whales On NJ, NY Beaches
  Wind Farms Eyed In Surge Of Dead Whales On NJ, NY Beaches

  In a case of odd bedfellows, environmental groups and Republican politicians are calling for a pause in offshore wind farm development following a string of whales washing up dead on New Jersey and New York beaches.  

  Seven whales have turned up dead in little over a month. The latest victim, a 20- to 25-foot juvenile Humpback whale, turned up in Brigantine, New Jersey on Thursday afternoon, close to a Coast Guard station. 

  “The wave of dead whales is the ocean sounding the alarm, and we must heed the warning,” said Cindy Zipf, executive director of Jersey-based Clean Ocean Action, after the sixth whale washed up in Atlantic City on Jan. 7 with signs of head trauma. “[The wind farm development] is too much, too fast. It’s outrageous and our ocean deserves better.” 

  

  On Friday, Congressman Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ) announced he would seek a federal investigation. “Ocean life is being put at risk as our governor and president force through their Green New Deal policies, without giving full consideration to their real-world impacts.

  Drew sits on the House Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee. New Jersey Republican state Senator Vince Polistina called for a pause in the offshore construction:

  “The work related to offshore wind projects is the primary difference in our waters, and it’s hard to believe that the death of (seven) whales on our beaches is just a coincidence.”

  For others officials, though, it’s damn the whales, full speed ahead. Democratic New Jersey governor Phil Murphy, on Friday said that, while “this is tragic, obviously,” suspicions that tie the dead whales to the wind farm development were “unfounded and premature.” 

  New Jersey has been on a quest to distinguish itself as the top offshore-wind state on the east coast. The Garden State has already approved three offshore wind farms and is soliciting more requests. 

  

  Clean Ocean Action says the installation of offshore windmills usually involves exploration of the sea floor using low-frequency sounds in the same frequency that whales use, with the risk that they could become disoriented or otherwise harmed.  

  Earlier this week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said it was unaware of any humpback whale having previously been confirmed as a victim of offshore wind projects. Among other human perils, whales can fall victim to ship strikes…but could sonar disorientation increase that risk? 

  The Marine Mammal Stranding Center said it can take months to figure out a beached whale’s cause of death. In the meantime, expect Governor Murphy to continue racing to bolster New Jersey’s green energy credentials.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 15:00

• FDA Adviser Says Young And Healthy People Shouldn’t Get Latest COVID Boosters
  FDA Adviser Says Young And Healthy People Shouldn’t Get Latest COVID Boosters

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A vaccine adviser to the Food and Drug Administration is questioning whether young, healthy people should get new COVID-19 boosters, arguing those shots should be used for older individuals.

  “I believe we should stop trying to prevent all symptomatic infections in healthy, young people by boosting them with vaccines containing mRNA from strains that might disappear a few months later,” wrote Dr. Paul A. Offit, an FDA vaccine panel adviser and professor of pediatrics at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, in New England Journal of Medicine on Jan. 11.

  

  In his article, Offit cited two studies suggesting that bivalent boosters, which target the original COVID-19 strain and two Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA. 5, do not “elicit superior immune responses.”

  “Why did the strategy for significantly increasing BA.4 and BA.5 neutralizing antibodies using a bivalent vaccine fail?” he asked. “The most likely explanation is imprinting. The immune systems of people immunized with the bivalent vaccine, all of whom had previously been vaccinated, were primed to respond to the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2. They therefore probably responded to epitopes shared by BA.4 and BA.5 and the ancestral strain, rather than to new epitopes on BA.4 and BA.5.”

  Offit noted that based on those studies, “boosting with a bivalent vaccine is likely to have a similar effect as boosting with a monovalent vaccine” but stressed that “booster dosing is probably best reserved for the people most likely to need protection against severe disease.”

  Another doctor appeared to agree with Offit’s conclusions regarding “imprinting.” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told U.S. News that “it may be that people’s immune systems are so primed to respond to the ancestral strain spike protein that a reformulated booster is unable to fully stimulate the immune system because it has been ‘imprinted’ by the original version of the virus.”

  More Details

  Data and studies have shown that older adults and people who have compromised immune systems are most at risk of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms, hospitalization, and death. Children, meanwhile, have long been shown to have the lowest chance of death, hospitalization, or developing severe symptoms since the pandemic started.

  Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and FDA said that everyone over the age of 6 months get updated boosters at least two months after their last doses of the vaccine. The bivalent boosters were authorized under emergency use for children aged 6 months to 4 years on Dec. 9.

  Meanwhile, a small number of Americans have received the updated boosters, according to the CDC. As of Jan. 4, some 15 percent of individuals aged 5 and older received the bivalent shots, while about 38 percent of adults aged 65 and older have gotten them.

  That same CDC data also shows that about 80.9 percent of all Americans received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine since they were rolled out two years ago, while 69 percent have completed their initial, “primary series.”

  An FDA spokesperson Abigail Capobianco responded to Offit’s article this week, telling NBC News that Offit allegedly used “selective” data to reach his conclusions and that “we strongly believe that the totality of the available evidence continues to support the use of these vaccines in all age groups.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 14:30

• Roomba Robot Vacuum Testers Find "Intimate" Photos Of Themselves On The Web
  Roomba Robot Vacuum Testers Find “Intimate” Photos Of Themselves On The Web

  Well, it looks like you can score one for all of the “conspiracy theorists” who have said they don’t like “smart” appliances in their home because they feel like they were being spied on.

  And you can tell those writing off these concerns that intimate photos of some Roomba tester vacuums have magically turned up on Facebook after being ascertained by Venezuelan gig workers.

  One woman even found photographs of herself on the toilet, taken by her robot vacuum. What a time to be alive!

  Breitbart reported last week that gig workers had posted pictures online where they were discussing “work-related matters”. One photo was a woman sitting on a toilet seat with her shorts pulled down to her mid thighs – it was taken by her Roomba J7 series robot vacuum, the report says.

  

  The photos were sent to iRobot by Scale AI, a startup that contracts workers to label AI data used to train artificial intelligence, the report says. Users had agreed to “participate in the data collection” as part of a testing. They signed consent forms but now say they feel “misled” about the true nature of the consent. 

  Albert Fox Cahn, executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, told Brietbart: “There is a real concern about whether the company is being deceptive if people are signing up for this sort of highly invasive type of surveillance and never fully understand… what they’re agreeing to.”

  The MIT Technology Review conducted an investigation and determined it to be gig workers in Venezuela. There were also photos of a child and a woman using the restroom, the report says. iRobot has terminated its agreement with ScaleAI in response to the investigation.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 14:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Nixon Threatened To Reveal CIA's Involvement In Kennedy Assassination, Roger Stone Claims
  Nixon Threatened To Reveal CIA’s Involvement In Kennedy Assassination, Roger Stone Claims

  Authored by Roger Stone via Stone Cold Truth with Roger Stone,

  A stunning, long-overlooked Nixon Watergate-era tape shows Richard Nixon warning CIA Director Richard Helms that he knows of CIA involvement in the murder of John F. Kennedy- “I know who shot John.” 

  This shocking new tape depicts Nixon increasingly besieged by Watergate but unaware that at least four of the Watergate burglars were still on the CIA payroll at the time of the break-in, and that the CIA had thus infiltrated the burglary team. Recently declassified documents reveal that Watergate Special Prosecutor Nick Akerman was aware of both the CIA’s advance knowledge and involvement in the break-in — but said and did nothing.

  Senator Howard Baker, the Republican Leader on the Senate Watergate Committee and his counsel Fred Thompson himself, a future U.S. Senator from Tennessee, like Baker, stumbled on the CIA’s deep advanced knowledge and direct involvement in the Watergate break-in. Baker and Thompson both knew that at least four of the Watergate burglars were on the CIA payroll at the time of the break-in and that through CREEP Security Director James McCord, had infiltrated the burglary team. Senate Watergate Committee Chairman Sam Ervin stoutly refused to allow Baker and the Committee Republicans including Edward J. Gurney of Florida the right to publish a Minority Report which noted this stunning information regarding the CIA.

  Nixon deeply distrusted the CIA because he knew that President Eisenhower had ordered the agency to give top secret briefings to both Nixon and Kennedy after both were the certain nominees of their parties. Nixon was sore that Kennedy utilized the information in their debates, attacking Nixon for being “soft” on communist Cuba, knowing full well that Nixon had chaired a working group as Vice President overseeing preparations for the “Bay of Pigs” invasion. Nixon, of course, could not reveal this upcoming attempt to topple Castro in the details.

  White House Domestic Policy Chief John Ehrlichman wrote that when he served as the White House Legal Counsel, Nixon ordered him to request that the CIA hand over all documents pertaining to John Kennedy’s murder. Nixon was furious when Richard Helms, the CIA Director, refused his presidential order to hand them over.

  This stunning new Watergate-era tape captures an increasingly besieged Nixon desperately seeking to mobilize the CIA in his defense by threatening to expose their greatest secrets. Nixon also knew that Congressman Gerald Ford, as a member of the Warren Commission, had, at the explicit direction of J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI Director, altered the official autopsy diagram for President John F. Kennedy; moving the marking from a bullet in his upper back to his neck in order to accommodate the single-bullet theory and to conceal the fact that Kennedy had been hit with more than the reported three shots.

  Nixon was acutely aware of Ford’s act of treachery in concealing the truth about Kennedy’s murder and the CIA’s involvement in it.

  White House Chief of Staff General Alexander Haig told me in an interview that “Nixon had Ford by the balls.”

  The five-star General said, “Nixon had me tell Ford that is he (Nixon) was going down, he was taking everybody with him.”

  Subscribe to Stone Cold Truth here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:40

• The Vinyl Comeback Continues
  The Vinyl Comeback Continues

  Continuing one of the more surprising comebacks of the digital age, vinyl album sales in the United States have grown for the 17th consecutive year.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter reports, according to Luminate, 43.5 million LPs were sold in the U.S. last year, up more than 48-fold compared to 2006 when the vinyl comeback began.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  So how big is vinyl’s comeback really?

  Should we all dust off our old record players to prepare for the analog future of music?

  According to Luminate’s 2022 Year-End Music Report, LPs accounted for 43 percent of album sales in the United States last year, which is quite substantial.

  Factoring in streaming and downloads of single tracks, however, that number drops to less than 5 percent of album equivalent music consumption, which puts things in perspective.

  However big or small the impact of rising LP sales on the music industry’s bottom line may be, it’s fascinating to witness a hundred year-old technology come back from near extinction. Physical goods, it appears, still hold value for many people, even in the digital age.

  Interestingly, vinyl LPs appear to have become a bit of collectors’ item for fans, who listen to music digitally but still want to own a physical object: according to Luminate, only 50 percent of vinyl buyers actually have a record player.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:20

• Pelosi Punts Stocks, Takes Huge Losses In Tesla, Salesforce And PayPal
  Pelosi Punts Stocks, Takes Huge Losses In Tesla, Salesforce And PayPal

  Now-former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has filed her latest periodic transaction report detailing recent stock trades – and she booked a ton of year-end losses.

  

  For starters, Pelosi booked $854,000 in losses on PayPal

  

  She also took a $733,000 loss in Salesforce, Inc.

  

  Pelosi also took a $511,000 loss in Tesla.

  

  Pelosi also took smaller losses in Roblox Corporation ($235,836), Netflix ($129,000), Disney ($114,138), and Alliance Bernstein ($11,500).

  Interestingly, Pelosi also sold $2.6 million worth of Google parent Alphabet ($GOOGL), but doesn’t list details of a gain or loss, as was the case with her losses.

  

  Is Nancy taking advantage of “tax loopholes for the rich” to avoid paying her fair share?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:10

• What Is The US "Gas Stove Ban" Really About?
  What Is The US “Gas Stove Ban” Really About?

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  What sounds like overeach in itself, is actually a cover for something potentially far, far worse…

  

  The Biden administration is apparently looking to ban gas stoves, calling them a “hidden danger”. But while that sounds bad enough, a deeper dive shows – as usual – it’s not really about what they say it’s about.

  Talk of banning gas stoves and “unregulated indoor air quality” could be a Trojan horse designed to get even more “smart” monitoring technology into your home.

  Let’s jump in.

  ARE GAS STOVES DANGEROUS?

  Well, according to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the New Scientist and million other outlets and pundits who started talking about it in the last two days, yes.

  Earlier this week near-identical articles from the National Review, Bloomberg and CNN detail how the US Consumer Product Safety Commission will be opening “public comment on the dangers of gas stoves sometime this winter”.

  The articles claim:

  The emissions have been linked to illness, cardiovascular problems, cancer, and other health conditions. More than 12 percent of current childhood asthma cases are linked to gas stove use, according to peer-reviewed research published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health last month.

  Now would be a good time to talk about the phrase “linked to”. It’s always a good one to look out for in any mainstream publication. Journalists love it because it implies causation without stating it.

  Consider, one hundred per cent of serial killers have been linked to the ingestion of water and the wearing of shoes.

  If this manipulative use of language were not evidence enough of an agenda, the rather premature deployment of the race card proves it:

  Senator Cory Booker (D., N.J.) and Representative Don Beyer (D., Va.) wrote a letter to the agency last month urging the commission to address the issue and calling the harmful emissions a “cumulative burden” on black, Latino and low-income households.

  SO, WILL THEY BAN THEM?

  Actually, probably not.

  Considering that, according to Bloomberg, some 40% of US homes use gas stoves to cook, an outright ban would be impractical to the point of madness. You can’t criminalise 40% of the country. It would be almost unenforceable.

  Perhaps they might try a “phasing out”, as they plan for petrol cars in California.

  But most likely of all is that this was never really about banning stoves in the first place.

  OK, SO WHAT’S IT REALLY ABOUT?

  What we’re seeing here looks to be your classic bait-and-switch. Having established a “problem”, the powers that be suggest a solution they have no intention of ever carrying out (the more unreasonable the better).

  When this measure is inevitably rejected by the public, the government will then proceed to suggest – or pay an NGO to suggest to them – a “compromise” measure.

  The compromise is no compromise at all, of course, but actually what they wanted to do from the beginning. Nevertheless, the whole process is sold in the media as a victory for whichever party happens to be in opposition, and cited as evidence that “the system works”.

  Tellingly, as I am writing this, Biden has already “ruled out a ban due to backlash”, and Vox were already using the “compromise” a lot in an article they published yesterday.

  However, what that “compromise” would be in this case isn’t clear at first, you have to do a little digging.

  One clue is present in the National Review article [emphasis added]:

  The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers argues that cooking produces harmful emissions regardless of the kind of stove used. “Ventilation is really where this discussion should be, rather than banning one particular type of technology,” Jill Notini, a vice president at the association, told Bloomberg. “Banning one type of a cooking appliance is not going to address the concerns about overall indoor air quality. We may need some behavior change, we may need [people] to turn on their hoods when cooking.”

  And you’ll find another in the abstract of the original report on “Cooking With Gas, Household Air Pollution, and Asthma: Little Recognized Risk for Children”, published in the Journal of Environmental Science in April 2021:

  The impact [of gas stove cooking] on children can be substantial because […] indoor air is unregulated.

  “Ventilation is where this discussion should be”, after all “cooking produces harmful emissions regardless of the kind of stove” and a ban wouldn’t address “concerns about overall indoor air quality” which is currently “unregulated”.

  Do you see where this is going?

  It’s not about gas stoves, and it’s not about asthma – it’s about “indoor air pollution”, and more importantly how they plan on “regulating” it.

  In one of those startling coincidences we’ve all got so used to witnessing in modern geopolitics, just as the US is talking about indoor air quality because of gas stoves, other countries around the world are doing the same thing for totally different reasons.

  Singapore is considering new regulations on indoor air quality too, but because of formaldahyde.

  Last month The Conversation was running articles claiming “indoor air pollution kills”, while Sir Chris Whitty, the UK’s chief medical officer, was “demanding action on indoor air pollution”.

  On Monday, in a Guardian lifestyle piece purportedly about scented candles, Svetlana Stevanovic calls indoor air quality a “going concern”.

  Two days ago The Tyee, an “independent” Canadian magazine which receives some funding from the Canadian government, ran an op-ed headlined:

  We Need a Revolution in Clean Indoor Air

  Which attempts to link improving indoor air quality to “ending Covid” (whilst making sure to sufficiently fluff the vaccines, of course).

  Just yesterday the Irish Times published an article about the dangers of poor indoor air quality.

  In a rather interesting piece of timing, the air hygiene technology company AeroClean and Molekule, a market leader for air purifiers, finalised a public stock merger…also just yesterday.

  Two days ago it was announced IKEA would be selling their own smart air monitors, the same day Samsung announced their new “smart air purifier”.

  Earlier today Chinese tech giant Xiaomi issued a media release about their new smart air monitoring technology.

  A recent report expects the global air monitor technology market to swell to nearly 6 billion dollars in the next three years.

  But I’m sure this is all just a coincidence.

  WHERE DOES THIS LEAD?

  Well, if I had to guess I would suggest some new “smart” technology is coming that will monitor air quality and indoor C02 emissions. Like smart electricity and water meters, but for your air.

  Interestingly, the World Economic Forum agrees with me, publishing an article on their website last July headlined “Indoor air pollution: What causes it and how to tackle it”, which claims:

  indoor air pollutants can now be detected with more precise, efficient, and compact sensors thanks to advances in environmental sensing technology. As a result, intelligent home systems may soon use sensors like these to keep track of indoor air quality and notify the ventilation system before dangerous levels are reached.

  As part of “backing down” from the stove ban, they will introduce a new bill which sees “smart air monitors” become mandatory in all new-build houses, hotels and rented accommodation.

  Just like smart electricity meters, smart air monitors would almost certainly be used to harvest huge amounts of data and give states or corporations the ability to control your home.

  If your “indoor air” isn’t “clean” enough; if you use your stove too much, burn too many scented candles or emit too much co2, expect to get penalized  in some fashion until you learn how to be more responsible.

  More smart technology, more monitoring, and ultimately more control.

  So, while it’s possible the gas stove ban talk will resolve itself into the cliche new tax or fines or some other petty scheme for bilking the many out of their wages, the signs are certainly there it might be something more sinister.

  Meanwhile, expect to keep seeing reports on gas stoves damaging the climate, or stories about poor indoor air quality making covid worse.

  The usual bought-and-paid-for columns that support every new normal narrative.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:00

• Where 'Military-Style' Weapons Are Banned In The US
  Where ‘Military-Style’ Weapons Are Banned In The US

  An so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazine ban has come into effect in Illinois after the state legislature voted for the law and governor J.B. Pritzker signed it this week.

  During the signing ceremony, Pritzker mentioned the mass shooting the state saw last year at a July 4 parade in Highland Park near Chicago as a reason to pass concrete legislation instead of paying lip service to improvements and sending “thoughts and prayers”.

  2022 saw a slew of mass shootings that rocked the United States, also including those at a supermarket in a predominantly black neighborhood in Buffalo, N.Y., at a primary school in Uvalde, Texas, at an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs, Colo., and a Cheasapeake, Va., Walmart, among others. Semiautomatic rifles, often of the AR-15 style, were used in the majority of 2022 mass shootings.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, Illinois joins eight states and the District of Columbia in implementing such a ban on ‘military-style’ weapons.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The vast majority of U.S. states do not restrict the sale of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, according to Giffords Law Center.

  Seven more states currently have restrictions in place that fall short of an assault weapons ban, including bans on high-capacity magazines in five states.

  Large capacity magazines are capable of holding up to 100 rounds, while states that restrict these magazine usually only allow ten to 15 rounds per magazine.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 22:40

• What We Know About Robert Hur, Special Counsel Probing Biden’s Handling Of Classified Documents
  What We Know About Robert Hur, Special Counsel Probing Biden’s Handling Of Classified Documents

  Authored by Samantha Flom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Robert K. Hur, the special counsel appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to lead the probe into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents, is a former federal prosecutor with a “long and distinguished career,” according to Garland.

  “As U.S. Attorney, [Hur] supervised some of the Department’s more important national security, public corruption, and other high-profile matters,” the attorney general noted in announcing Hur’s appointment on Jan. 12.

  

  Hur held the role of U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland from April 2018 until February 2021. He was appointed to that role by former President Donald Trump, and unanimously confirmed by the Senate in March 2018.

  Adding that he would ensure Hur received all of the necessary resources to perform his investigation, Garland continued, “I am confident that Mr. Hur will carry out his responsibility in an even-handed and urgent manner, and in accordance with the highest traditions of this Department.”

  Hur’s appointment as special counsel follows a tumultuous week for the Biden administration as new details regarding the classified documents discovered at President Joe Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware, home and former office at the Penn Biden Center in Washington continue to come to light.

  “I will conduct the assigned investigation with fair, impartial, and dispassionate judgment,” Hur said in a Jan. 12 statement released by the Justice Department (DOJ). “I intend to follow the facts swiftly and thoroughly, without fear or favor, and will honor the trust placed in me to perform this service.”

  A ‘Distinguished Career’

  A graduate of Harvard University and Stanford Law School and former law clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Hur joined the DOJ’s Criminal Division in 2003, where he served as counsel and special assistant to then-Assistant Attorney General Christopher Wray.

  Wray, who is now the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has come under scrutiny in recent months for his leadership as fears of political bias against conservatives have escalated in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach and the bureau’s August raid of former President Donald Trump’s home.

  While working for Wray, Hur worked on counterterrorism, corporate fraud, and appellate matters.

  Between 2003 and 2018, Hur went back and forth between the Justice Department and private law practice at King & Spalding, serving as an assistant U.S. attorney from November 2007 to January 2014 and principal associate deputy attorney general from June 2018 to April 2018.

  In the latter role, Hur served as the principal counselor to then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, assisting with oversight of the National Security, Civil, Criminal, and Antitrust divisions, all 93 U.S. attorneys’ offices, and the FBI.

  Rosenstein is noteworthy for his involvement in the Trump-Russia collusion investigation—particularly for appointing Robert Mueller as special counsel and signing off on the application to spy on former Trump associate Carter Page.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 22:20

• Most Expensive And Cheapest Appliances To Use By Region
  Most Expensive And Cheapest Appliances To Use By Region

  Wholesale power prices jumped last year and are yet another cost burden on consumers’ wallets. A new study breaks down the cheapest and most expensive household appliances to use based on geographical region. 

  Jonathan Merry, CEO of MoneyTransfers, revealed the biggest electricity users in American homes are air conditioners. The average AC unit costs consumers up to $1,062 per year. While the cost per kilowatt differs a few cents across the country, this can translate into cost-savings by region. 

  For example, consumers in the Midwest who run air conditioners for eight hours a day benefited the most from lower power prices and saw a $200 reduction in their energy bill than those in the West, with an average annual cost of $826. 

  Electric heaters, tumble dryers, washing machines, fridge freezers, and dishwashers were found to be other appliances that cost the most to run, but there are cost benefits to living in certain parts of the country where appliances are cheaper to operate. 

  Another example of the cost savings of living on a cheaper power grid is a tumble dryer costs up to $8.64 per month in the West but only $6.72 monthly in the Midwest. 

  Cheapest and most expensive appliances to run per year by region. 

  

  And average monthly costs to run appliances by US region. 

  

  “Many households are looking for ways to save money on their energy bills amidst the rising cost of living worldwide – and our hope is that this data will educate people on what everyday household appliances have the biggest impact on energy usage,” Merry said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 22:00

• Johnstone: Western Journalists Are Cowardly, Approval-Seeking Losers
  Johnstone: Western Journalists Are Cowardly, Approval-Seeking Losers

  Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

  Research conducted by New York University’s Center for Social Media and Politics into Russian trolling behavior on Twitter in the lead-up to the 2016 US presidential election has found “no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.”

  

  Which is to say that all the years of hysterical shrieking about Russian trolls interfering in US democracy and corrupting the fragile little minds of Americans — a narrative that has been used to drum up support for internet censorship and ever-increasing US government involvement in the regulation of online speech — was false.

  And to be clear, this isn’t actually news.

  It was established years ago that the St Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency could not possibly have had any meaningful impact on the 2016 election, because the scope of its operations was quite small, its posts were mostly unrelated to the election and many were posted after the election occurred, and its funding was dwarfed by orders of magnitude by domestic campaigns to influence the election outcome.

  What’s different this time around, six years after Trump’s inauguration, is that this time the mass media are reporting on these findings.

  “Journalists” do this thing where they hype Party propaganda when needed, and then when the story is no longer relevant they quietly publish the truth about how they were totally lying. This way they can say “we DID report the facts!”

  Truly bad people. https://t.co/NlIkeIpVKy

  — ⚡David Angelo⚡ (@MrDavidAngelo) January 9, 2023

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

  The Washington Post has an article out with the brazenly misleading headline “Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on 2016 voters“. Anyone who reads the article itself will find its author Tim Starks acknowledges that “Russian accounts had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior,” but the insertion of the word “little” means anyone who just reads the headline (the overwhelming majority of people encountering the article) will come away with the impression that Russian trolls still had some influence on 2016 voters.

  “Little influence” could mean anything shy of tremendous influence. But the study did not find that Russian trolls had “little influence” over the election; it failed to find any measurable influence at all. 

  Starks does some spin work of his own in a bid to salvage the reputation of the ever-crumbling Russiagate narrative, eagerly pointing out that the report does not explicitly say Russia definitely had zero influence on the election’s outcome, that it doesn’t examine Russian trolling behavior on Facebook, that it doesn’t address “Russian hack-and-leak operations,” and that it doesn’t say “doesn’t suggest that foreign influence operations aren’t a threat at all.”

  None of these are valid arguments. Claiming Russia definitely had no influence on the election at all would have been beyond the scope of the study, the report’s authors do in fact argue that the effects of Russian trolling on Facebook were likely the same as on Twitter, the (still completely unproven) “Russian hack-and-leak operations” were outside the scope of the study, as is the question of whether foreign influence operations can be a threat in general.

  What Starks does not do is make any attempt to address the fact that mainstream news and punditry was dominated for years by claims that Russian internet trolls won the election for Donald Trump. He does not, for example, make any mention of his own 2019 Politico article telling readers that the Russian Twitter troll operation ahead of the 2016 election “was larger, more coordinated and more effective than previously known.”

  

  Starks also does not take the time to inform The Washington Post’s readership about the false reporting this story has received over the years from his fellow mainstream news media employees, like The Washington Post’s David Ignatius and his melodramatic description of the St Petersburg troll farm as “a sophisticated, multilevel Russian effort to use every available tool of our open society to create resentment, mistrust and social disorder” in an article hysterically titled “How Russia used the Internet to perfect its dark arts“. Or The New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg in her article “Yes, Russian Trolls Helped Elect Trump“, in which she argues that it looks increasingly as though the Internet Research Agency “changed the direction of American history.” Or NBC’s Ken Dilanian (a known CIA asset), who described Russian trolling on Twitter in the lead-up to the election as “a vast, coordinated campaign that was incredibly successful at pushing out and amplifying its messages,” a claim that was then repeated by The Washington Post. To pick just a few out of basically limitless possible examples.

  Starks and his editors could easily have included this sort of information in the article. It would have greatly helped improve clarity and understanding among The Washington Post’s audience if they had. It would have been entirely possible to clearly spell out the fact that all those other reports appear to have been incorrect in light of this new information, or at least to acknowledge the fact that there is a glaring difference between this new report and previous reporting. It would do a lot of good for awareness to grow, especially among Washington Post readers, that there’s been a lot of inaccurate information circulating about Russia and the 2016 election these past several years.

  But they didn’t. And nobody else in the mass media has done so either. Even The Intercept’s report on the same story, despite having the far more honest headline “Those Russian Twitter bots didn’t do $#!% in 2016, says new study,” doesn’t name any names or criticize any outlets for their inaccurate reporting on Russian trolls stealing the election for Donald Trump.

  Indeed, it’s very rare in the west to see mainstream journalists hold other mainstream journalists accountable for their false reporting, facilitation of propaganda, or journalistic malpractice, unless it’s journalists whose approval they don’t care about like members of the opposite political faction or independant media reporters. This is because western journalists are worthless, obsequious cowards whose entire lives revolve around seeking the approval of their peers.

  How interesting that this is coming out now. Will the Washington Post address the countless stories they wrote hyping Russian influence on the 2016 race? The Pulitzer they won for such coverage? https://t.co/NKVV58SB8Q

  — Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 9, 2023

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

  The most important reporting a journalist can do in the western world today is help expose the lies, propaganda and malpractice of other western journalists and news outlets. But that is also the last thing a western journalist is ever likely to do, because western journalists seek praise and approval not from the public, but from other western journalists.

  You can see this in the way they post on Twitter, with their little in-jokes and insider references, how they’re always cliquing up and beckoning and signaling to each other. Twitter is a great window through which to observe western journalists, because they really lay it all out there. Watch their bootlicking facilitation of status quo power, their ingratiating tail-wagging with each other, the way they gang up on dissenters like zealots burning a heretic. To see what I’m talking about you have to pay attention not to their viral tweets that go off but to all the rest that receive little attention, because the ones that take off are the ones the public are interested in. If you watch them carefully it becomes clear that for most of them the intended audience of the majority of their posts is not the rank-and-file public, but their fellow members of the media class.

  Look at this Twitter conversation between Australian journalists right after the Ecuadorian embassy cut off Julian Assange’s internet access in 2018 for a good illustration of this. Former ABC reporter Andrew Fowler (now a vocal supporter of Assange) questions ABC’s Michael Rowland for applauding Ecuador’s move, and ABC’s Lisa Millar rushes in to help Rowland argue that Assange is not a journalist and doesn’t deserve the solidarity of journalists, and that Fowler is putting himself on the outside of the groupthink consensus by claiming otherwise. Millar and Rowland are part of the clique, Fowler is being ostracised from it, and Assange is the heretic whose lynching they’re braying for:

  

  Western journalists have a freakish herd-like mindset that makes the derision and rejection of their class the most nightmarish scenario possible and the approval of their class the most powerful opiate imaginable. They’re terrified of other journalists turning against them, of being rejected by the people whose approval they crave like a drug, of being kicked out of the group chat. And that’s exactly what would happen if they began leveling valid criticisms at mass media propaganda in public. And that’s exactly why that doesn’t happen.

  The western media class is a cloistered, incestuous circle jerk that only cares about impressing other members of the cloistered, incestuous circle jerk. It doesn’t care about creating an informed populace or holding the powerful to account, it cares about approval, inclusion and acclaim from its own ranks, regardless of what propagandistic reporting is required to obtain it. The Pulitzers are mostly just a bunch of empire propagandists giving each other trophies for being good at empire propaganda.

  A journalist with real integrity would spurn the approval of the media class. It would nauseate and repel them, because it would mean you’ve been aligning yourself with the most powerful empire in history and the propaganda machine which greases its wheels. They would actively make an enemy of the mainstream western press.

  Journalists without integrity — which is to say the overwhelming majority of journalists — do the opposite.

  US Military Thanks And Praises Retiring CNN “Journalist” For Her Service

  “The US military has such adoration for Barbara Starr because she is a war propagandist, just like the rest of the mainstream western news media who report on US foreign policy.”https://t.co/jD6xiyFQn6

  — Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) December 21, 2022

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

  None of this will be news to any of my regular readers, who will likely understand that the role of the mass media is not to inform but to manufacture consent for the agendas and interests of our rulers. But we shouldn’t get used to it, or lose sight of how odious it is.

  It’s important to be clear about how gross these people are. You can never be sufficiently disdainful of these freaks.

  *  *  *

  My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal, or buying an issue of my monthly zine. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

  Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

  Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 21:40

• China Still Dominates The Rare-Earth Market
  China Still Dominates The Rare-Earth Market

  Rare earth elements (REE) are metals used in many of today’s key technologies, such as wind turbines, phone screens and even electric motors.

  As this infographic from Statista’s Martin Armstrong reveals, anyone who needs one of these 17 chemical elements will have a hard job sourcing them from anywhere but China.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The People’s Republic has the world’s largest reserves of these not so rare metals.

  According to analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey, around 44 million tons of REO (rare earth oxides) lie dormant in the Chinese soil.

  The second largest stockpile is in Vietnam, but according to geologists’ estimates, it is only half as large as China’s, at 22 million REO tons. Likewise, more than 20 million tons are believed to lie hidden beneath Russian and Brazilian ground.

  While not catapulting it to a rare earth superpower, Sweden just announced the discovery of what could be the largest known deposit in Europe – an area estimated to contain over one million metric tons of REO.

  Currently, rare earths are being mined nowhere in Europe, with 98 percent of rare earths used in the EU in 2021 imported from China.

  China is responsible for around 61 percent of global mine production and thus mines by far the largest share of the elements traded on the world market.

  The United States, on the other hand, while the second largest producer, is a small player relatively speaking with a market share of around 15.5 percent.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 21:20

• 'Normalization' Of Emergency Use Authorizations Concerns Health Experts
  ‘Normalization’ Of Emergency Use Authorizations Concerns Health Experts

  Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved an unprecedented number of emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for drugs, tests, and medical devices since the beginning of the pandemic.

  

  Between March 2020 and June 2021, more than 600 EUAs were authorized, according to Fortune.

  This has caused concern among healthcare professionals, with some studies claiming that overreaction by regulators may have led to a decline in industry standards (1, 2).

  As clarified in the journal Yale Medicine, “An EUA can only be granted when no adequate, approved, available alternatives exist, and when the known and potential benefits outweigh the potential risks. A EUA also only lasts as long as the public health emergency for which it was declared.”

  Prior to 2020, the public health emergency that allowed the highest number of EUAs was the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, with 22 EUAs overall for personal protective equipment (PPE), antivirals, and diagnostic tests. The only emergency-authorized vaccine prior to the 2020 pandemic was the anthrax vaccine.

  Given the drastic increase in EUAs, experts worry that this time, the FDA has gone too far.

  The Normalization of EUA Drugs and Lack of Informed Consent

  Cardiologist Dr. Jack Askins has pointed out that the unprecedented onslaught of emergency authorizations in drugs, vaccinations, medical devices, COVID tests, and PPE has normalized EUA drugs and products as being fully FDA-approved rather than being investigational.

  Prof. Linda Wastila from the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, whose expertise is in pharmacotherapy and drug policy, told The Epoch Times that the torrent of 600 EUAs makes it very difficult for healthcare professionals to remain informed of the approval statuses of new drugs.

  For example, Askins previously told The Epoch Times that he noticed some of his colleagues who prescribe Paxlovid lacked adequate awareness of the many interactions and contraindications Paxlovid has with other drugs.

  Paxlovid can interact with 43 different drug classes and over 550 active drug ingredients.

  Even before the pandemic, it was hard for clinicians and pharmacists to keep up, given that around 40 novel therapeutics are approved by the FDA yearly, not counting generic drugs.

  Wastila said that compared to traditional FDA-approved products, there has been less informed consent with the EUA products during the pandemic.

  Informed consent is defined as “the process in which a health care provider educates a patient about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of a given procedure or intervention,” and patients must make their own voluntary decision.

  Informed consent is especially important with EUA products as they are investigational products. Articles on EUAs have compared taking these products to participating in experimental trials (1, 2).

  

  Part of informed consent is letting patients know that what they are taking is experimental and that they have the right to refuse.

  But Askins highlighted that very few patients were provided informed consent when they took EUA products such as the vaccine.

  He said that three patients, each of whom received the bivalent booster as a fourth shot, were admitted to his clinic. He asked all three if they were given information on the potential risks and the emerging data on concerns and problems with it.

  “All three said no,” he said, “I do not think they understand emergency use authorization versus full FDA approval.”

  It also should be noted that EUAs do not come with long-term safety data.

  While drugs fully approved by the FDA come with a densely written package insert on side effects and drug mechanisms, for many EUA products, such as the COVID-19 vaccines, these sections are left blank.

  A Johnson & Johnson spokesperson said this was intentional, leaving it to consumers to search online for the most up-to-date information on safety and effectiveness as the data is published.

  However, Wastila sees this lack of information as potentially dangerous.

  “To me at least, [it] conveys the fact that they don’t really know whether a product is safe and effective when it’s an EUA product.”

  The Erosion of Drug Safety Standards

  Dr. David Bell, formerly a medical officer with the World Health Organization, said that the overuse of EUAs during the pandemic has lowered drug safety standards put in place to protect patients.

  EUA products are very different from FDA-approved drugs. However, public health agencies’ encouragement to use EUAs has blurred the separation between EUAs and FDA-approved drugs.

  Wastila fears that EUA is replacing FDA approval as the norm.

  “[EUAs] have lost all meaning,” said board-certified internist and nephrologist Dr. Richard Amerling. “People don’t hear ‘emergency use;’ they only hear ‘authorized.’”

  Askins argued that there has been intentional public messaging from the FDA to make EUA appear just as safe and equivalent to a fully tested and licensed product.

  In August 2021, the FDA approved the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine under the label of Comirnaty.

  Having an FDA-approved vaccine should have nullified the EUA for other COVID-19 vaccines, or at the very least, the Pfizer EUA vaccine.

  Yet, the Pfizer EUA vaccine remains on the U.S. market. The FDA also wrote that for the Pfizer vaccine, “doses distributed under the EUA are interchangeable with the licensed doses.”

  

  An order issued in November 2021 by Judge Allen Windsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida rejected this claim, stating that while the two versions may be medically interchangeable, they are not legally interchangeable.

  Judge Windsor’s order also mentioned that FDA officials could not prove that Comirnaty vaccines even exist in the United States.

  Nevertheless, the full FDA approval of Comirnaty has led many health providers to assume that the Pfizer injections being administered are the licensed versions.

  Wastila recounted an experience at her former local pharmacy.

  She was picking up some antibiotics and, while chatting with the pharmacist, she asked about the uptake of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

  “[The pharmacist] goes, ‘Oh, they’re great. Everyone’s so happy that they’re FDA approved,’” Wastila recounted. “That’s literally a quote from the pharmacist’s mouth.”

  “I said, ‘They’re not FDA approved, though.’ She goes, ‘Oh, Pfizer is.’”

  So Wastila asked to see an unopened package of the vaccine, and the pharmacist showed the doctor a vial.

  The pharmacist presented an EUA vaccine; it did not have the Comirnaty label, which would be printed according to labeling requirements.

  Wastila told the pharmacist that the pharmacy was still using the EUA vaccines.

  “[The pharmacist] was just like kind of amazed,” said Wastila, “But there’s no informed consent if even your dispensers aren’t aware that it is EUA or FDA approved.”

  More Emergency Declarations and EUAs Likely To Come

  Health experts argue that COVID-19 pandemic management has already lowered the standards for future emergency declarations and EUAs.

  Dr. Robert Malone, biochemist and one of the inventors of the mRNA drug platform, said that monkeypox, which was declared a public health emergency in August 2022 with no deaths in the U.S. at the time, is a good example of this reduced standard.

  Given that the disease almost exclusively affects men who have sex with men, a specific population demographic, and has led to 20 deaths in the United States thus far, Bell and Wastila both said that it was ludicrous that it was deemed a public health emergency.

  “Now the cat’s out the bag, [public health emergency declarations] can be used really easily now because there are precedents [such as] COVID-19 and monkeypox that were not very severe,” Bell said.

  The smallpox vaccine, commercially labeled as JYNNEOS, was also rapidly given EUA approval in a matter of days.

  The FDA wrote that it was “inferred” that a smallpox vaccine would be effective against monkeypox, given that both viruses are from the same family.

  However, according to a statement made by the CDC on Oct. 19, 2022, there was no data on the effectiveness of JYNNEOS or ACAM2000, an alternative to JYNNEOS, for monkeypox.

  

  The vaccine also has cardiological side effects. Pooled data across 22 studies showed that of the more than 7,800 people vaccinated, six developed cardiac-related adverse events that were determined to be causally related to vaccination.

  Concerns have been raised about the respiratory syncytial virus, known as RSV, in children. Though the virus has not been declared a national public health emergency, declarations have been made in Oregon and Colorado, and some health experts have urged a national declaration.

  “We’ve had RSV and the flu every year, and all of a sudden, it’s become a big issue again, and it’s because we’re afraid of every viral infection, [we’re] normalizing being fearful of every contagion,” said Wastila.

  Loss of Trust in Public Health

  As a pharmacotherapy professor who is in contact with pharmacists and staff working with the FDA, Wastila confessed that the pandemic has been a “rude awakening” for her.

  “Physicians, dispensers, and pharmacists just blindly follow the safety and effectiveness of a product just because it has the FDA seal of approval, even if that ‘approval’ is an EUA.”

  Though financial backdoor dealings have been suspected and discussed for decades, Malone argues that the pandemic has brought “corruption” to the surface.

  Financially, 65 percent of the FDA’s budget comes from pharmaceutical companies, with a large proportion of this money coming through sponsorship for drug approval applications.

  

  The 1992 Prescription Drug User Fee Act, also known as the PDUFA, requires pharmaceutical companies to pay the FDA for drug approvals.

  Wastila said that after speaking to colleagues and students who work in the FDA, she senses that the PDFUA may have established “a culture of entitlement” from the drug companies to have their drugs approved and marketed.

  “The sponsors feel like, hey, we’ve paid for this,” she said, “It’s like a pay-for-play situation.”

  Many members of drug evaluation boards also receive financial payments from drug companies.

  When evaluating a drug, there needs to be “zero conflict of interest,” said Amerling. “Declaring that you have a financial conflict of interest doesn’t make it go away.”

  Bell said that the low uptake of vaccines in children under five years of age is a sign that people no longer trust public health agencies.

  “They [The FDA] were unable to produce any solid data showing that there’s an all-cause benefit to those children,” said Bell.

  For healthcare professionals and members of the public who once trusted the FDA, some feel that they no longer have a place to go for advice on treatments.

  Amerling said this would force clinicians to be very conservative with their treatment.

  As the Chief Academic Officer at The Wellness Company, Amerling educates doctors to prescribe only medications with a safety record of at least several years.

  “Don’t be that person to jump on the bandwagon with a new product,” he said, “Post-marketing experience can reveal unanticipated adverse events, and you’re not going to see them even with the initial studies, even if they’re well done.”

  “When medium and long-term risk is unknown, it’s best to err on the side of caution, especially if benefits are small.”

  Wastila added that there has been a considerable information gap on drug safety since the pandemic, with little scrutiny from drug regulators.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 21:00

• These Are North America's Biggest Sources Of Electricity By State And Province
  These Are North America’s Biggest Sources Of Electricity By State And Province

  On a national scale, the United States and Canada rely on a very different makeup of sources to generate their electricity.

  The U.S. primarily uses natural gas, coal, and nuclear power, while Canada relies on both hydro and nuclear. That said, when zooming in on the province or state level, individual primary electricity sources can differ greatly.

  In the infographic below, Visual Capitalist’s Selin Oğuz takes a look at the electricity generation in the states and provinces of these two countries using data from the Nuclear Energy Institute (2021) and the Canada Energy Regulator (2019).

  

  Natural Gas

  Natural gas is widely used for electricity generation in the United States. Known as a “cleaner” fossil fuel, its abundance, coupled with an established national distribution network and relatively low cost, makes it the leading electricity source in the country.

  In 2021, 38% of the 4120 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity generated in the U.S. came from natural gas. Not surprisingly, more than 40% of American states have natural gas as their biggest electricity source.

  Here are some states that have the largest shares of natural gas-sourced electricity.

  

   

  In Canada, natural gas is only the third-biggest electricity source (behind hydro and nuclear), accounting for 11% of the 632 TWh of electricity produced in 2019. Alberta is the only province with natural gas as its main source of electricity.

  Nuclear

  Nuclear power is a carbon-free energy source that makes up a considerable share of the energy generated in both the U.S. and Canada.

  19% of America’s and 15% of Canada’s electricity comes from nuclear power. While the percentages are close to one another, it’s good to note that the United States generates 6 to 7 times more electricity than Canada each year, yielding a lot more nuclear power than Canada in terms of gigawatt hours (GWh) per year.

  As seen in the map, many states and provinces with nuclear as their main source of electricity are concentrated in the eastern half of the two countries.

  In the U.S., Illinois, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina are top producers in terms of GWh/year. Illinois and South Carolina also have nuclear as their primary electricity source, whereas Pennsylvania’s electricity production from natural gas exceeds that from nuclear.

  The vast majority of Canada’s nuclear reactors (18 of 19) are in Ontario, with the 19th in New Brunswick. Both of these provinces rely on nuclear as their biggest source of electricity.

  Renewables: Hydro, Wind and Solar

  Out of the different types of renewable electricity sources, hydro is the most prevalent in North America. For example, 60% of Canada’s and 6% of the U.S.’s electricity comes from hydropower.

  Here are the states and provinces that have hydro as their biggest source of electricity.

  

   

  Wind and solar power collectively comprise a small percentage of total electricity generated in both countries. While no state or province relies on solar as its biggest source of electricity, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota rely primarily on wind for their electricity, along with Canada’s Prince Edward Island (PEI).

  Coal and Oil

  Coal and oil are emission-heavy electricity sources still prevalent in North America.

  Currently, 22% of America’s and 7% of Canada’s electricity comes from coal, with places such as Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia still relying on coal as their biggest sources of electricity.

  Certain regions also use petroleum to generate their electricity. Although its use for this purpose is declining, it is still the biggest source of electricity in both Hawaii and Nunavut.

  Over the next few years, it will be interesting to observe the use of these fossil fuels for electricity generation in the U.S. and Canada. Despite the differences in climate commitments between the two countries, lowering coal and oil-related emissions may be a critical part of hitting decarbonization targets in a timely manner.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 20:40

• The Tyranny Of Minorities
  The Tyranny Of Minorities

  Authored by Bill King via RealClearPolitics.com,

  We hear a great deal today about the “protection of democracy.”

  For Democrats, it is all about voter suppression and election denial, and for Republicans, election fraud. But the great irony, and far greater threat to democracy, comes from both political parties as they routinely thwart the will of the majority of American people to satisfy their primary base voters and the special interests that finance their parties.

  

  Neither really give a tinker’s damn about what the majority of Americans want.

  Case in point. In 2019, Texas passed a near total ban on abortion after fertilization. The law became effective on the overturning of Roe v. Wade. There is an exception for a serious health risk to the mother but there is no exception for cases of rape or incest.

  A recent University of Texas poll showed that only 13% of Texans thought there should be no exception in cases of rape or incest. 87% supported such an exception up to six weeks into the pregnancy and 64% up to twelve weeks. Only 29% supported the exception at any time during the pregnancy.

  Yet, the Texas legislature passed a bill without a rape/incest exception, notwithstanding that 87% of Texans think the law should include one. How can that be described as anything other than undemocratic?

  Of course, the same is true with Democrats. Polling has consistently shown that a supermajority of Americans oppose President Biden’s immigration policies since he was elected. Nonetheless, it took him two years to even acknowledge there was a problem and then offer only half-hearted measures.

  On issue after issue, contrary to the popular media narrative that Americans are hopelessly divided and polarized, the truth is a majority of Americans agree with centrist, common-sense policies. Morris Fiorina, in his book, Unstable Majorities, uses American National Election Survey data going back over five decades to show that “normal Americans continue to be centrists.”

  Both Democrats and Republicans are correct: Our democracy is under siege. But it is not under siege from voter suppression, election denial, or election fraud. It is under siege because our historic two-party system has been perverted by primaries that seek to discourage participation by anyone but “true believers,” by computer-driven gerrymandering, and by a media industry that profits by pandering to the extremes of the ideologic spectrum. As Jason Altmire so vividly explained in his book Dead Center, any elected official that tries to buck the system is punished, frequently by being voted out of office by primary voters. As result, our two legacy parties represent the views of the voters that show up for their primaries, not the views of the majority of Americans.

  When it comes to threats to our democracy, both parties should be reciting the words of the great American philosopher, Pogo (aka Walt Kelly): “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 20:20

• How Do You Feel About Religion?
  How Do You Feel About Religion?

  How do you feel about religion?

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, depending on which country you are in, this question is more or less likely to be met with a shrug or even an objection to religious belief.

  In China, the highest percentage of people among the 56 countries and territories included in the Statista Global Consumer Survey is non-religious or atheist, the latter describing people rejecting the idea that there is a God.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Among European countries, Germany ranks high for the share of its non-religious and atheist population, which stands at around a third of survey respondents aged 18 to 64.

  Even in a country often associated with religiousness – Italy – a quarter of people between these ages are not religious today.

  Religion has a somewhat stronger hold on the United States, Russia and Brazil, while in South Africa, the non-religious are in the single digits at just 9 percent of adults under the age of 65. In India, finally, being non-religious or atheist is virtually unheard of, with just two percent of survey respondents saying they fell into one of the two categories.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 20:00

• What The January 6 Videos Will Show
  What The January 6 Videos Will Show

  Authored by Julie Kelly via AmGreatness,

  The jury trial of Richard Barnett, the man famously photographed with his feet on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office on January 6, 2021, is underway in Washington, D.C.

  Nearly two years to the date of his arrest, Barnett finally had a chance to defend himself in court on multiple charges, including obstruction of an official proceeding.

  But it was not the fiery, outspoken Barnett who provided the most jaw-dropping testimony in the trial so far.

  To the contrary, one of the government’s own witnesses confirmed under defense cross-examination that “agents provocateur” were heavily involved in instigating the events of January 6. 

  

  Captain Carneysha Mendoza, a tactical commander for U.S. Capitol Police at the time, testified Wednesday how a group of agitators destroyed security barriers and lured people to Capitol grounds that afternoon:

  Defense Counsel Brad Geyer: Isn’t it true that you had a lot of people, a large quantity of people walking down two streets that dead-ended at the Capitol?

  Mendoza: Yes, sir.

  Geyer: And would it be fair to say that at least at some of the leading edges of that crowd, they contained bad people or provocateurs; is that fair? 

  Mendoza: It’s fair.

  Report Ad

  Report Ad

  Geyer: Dangerous people?

  Mendoza: Yes.

  Geyer: Violent people?

  Mendoza: Yes.

  Geyer: Highly trained violent people?

  Mendoza: Yes.

  Geyer: Highly trained violent people who work and coordinate together?

  Mendoza: Yes

  It was a stunning admission, representing the first time a top law enforcement official stated under oath (to my knowledge) that a coordinated, experienced group of agitators engaged in much of the mischief early that day. Under further questioning, Mendoza acknowledged those same individuals “pushed through barriers, removed barriers, threw barriers over the side, removed fencing, and eased the flow of people into places where they shouldn’t be.” This happened around 1:00 p.m., the same time the joint session of Congress convened to debate the results of the 2020 presidential election.

  Hiding the pivotal role of still unidentified—and uncharged—agitators on January 6 is just one reason why the government has successfully sought to conceal thousands of hours of footage captured by the Capitol police’s security system before, during, and after the protest. 

  As I explained in May 2021, Capitol police immediately designated roughly 14,000 hours of surveillance video as “security information” that should not be released to the public.

  Thomas DiBiase, general counsel for Capitol police, the technical owner of the video trove, signed an affidavit in March 2021 objecting to the widespread dissemination of footage “related to the attempted insurrection.” DiBiase claimed the agency wanted to prevent “those who might wish to attack the Capitol again” from accessing interior views of the building.

  The Department of Justice subsequently labeled the footage as “highly sensitive government material” subject to strict protective orders in court proceedings. Defendants must comply with onerous rules before viewing any surveillance video associated with their case.

  There are, of course, exceptions for any party helping to enforce the “insurrection” narrative. For example, the House committee handling Donald Trump’s post-January 6 impeachment was allowed to use portions of the super-secret reel. So, too, was HBO in producing its January 6 documentary. The January 6 select committee aired extensive if highly selective surveillance footage during their televised performances.

  And that brief clip of Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) running in a hallway on January 6? It was clearly an image intended to mock his alleged cowardice that day. And, of course, it was Capitol surveillance video.

  If it’s safe to place the video in the hands of Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the biggest deceiver in Congress, and random HBO film producers, then it’s safe to place all the footage in the hands of the American people. Which is why calls by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to fully release the surveillance video are a welcome, and necessary, step in providing a complete account about the events of January 6 to the public.

  (The Committee on House Administration, now under Republican control, is one of two congressional committees with access to the full library of video.)

  The recordings, Gaetz said in an interview this week, “would give more full context to that day rather than the cherry-picked moments that the January 6 committee tried to use to inflame and further divide our country.”

  That demand undoubtedly will be met with fierce resistance by the same lawmakers, government agencies, and media organizations incessantly bleating about the need to “tell the truth” about what happened before and on January 6.

  So, what exactly will the tapes reveal? 

  The footage, which captured the inside and outside of the building, will show how many agitators and/or federal assets were staged at various locations early in the day. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) might finally get an answer to the question that FBI Director Christopher Wray refused to answer during a congressional hearing last year—whether FBI informants disguised as Trump supporters were planted inside the building prior to the initial breach.

  To that end, the video could show who instructed two men how to open the two-ton Columbus Doors on the east side of the Capitol Building, creating an access point for hordes of protesters.

  Ditto for entry points at other locations.

  Will the video identify the individuals who erected the “gallows” featuring an orange noose allegedly built to “hang” Vice President Mike Pence? Just like the identity of the suspect who allegedly planted the pipe bombs at the DNC and RNC, no one has been identified or charged with constructing that stage on government property—another unanswered question the footage will answer.

  The public undoubtedly will be shocked to see police officers from Capitol police and D.C. Metropolitan Police Departments viciously attacking crowds of people assembled outside the Capitol. Mendoza’s testimony also confirmed that Capitol police officers used nonlethal “munitions” on hundreds of individuals beginning shortly after 1:00 p.m. Weaponry included pepper balls—projectiles containing a chemical irritant shot from a launcher similar to a paintball gun—gas, rubber bullets, and flashbangs, a less-than-lethal grenade that likely caused the fatal heart attacks of two Trump supporters that afternoon.

  Not only will the public see what happened to those two men, Kevin Greeson and Benjamin Phillips, but they will also see evidence of the numerous, serious injuries inflicted on dozens of people, including children and elderly women, at the hands of police. Are Americans prepared to see how law enforcement handled the dead bodies of Ashli Babbitt and Rosanne Boyland?

  It will be tough to watch.

  More importantly, the footage will indicate which cameras were disabled before the protest. The government’s claim that security cameras are not installed outside the Columbus Doors is questionable at best. A full comparison between the Capitol’s closed-circuit television system and the cameras operable on January 6 is a must.

  House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Thursday endorsed Gaetz’s calls to release the footage.

  “I think the American public should actually see all what happened,” McCarthy told reporters.

  “Yes, I’m engaged to do that.”

  If McCarthy follows through on his promise, the world will see the biggest inside job—an actual coup—in U.S. history unfold before their eyes.

  Not only is it necessary to expose the truth of January 6 but to exonerate innocent Americans whose lives have been destroyed in the aftermath.

  Roll the tapes…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 19:40

• US Navy Veteran Released From Russian Custody In Kaliningrad
  US Navy Veteran Released From Russian Custody In Kaliningrad

  Another American who had been quietly held in Russian detention, and whose case has received no media spotlight or coverage since his arrest, has been released by the Kremlin after a year of detention. 

  US Navy veteran Taylor Dudley was released where he had been in detention in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, which lies between Poland and Lithuania. It comes following last year’s high profile prisoner exchange involving Brittney Griner and Victor Bout, and involved the mediation of former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. Dudley was delivered to the Polish border by Russian authorities, where he crossed back. The US had deemed his a “wrongful” detention.

  

  But unlike with the Griner case, or with other still detained Americans like Paul Whelan or Marc Fogel, the 35-year old Dudley – a Michigan native – had crossed into the Russian province of Kaliningrad during the Ukraine war, in April. The other American cases involved arrests and detentions prior to the Feb.24 Ukraine invasion.

  “Today, the Russian govt released my client, Taylor Dudley, a Navy vet, cross the Polish border,” , a spokesperson for the family, Jonathan Franks tweeted Thursday morning.

  According to background first reported in CNN:

  Taylor Dudley, 35, of Lansing, Michigan, was detained by Russian border patrol police in April 2022 after crossing from Poland into Kaliningrad, a Russian exclave which is territory governed by Moscow between Poland and Lithuania. He was in Poland attending a music festival, and it is not clear why he crossed the border.

  Dudley’s detention – which the US government had not deemed as “wrongful,” or based on arbitrary and discriminatory motivations – had not been widely publicized…

  Working alongside Gov. Richardson was the US Embassy in Warsaw, the Steve Menzies Global Foundation, and the James Foley Foundation – all who helped secure the release of Dudley.

  Franks’ tweet said additionally that “For every case in the James Foley Foundation count that is public, there are 3 that aren’t, and this is one of those cases.” Thus it appears the family and negotiators intentionally kept knowledge of Dudley’s plight out of the public eye, presumably to not negatively impact the negotiation process.

  

  CNN and others are reporting that no known exchange was made for Dudley. “The past 9 months have been difficult ones for the family and they ask the media to respect their privacy and give them the space to welcome Taylor home,” a family statement added. It’s still as yet unclear why he crossed the border in the first place, with all media statements describing this in an ambiguous and somewhat mysterious way.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 19:20

• Yes, Virginia, There Is A Deep State… And It's Worse Than You Think
  Yes, Virginia, There Is A Deep State… And It’s Worse Than You Think

  Authored by William Anderson via The Mises Institute,

  Mention the term “deep state” in polite company and most likely no one will want to speak to you the rest of the evening. The deep state is what Wikipedia calls “discredited,” something reeking of conspiracies, false accusations, and the substitution of fantasy for the truth.

  After the FBI raided Donald Trump’s home in Florida, Trump alluded to “deep state” actions, which brought predictable ridicule from the mainstream media. Trump was speaking conspiratorially, and if one follows the mainstream media these days, the only conspiracies are on the right. (You know, like the one in which the unarmed, ragtag January 6 rioters nearly overthrew the US government.)

  After the recent revelations about how Twitter worked to hide the story of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop, Trump attributed the secrecy to a plot by the “deep state.” However, while the facts of the story really are outrageous, I don’t believe it was as much a secret conspiracy as a case of people being able to engage in certain actions with no political consequences.

  

  Furthermore, journalist Matt Taibbi’s stunning revelations regarding FBI and CIA agents’ outright interference in the 2020 election via Twitter on the pretense that Russian operatives were spreading disinformation has further exposed both the involvement of federal law enforcement agents in partisan activities and the sad fact that those agents need not worry about being held accountable – especially if they are engaged in a “progressive” cause.

  The Standard Deep State Narrative

  One does not have to believe in a single conspiracy (not even about the 9/11 attacks) to understand that there really is what we can call a deep state. Indeed, what we might call the real deep state has nothing to do with conspiracies, secret meetings, and the like. Instead, this deep state operates in the open and in broad daylight, and that makes the deep state narrative an even greater threat than the secret cabal narrative.

  When I was a young adult, I read a novel by two anticommunist journalists called The Spike, in which a young, liberal, and crusading journalist uncovers a nest of Soviet agents embedded in the US government. The journalist’s story on the affair, however, is spiked by his employer (a Washington Post–like paper), but the protagonist manages to get the story out elsewhere. The result is that a compromised president is brought down and the federal government is able to ferret out the Soviet agents.

  Thus, in a dramatic moment, a motivated journalist and political allies expose the equivalent of the “deep state” and the US government makes a rightward turn. The deep state goes away.

  The Hard Truth

  Unfortunately, no novelist can write out our present deep state because that would be a bridge too far. The reason is that our present deep state simply is the executive branch of government, which has been written into our laws and our courts, and this branch has taken over much of the role originally assigned to the judicial wing of government, that of interpreting the laws.

  The real power of the modern state is in its civil service, which is composed of employees of all the federal departments and agencies—employees who hardly are neutral ideologically and politically, employees who are protected by civil service laws and by unions. When progressive regimes such as the Biden and Obama administrations occupy the West Wing and Congress, the federal courts become almost irrelevant. The president and his political appointees govern by executive orders, which, not surprisingly, the allegedly neutral government employees enthusiastically support.

  Much of modern lawmaking is by executive order, with many orders not even having to square with the statutes underlying them, something that has gone on for a long time. For example, when President Franklin Roosevelt seized private gold holdings in 1933, he based his executive order upon the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act. When President Biden announced student loan forgiveness, he based his order on the 9/11 Heroes Act, stretching that law and its obvious intent to the point that it was unrecognizable.

  While not all executive orders have the effect of Executive Order 6102, they nonetheless involve the executive branch of the US government assuming powers that well may violate the Constitution yet are carried out without a worry that any outside agency—including the US Supreme Court—will intervene. (Yes, the courts so far have slapped down Biden’s student loan forgiveness scheme, but the litigation process is not complete, and the courts can be unpredictable.)

  All-Powerful Bureaucracy Has Progressive Support

  One would think that educated Americans would blanch at the prospect of federal agencies making policies independent of congressional or court oversight, but the opposite is true, especially when federal agents pursue progressive policies. For example, when the Supreme Court placed some legal fences around the Environmental Protection Agency’s powers to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, the progressive establishment exploded in anger.

  For example, the New York Times, which carries the progressive standard, declared that the court had placed American lives in danger:

  Regulatory agencies staffed by experts are the best available mechanism for a representative democracy to make decisions in areas of technical complexity. The E.P.A. is the entity that Congress relies upon to figure out how clean the air should be, and how to get there. Asserting that it lacks the power to perform its basic responsibilities is simply sabotage.

  Governance by “experts” has been the progressive mantra for more than a century, the idea being that so-called experts embedded deep in government should be free to make whatever decisions they believe best to govern the rest of us. The assumption of the editors of the NYT is that the “experts” always (or at least usually) know what is best for everyone else and how to achieve those important social and economic ends.

  Likewise, the revelations that the FBI and CIA were coercing social media companies to censor anything that contradicted certain progressive narratives coming from Washington, DC, should have been banner headlines everywhere and the lead story on the evening news. Instead, mainstream progressive journalists attacked Matt Taibbi, or like David French, they downplayed the seriousness of what happened and made excuses for federal agents.

  (French argued that the only real question was whether federal agents had “violated the First Amendment” and that anything else was not fit for discussion. And, yes, he concluded that those agents probably had not violated the Constitution.)

  Conclusion

  We are not speaking of secret conspiracies in which nefarious actions are carried out in the darkness. These things are carried out in daylight, complete with the names of the characters involved, yet people who raise serious questions about the legality of these actions, let alone the question of right and wrong, are excoriated and ignored by our institutional gatekeepers.

  That is why I say that this version of the deep state is much worse than whatever the authors of The Spike might have believed to exist. The people involved do what they darn well please, all the while claiming they are the soul of democracy, and many Americans seem to either believe them or no longer care.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 19:00

• GOP-Led House Launches Probe Into Biden's "Absurd & Disgraceful" Botched Afghan Withdrawal 
  GOP-Led House Launches Probe Into Biden’s “Absurd & Disgraceful” Botched Afghan Withdrawal 

  The Republican-led House has launched a formal probe into the Biden administration’s chaotic and deadly Afghanistan troop withdrawal operation and evacuation of August 2021, which is to be complete with issuing subpoenas for US officials to undergo depositions, in order to gain a clear picture of what happened and the botched decision-making. This as there’s still yet to be any level of accountability for officials that oversaw the disaster.

  The Hill reports Friday, “Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who served as its ranking member previously, said the Biden administration has so far refused to hand over documents but that he is now formally requesting compliance as chair of the panel.”

  McCaul blasted the White House, saying “It is absurd and disgraceful that the Biden administration has repeatedly denied our longstanding oversight requests and continues to withhold information related to the withdrawal.”

  

  “In the event of continued noncompliance, the Committee will use the authorities available to it to enforce these requests as necessary, including through a compulsory process,” he added.

  A Thursday letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken demanded the handing over of relevant intelligence assessments, and internal agency documents, as well as any communications with either the Afghan government or Taliban that occurred in the lead-up to and during the withdrawal.

  It was among the most disastrous withdrawals from a foreign conflict theatre of US troops in American history, which closed a 20-year long. increasingly unpopular occupation. At the time, widespread comparisons were made with the April 1979 fall of Saigon and its images of American helicopters landing on the rooftop of the US embassy to evacuate desperate personnel and their families.

  13 US troops died as a result of a terror attack targeting a gate at Kabul international airport. Additionally about 170 Afghans died, as they had been crowded up against the gate that US Marines were manning.

  Other countries, notably China and Russia widely mocked the US and Pentagon for its handling of the Afghanistan pullout…

  Here come the astonishing scenes from last year when crowds of Afghans chased a #USA military cargo plane as it took off, some even risked their lives to cling to the aircraft to flee #Afghanistan.pic.twitter.com/26MYotiAPJ

  — Zhang Meifang张美芳 (@CGMeifangZhang) August 16, 2022

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

  The world also witnessed shocking scenes of two Afghans falling to their deaths after they sought to grab a hold of the undercarriage of a departing US Air Force C-17, after Kabul airport security broke down and huge crowds swarmed the runways. The body of another Afghan was found in the aircraft’s landing gear upon landing.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 18:40

• Comet Set To Graze By Earth For First Time In 50,000 Years – Might Be Seen With The Naked Eye
  Comet Set To Graze By Earth For First Time In 50,000 Years – Might Be Seen With The Naked Eye

  Authored by Michael Wing via The Epoch Times,

  An icy visitor from the far reaches of the solar system is expected to shoot past Earth and the sun in the coming weeks and it might be visible with the unaided human eye. This visitor from afar is a comet believed to have brushed by Earth before – some 50,000 years ago.

  Discovered in March 2022, the comet recently passed within Jupiter’s orbit and is heading for the inner solar system. Our witnessing the flyby soon to occur could be a once-in-a-lifetime astronomical occasion.

  Bright Enough for Naked Eyesight?

  Dubbed C/2022 E3 ZTF, the comet displays a greenish coma, the nebulous envelope surrounding a comet’s nucleus, and a yellow-tinged tail of dust and ion particles in its wake.

  Initially showing a stellar magnitude of 17 when it was discovered, according to EarthSky, C/2022 E3 ZTF’s brightness will increase as it approaches the sun, as the frozen matter of a comet’s nucleus sublimates when exposed to solar radiation sometimes causing a spectacular green “glow.”

  Just today the comet reached its perihelion, its closest distance from the sun, and currently shines with a magnitude of 7.4—The lower an object’s magnitude the greater its brightness. It’s magnitude is expected to increase to 5 or 6, the range visible to the naked eye, next month when it reaches its closest distance from Earth.

  So with dark skies and minimal moonlight or streetlight, C/2022 E3 ZTF might be seen without binoculars or a telescope. However, comets are notoriously unpredictable; it could be even brighter.

  

  The comet grows brighter as it speeds toward the sun. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  

  C/2022 E3 ZTF exhibits a green coma and yellow-tinged ion tail. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  Optimal Viewing Geometry

  Typically, as comets near the sun, they are drowned out by sunlight and banished from sight but unlike other comets C/2022 E3 ZTF’s trajectory presents great geometry for viewing from Earth. Appearing slightly past midnight over the coming weeks, it will stay visible despite its proximity to the sun—This holds true for stargazers in the northern hemisphere at least.

  Originally appearing in the north, the comet arced northwest to southwest and then seemed to loop as our vantage point on Earth changed while we orbited the sun. The comet then shot northward in early October, vanishing entirely from view for comet watchers in the southern hemisphere.

  C/2022 E3 ZTF is currently careening toward the Northern Crown and by month’s end will have neared Polaris, all the while getting brighter and closer to Earth. It will become visible to viewers south of the equator again in early February when it pops above their northern horizon.

  The comet will reach its closest distance from Earth on Feb. 2 and you can find it transiting in between the constellations Draco and Camelopardalis just south of Polaris. As it travels in a retrograde orbit (the opposite way as Earth’s orbit), it will be moving very quickly. Try spying it with your naked eye, otherwise use a pair of good binoculars.

  How Close?

  As for the size of this comet, its nucleus was measured to be about 1 kilometer across, according to AFP—relatively small compared to more famous comets such as NEOWISE, which appeared in 2020; more famously, Hale-Bopp appeared in 1997 exhibiting a diameter of 60 miles (37 kilometers). But what C/2022 E3 ZTF lacks in size, it compensates for in closeness.

  

  Comet C/2022 E3 ZTF presents optimal geometry in its trajectory, facilitating excellent viewing opportunities from Earth. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  

  C/2022 E3 ZTF grows brighter as it approaches its perihelion, closest distance from the sun. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  Having just reached its perihelion today, the comet now lies roughly 103 million miles (1.11 AU/166 million kilometers) from the sun. When it “grazes” by Earth on Feb. 2, it will be 27 million miles (0.29 AU/42 million kilometers) away, before it swerves outbound toward the outer solar system again.

  This is the first time said comet has entered our solar system since the Upper Paleolithic period 50,000 years ago. Scientists say it could be permanently ejected once it makes its departure from the solar system, AFP reported.

  But before we bid farewell, it offers an encore.

  A Date With Mars … And Adios

  Particularly for first-time comet spotters, C/2022 E3 ZTF presents a great sighting opportunity on Feb. 10 when it will appear extremely close to Mars. You can try taking a long-exposure photo for 20 to 30 seconds which might yield a fuzzy, tailed object beside the rust-red planet.

  As for where C/2022 E3 ZTF is headed, we might ask where it came from. The comet is believed to originate from the Oort Cloud, a theoretical vast sphere that surrounds the solar system inhabited by mysterious icy objects.

  

  The comet is set to near Mars as it makes its departure from the inner solar system. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  As for the comet’s unwieldy name, here’s the story behind that. It was first discovered during a survey on March 2, 2022, by astronomers Bryce Bolin and Frank Masci using the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF), located at Mt. Palomar in Southern California. Its name denotes the facility where it was discovered (ZTF), the year of its discovery (2022), and that it was the third (3) such object found in the year’s fifth half-month (A, B, C, D, E), hence C/2022 E3 ZTF.

  This visitor from afar will vanish from view by late April 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 18:20

• Gallup: Americans Split On Companies Taking Political, Social Stands
  Gallup: Americans Split On Companies Taking Political, Social Stands

  Americans are almost evenly split on whether companies should take public stands on social and political issues. A new Bentley University/Gallup poll finds that 52% of U.S. adults disapprove of such public posturing, while 48% support it. 

  We hasten to note that the pollsters don’t seem to approach the topic from an impartial perspective. That’s initially evident from the name of the undertaking: “The Force for Good Survey.” Then there’s this language on the survey website: 

  “Business can be a powerful force for positive change in our society. But are businesses doing enough to live up to that potential and make the world a better place?” 

  That said, even if the survey seems prone to cultivating the leftist stance on this question — which is asked among a variety of others — it surely provides directional insights, so let’s have a look. 

  While the big picture shows a roughly even split, differences start to emerge when results are sorted by age, with younger adults more prone to support corporate stances on current events. The poll found 59% of those 18 to 29 years old approve, compared to 43% of those 60 and over. 

  

  Those substantial gaps turn into enormous divides when you get to party affiliation: 75% of Democrats want companies to share their beliefs, compared to 18% of Republicans. Only 40% of independents want companies spouting off on current events.  

  

  Turning to other crosscuts, strong majorities of Asians (74%) and blacks (72%) support corporate pontification, while just 49% of Hispanics and 41% of whites do. 

  Meanwhile, women are more likely to back corporate preaching than men, by a 52% to 43% margin.

  

  The findings show the predicament companies face in deciding if they should speak out on everything from racism to LGBT activism and Covid policy, with substantial portions of the population on each side of that question. The pressures aren’t only external: businesses face pressure from their employees too.  

  Other top-level findings from the survey: 

  • 55% think business has a positive impact on society
  • 71% of young Americans think business hurts the environment
  • 84% of young Americans think businesses should promote diversity, equity and inclusion
  • 62% of blacks and 33% of whites think the federal government is effective in making a positive impact on people’s lives

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Don't Trust The Government With Your Privacy, Property, Or Your Freedoms
  Don’t Trust The Government With Your Privacy, Property, Or Your Freedoms

  Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  How do you trust a government that continuously sidesteps the Constitution and undermines our rights? You can’t.

  

  When you consider all the ways “we the people” are being bullied, beaten, bamboozled, targeted, tracked, repressed, robbed, impoverished, imprisoned and killed by the government, one can only conclude that you shouldn’t trust the government with your privacy, your property, your life, or your freedoms.

  Consider for yourself.

  • Don’t trust the government with your privacy, digital or otherwise. In the two decades since 9/11, the military-security industrial complex has operated under a permanent state of emergency that, in turn, has given rise to a digital prison that grows more confining and inescapable by the day. Wall-to wall surveillance, monitored by AI software and fed to a growing network of fusion centers, render the twin concepts of privacy and anonymity almost void. By conspiring with corporations, the Department of Homeland Security “fueled a massive influx of money into surveillance and policing in our cities, under a banner of emergency response and counterterrorism.” For instance, all across the country, police are installing Flock Safety license plate readers as part of a public-private partnership program between police and the surveillance industry. These cameras, which upload data in real time to fusion crime centers, signal a turning point in the transition from a police state to a police-driven surveillance state.

  • Don’t trust the government with your property. In yet another effort to legitimize warrantless searches, police are employing “hit-and-hold” tactics in which police enter a home, carry out an initial sweep of the property, handcuff the occupants, then wait for official search warrants to be secured and applied retroactively. In the meantime, police have managed to bypass the Fourth Amendment. The rationale, to prevent possible destruction of evidence, is the same one used to deadly effect with no-knock raids. If government agents can invade your home, break down your doors, kill your dog, damage your furnishings and terrorize your family, your property is no longer private and secure—it belongs to the government. Hard-working Americans are having their bank accounts, homes, cars electronics and cash seized by police under the assumption that they have allegedly been associated with some criminal scheme.

  • Don’t trust the government with your finances. The U.S. government—and that includes the current administration—is spending money it doesn’t have on programs it can’t afford, and “we the taxpayers” are being forced to foot the bill for the government’s fiscal insanity. The national debt is $31.3 trillion and growing, and we’re paying more than $300 billion in interest every year on that public debt, yet there seems to be no end in sight when it comes to the government’s fiscal insanity. According to Forbes, Congress has raised, extended or revised the definition of the debt limit 78 times since 1960 in order to allow the government to essentially fund its existence with a credit card.

  • Don’t trust the government with your health. For all intents and purposes, “we the people” have become lab rats in the government’s secret experiments, which include MKULTRA and the U.S. military’s secret race-based testing of mustard gas on more than 60,000 enlisted men. Indeed, you don’t have to dig very deep or go very back in the nation’s history to uncover numerous cases in which the government deliberately conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace—citizens and noncitizens alike—making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins. Unfortunately, the public has become so easily distracted by the political spectacle out of Washington, DC, that they are altogether oblivious to the grisly experiments, barbaric behavior and inhumane conditions that have become synonymous with the U.S. government, which has meted out untold horrors against humans and animals alike.

  • Don’t trust the government with your life: At a time when growing numbers of unarmed people have been shot and killed for just standing a certain way, or moving a certain way, or holding something—anything—that police could misinterpret to be a gun, or igniting some trigger-centric fear in a police officer’s mind that has nothing to do with an actual threat to their safety, even the most benign encounters with police can have fatal consequences. The number of Americans killed by police continues to grow, with the majority of those killed as a result of police encounters having been suspected of a non-violent offense or no crime at all, or during a traffic violation. According a report by Mapping Police Violence, police killed more people in 2022 than any other year within the past decade. In 98% of those killings, police were not charged with a crime.

  • Don’t trust the government with your freedoms. For years now, the government has been playing a cat-and-mouse game with the American people, letting us enjoy just enough freedom to think we are free but not enough to actually allow us to live as a free people. Freedom no longer means what it once did. This holds true whether you’re talking about the right to criticize the government in word or deed, the right to be free from government surveillance, the right to not have your person or your property subjected to warrantless searches by government agents, the right to due process, the right to be safe from militarized police invading your home, the right to be innocent until proven guilty and every other right that once reinforced the founders’ belief that this would be “a government of the people, by the people and for the people.” On paper, we may be technically free, but in reality, we are only as free as a government official may allow.

  Whatever else it may be—a danger, a menace, a threat—the U.S. government is certainly not looking out for our best interests, nor is it in any way a friend to freedom.

  Remember the purpose of a good government is to protect the lives and liberties of its people.

  Unfortunately, what we have been saddled with is, in almost every regard, the exact opposite of an institution dedicated to protecting the lives and liberties of its people.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, “we the people” should have learned early on that a government that repeatedly lies, cheats, steals, spies, kills, maims, enslaves, breaks the laws, overreaches its authority, and abuses its power at almost every turn can’t be trusted.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 23:40

• These Are America's Most (And Least) Trusted Professions
  These Are America’s Most (And Least) Trusted Professions

  Some occupations have a better reputation for honesty than others.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, Gallup examines the issue in a reoccurring poll showing that nurses are the most trusted professionals in the United States, followed by doctors and pharmacists.

  

  They have actually topped the ranking for two decades and were regarded as highly honest and ethical by 79 percent of respondents in 2022, down from a coronavirus high of 89 percent in 2020.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Other than the healthcare sector, trusted professionals in the eyes of Americans also come from the fields of teaching, the judiciary and law enforcement, despite long-standing criticism of police behavior that came to a boil in the country in 2020.

  Other professions that more people see positively than negatively are accountant, banker and real estate agent.

  Public opinion flips for labor union leaders, lawyers, journalists and business executives, with skepticism towards these occupations prevailing.

  Journalists were among the professions dropping the most in the ranking since the start of the coronavirus pandemic.

  At the very bottom of the list, members of Congress rub shoulders with those from professions traditionally considered untrustworthy, like car salespeople and telemarketers. 62 percent of respondents said Congresspeople had low standards of honesty and ethics.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 23:20

• Senator Questions CDC On Why It Claimed No 'Unexpected Safety Signals' For COVID Vaccines
  Senator Questions CDC On Why It Claimed No ‘Unexpected Safety Signals’ For COVID Vaccines

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A U.S. senator is questioning a top agency’s public statements over safety signals for the COVID-19 vaccines.

  Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), claimed in 2022 that safety monitoring revealed no “unexpected safety signals” for the vaccines.

  

  But the results to which she was referring showed hundreds of safety signals, or adverse events potentially linked to the shots.

  The Epoch Times obtained the results through a Freedom of Information Act after the CDC refused to release them.

  Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) is now wondering why the CDC expected so many signals after vaccination.

  In a Jan. 10 letter citing The Epoch Times article on the results, Johnson demanded the CDC explain how it determined what is and is not an “unexpected safety signal.”

  “The American people have a right to know the extent to which your agency was aware of and tracked COVID-19 vaccine adverse events. Your lack of transparency is unacceptable. Without immediately providing complete and reliable information about COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, you are obstructing Congressional oversight and leaving the public in the dark,” added Johnson, who was stonewalled when he requested the monitoring results.

  The CDC did not respond to a request for comment.

  False Statements

  The CDC has made multiple false statements on the outcomes found from a type of analysis called Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR). The analysis involves comparing the number of adverse events reported to a system co-managed by the CDC after COVID-19 vaccination to the number of adverse events reported after vaccination with other vaccines.

  The CDC initially said that performing PRRs was outside of its purview, contradicting a government document that stated the agency “will perform” the technique. Dr. John Su, a top CDC official, then claimed it started performing the analysis in February 2021 and continued to do so as of July 18, 2022.

  Both statements turned out to be wrong. After being pressed by Johnson, the CDC later said that it did not start the PRRs until March 25, 2022, and stopped performing them on July 31, 2022.

  Walensky, a Biden appointee, admitted the CDC provided false information in a September 2022 letter to the senator.

  The CDC “recently addressed a previous statement made to The Epoch Times to clarify PRR were not run between February 26, 2021, to September 30, 2021,” she said.

  Johnson noted that the missive did not explain why the CDC offered the false information. Martha Sharan, a CDC spokesperson who herself made a false claim, told The Epoch Times in an email that no CDC workers intentionally provided false information.

  

  Results

  The results of the PRRs, obtained by The Epoch Times and released to the public for the first time in January, shows CDC analysts found hundreds of adverse events met the threshold for a safety signal.

  That included severe conditions such as blood clotting and even death.

  PRRs analyze reports lodged with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which health officials describe as “the nation’s early warning system” for vaccine issues.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 23:00

• Rolls-Royce Sales Hit Record As Rich Splurged On Luxury While Everyone Else Crushed By Inflation
  Rolls-Royce Sales Hit Record As Rich Splurged On Luxury While Everyone Else Crushed By Inflation

  2022 was a terrible year for billionaires, many of which lost nearly $2 trillion combined. Despite stock, crypto, and bond market turmoil, as well as soaring interest rates, elevated inflation, and increased risk of economic uncertainty, the ultra-wealthy were increasingly purchasing luxury vehicles.

  Rolls-Royce Motor Cars published a press release stating it recorded its “highest-ever annual sales” in 2022, delivering 6,021 motor cars, up 8% versus 2021. 

  “This is the first time in the company’s 118-year history that its sales have exceeded 6,000 in a single 12-month period,” the British luxury carmaker said. 

  

  Rolls-Royce’s sales were led by the US, China, and European markets. The automaker said orders stretched well into this year and noted the high demand for its vehicles, many of which fetch $500k, which led to an expansion of the company’s Goodwood plant in the UK. 

  “2022 has been a momentous year for Rolls-Royce Motor Cars,” CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös wrote in a statement. 

  “Our order book stretches far into 2023 for all models,” Müller-Ötvös continued. “We haven’t seen any slowdown in orders.”

  Müller-Ötvös added the brand’s bespoke, customized approach to “ever more imaginative and technically demanding – a challenge we enthusiastically embrace.” 

  And it’s not just Rolls-Royce. Bentley and Lamborghini had record sales last year. 

  Lamborghini delivered 9,233 vehicles in 2022, a 10% increase from the year before. Bentley delivered 15,174 vehicles, a 4% increase over 2021, which was a record year. 

  The growth of luxury vehicle sales reflects high net wealth folks are doing just fine despite a vast amount of wealth vaporization due to central banks tightening monetary policy. As for everyone else, many folks can barely afford their $1,000 car payment, as an auto bust seems almost inevitable. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 22:30

• What's Behind The Global Erosion Of Civil Liberties, Privacy, & Property Rights?
  What’s Behind The Global Erosion Of Civil Liberties, Privacy, & Property Rights?

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  The second essential step is to recognize how the spectacles of “news” and entertainment distract our attention from this erosion of basic rights.

  

  Hierarchical power structures like city-states arose as problem-solving solutions, not just for the elites who benefited from the concentration of wealth and power but for the citizenry. This dynamic underpins the analysis presented in my recent book Global Crisis, National Renewal: when nation-states and global hierarchies no longer solve the key problems of their populaces, they dissolve and are replaced by some new arrangement.

  It’s easy to see how hierarchies benefit the leaders / elites at the top, but there’s always a trade-off to the populace ceding power/control to elites: we will cede control over our lives in exchange for benefits we cannot gain by ourselves, starting with security from invasion and starvation, i.e. the existential threats posed by Nature and other human organizations.

  

  Over time, as energy surpluses and knowledge increased, city-states aggregated into nation-states and empires. These larger organizations were able to solve problems on a larger scale than city-states.

  When these entities could no longer solve existential problems (surpluses diminished, elites failed to provide successful leadership, etc.), they eroded and then collapsed, and were replaced with some other more successful organizational arrangement.

  Over time, the citizenry of some regions began expanding the benefits nation-states and their elites were expected to provide in exchange for power: the state was expected to secure the rights to individuals’ property and various civil liberties relating to the free exchange of ideas and knowledge, freedom of worship, and having a say in national decisions.

  Globally, these basic human rights are being eroded by state-elite over-reach and consolidation of power beyond what the citizenry agreed upon. For example, the citizenry ceded power to the state to protect individuals’ privacy from the surveillance and information-gathering of both the state and private interests.

  As Richard Bonugli and I discuss in our podcast on Eroding Civil Liberties and Property Rights, these privacy statutes are still on the books but they are routinely disregarded by both state agencies and private-sector interests with little functional enforcement by state agencies tasked with protecting the citizens’ rights to privacy.

  Big Tech routinely harvests private data for profit with little oversight, state agencies collect private data beyond their mandated scope and mobile phones gather private information which others manage to collect or access.

  Property rights are also being eroded. Civil forfeiture enables local and national governments to expropriate individuals’ private property without due process, in effect declaring them guilty and effecting punishment (taking their money/property) and then forcing them to prove their innocence via a lengthy, costly, Kafkaesque process.

  War by other means now includes sanctions and expropriation of individuals’ assets, not just the assets of other states or state entities (central banks, state-owned corporations, etc.)

  What is driving this global erosion of the most basic civil liberties and property rights? As I describe in my book Resistance, Revolution, Liberation, all states share the same ontology, which is to respond to any threats or challenges by increasing their reach and control.

  In other words, all states share the same teleological Prime Directive: always expand the state’s control and power. No state has the institutional memory or means to reduce the state’s reach, control or power.

  

  The only limit on state expansion is the citizenry’s resistance to the loss of civil liberties, property rights and having a say in decisions which affect the entire citizenry. If the citizenry do nothing to protect their rights as individuals and communities, the state will nibble away at these until they exist only in name, not in the real world.

  The first essential step is to recognize the erosion as real and consequential. Richard and I do our best to further this in our podcast Charles Hugh Smith on Eroding Civil Liberties and Property Rights (31:35 min).

  The second essential step is to recognize how the spectacles of “news” and entertainment distract our attention from this erosion of basic rights. Before we know it, we’re in prisons without bars and grateful to get a questionnaire about how we like the torture (i.e. the “entertainment”).

  *  *  *

  My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century.  Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

  Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 22:20

• National Security Experts Criticize Media, Scientists Who Dismissed COVID-19 Lab Leak Theory In Open Letter
  National Security Experts Criticize Media, Scientists Who Dismissed COVID-19 Lab Leak Theory In Open Letter

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A group of 43 national security experts published an open letter on Jan. 11 criticizing news organizations and scientific publications that dismissed the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic might have been the result of a lab leak.

  

  The letter is addressed “To the editors, authors, and contributors to major scientific, medical, and journalistic publications worldwide.” The addressees include The Lancet, Nature Medicine, The New York Times, and TIME magazine.

  The letter was coordinated by the Vandenberg Coalition, and included signatures from House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), former U.S. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien, Former U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger, and analysts from the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and other security and foreign policy analysts.

  “Leading scientific journals censored dissenting voices; many science writers at major news outlets promoted narratives or asserted conclusions unsubstantiated by evidence; reporters failed to make even cursory attempts at surfacing potential conflicts of interest of their sources,” the letter states.

  “This served to hamper national and international policy discussions about how to mitigate against future pandemics of any origin—natural, accidental, or deliberate.”

  The letter faults editors and reporters at news organizations and scientific publications for stifling debate on the origins of the virus.

  The letter references a Fox News article about a May 2021 tweet by a New York Times reporter who said, “Someday we will stop talking about the lab leak theory and maybe even admit its racist roots. But alas, that day is not yet here.”

  The New York Times reporter deleted the tweet the same day she wrote it.

  “Our security and prosperity depend on rigorous scientific debate, research, and scholarship, as well as an intrepid and independent news media,” the letter continues.

  “The responsibility of scientists and journalists alike is to ask hard questions and seek truth. By prematurely dismissing or stigmatizing certain questions—from the very outset of the pandemic—many prominent scientists and journalists failed in their duty.”

  The letter went on to list “notable failures” by the various news and scientific publications. A February 2020 statement by The Lancet “asserted without evidence that questioning the supposed natural origin of COVID-19 constituted ‘misinformation’ and a ‘conspiracy theory,” the letter states.

  Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, was listed as a co-author the February 2020 statement by The Lancet. EcoHealth Alliance worked directly with China’s Wuhan laboratories to research coronaviruses. The Lancet subsequently acknowledged questions if Daszak had a “competing interest” when he co-authored the 2020 statement.

  The letter authors also noted that a report by Nature Medicine, which “became one of the most-cited academic journal articles in history” had “effectively stigmatized anyone who questioned whether the outbreak may have originated in a laboratory.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 21:40

• DeSantis Eyes Ban On China-Based Entities From Purchasing Florida Property
  DeSantis Eyes Ban On China-Based Entities From Purchasing Florida Property

  Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is mulling a move to ban Chinese entities from purchasing property in the state due to the economic and security risks posed by  China’s communist regime.

  “If you look at the Chinese Communist Party, they’ve been very active throughout the Western Hemisphere in gobbling up land and investing in different things,” DeSantis said during a press conference on Jan. 10.

  “And, you know, when they have interests that are opposed to ours, and you’ve seen how they’ve wielded their authority… it is not in the best interests of Florida to have the Chinese Communist Party owning farmland, owning land close to military bases.”

  

  The remarks follow warnings from security experts and lawmakers that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which rules China as a single-party state, is seeking to purchase strategic parcels of land throughout the United States from which it can conduct espionage or otherwise sabotage U.S. national security interests.

  In recent years, Chinese land buys in Texas and North Dakota, which were both situated near U.S. military bases, have raised alarm among both locals and policymakers in state and federal governments.

  DeSantis said that the CCP had “taken a much more Marxist-Leninist turn” under current Party leader Xi Jinping and suggested that communist China was now a “hostile nation.”

  “We do not need to have CCP influence in Florida’s economy,” DeSantis said.

  

  China Spending Billions on US Land Every Year

  Chinese investors purchased more than $6 billion in U.S. real estate between March 2021 and March 2022, according to the National Association of Realtors, making it the largest foreign buyer in terms of dollars spent.

  Florida has been at the center of that purchasing craze, with 24 percent of all foreign property purchases in the nation happening there. The next state with the highest amount of foreign purchases was California, which accounted for 11 percent.

  DeSantis described the CCP’s influence in American society as “very insidious” and, to that end, said that he was not only concerned with the CCP seeking out farmland, but also wanted to terminate its access to residential properties.

  “Why would you want them buying residential developments and things like that?” DeSantis said. “I don’t want them owning subdivisions and things like that.”

  Though outrage over the issue has been widespread in recent months, there have been relatively few concrete actions taken to curb the flow of U.S. land to CCP-aligned organizations.

  Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) introduced legislation in November that would “prohibit the purchase of public or private agricultural land in the United States by foreign nationals associated with the Government of the People’s Republic of China.”

  Likewise, Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) introduced legislation to improve national security by “preventing foreign adversaries from taking any ownership or control of the United States agriculture industry.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 21:00

• 'Decision To Arm Ourselves Or Arm Ukraine': Navy Secretary Admits Crisis In US Defense Stockpiles
  ‘Decision To Arm Ourselves Or Arm Ukraine’: Navy Secretary Admits Crisis In US Defense Stockpiles

  The leader of the US Navy has admitted that the question of dwindling US arms stockpiles in the rush to arm Ukraine, which now stands at over $100 billion in defense aid and counting, is dire enough that some tough unprecedented decisions are coming, which shocked a group of reporters this week.

  Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro acknowledged before a naval warfare conference in Arlington, Virginia on Wednesday that the US within the next six months could face a decision of whether to arm itself or Ukraine, due to rapidly depleting stockpiles due to supplying Ukraine

  

  The comments were first revealed by Defense One editor Marcus Weisberger on Twitter, and subsequently reported in the publication, and in Newsweek and others. Earlier in the conference the US Navy’s Adm. Daryl Caudle put things in stark terms by saying the decision will eventually come down to ‘arm ourselves or arm Ukraine’. 

  Weisberger wrote of the comments: “An admiral alluded to the US needing to choose between itself and Ukraine during a panel at the conference.”

  Below are the rare, very revealing words of the exchange heard by reporters: 

  The secretary was asked to respond to comments made at the conference by Adm. Daryl Caudle, commander of U.S. Fleet Forces Command. Caudle, the reporter said, worried that “the Navy might get to the point where it has to make the decision whether it needs to arm itself or arm Ukraine, and has the Navy gotten to that point yet?”

  Del Toro replied, “With regards to deliveries of weapons systems for the fight in Ukraine…Yeah, that’s always a concern for us. And we monitor that very, very closely. I wouldn’t say we’re quite there yet, but if the conflict does go on for another six months, for another year, it certainly continues to stress the supply chain in ways that are challenging.”

  While most weapons going to Ukraine are from Army stockpiles, it remains that the US recently pledged Sea Sparrow missiles to Ukraine. Additionally US-made Harpoons have long been transferred to Kiev via Denmark. 

  Navy Secretary Del Toro went on to explain that Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks has been working “very closely with [the defense] industry, to motivate them to find out what their challenges or obstacles are to be able to increase their own production rates,” as quoted in the Defense One report.

  US defense officials are wringing their hand over the RAPID DEPLETION of US ammo stockpiles. Yes, the US has drained its munitions stockpiles to fight its proxy war with Russia. Now, it’ll have to cough up EVEN MORE $ to restock its own US arsenal. MADNESS.https://t.co/s53bVlpTgH

  — Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) January 5, 2023

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

  “It’s obvious that you know, these companies have a substantial pipeline for the future,” Del Toro added. “They now need to invest in their workforce, as well as the capital investments that they have to make within their own companies to get their production rates up.”

  Department of Defense stockpiles have been a concern in relation to steadily ramped up arms supplies to Ukraine from within the opening months of the Russian invasion. Additionally other NATO allies are facing this same problem and worry, especially ‘neutral’ Germany which due to the war dramatically shifted its historic stance on not sending weapons into foreign conflict zones. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock admitted as early as the summer that “Unfortunately, the situation here is such that we have an absolute deficit in our own stocks.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 20:45

• Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Executive Order Banning CRT In Arkansas
  Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Executive Order Banning CRT In Arkansas

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed an executive order banning indoctrination and critical race theory (CRT) in the state after being sworn in as governor.

  

  Schools must “educate, not indoctrinate” students and that the state’s education policies need to “protect children and prepare them to enter the workforce,” according to the executive order, obtained by the Daily Caller.

  CRT controversially teaches that America is fundamentally racist, promotes skin color as a person’s primary characteristic, and assigns moral fault to individuals—usually white people—solely based on their skin color.

  CRT has been a controversial ideology meeting resistance from parents and communities across America, who argue that it teaches a distorted definition of what racism has traditionally meant.

  Sanders’ executive order, signed Jan. 10, declares CRT “antithetical to the traditional American values of neutrality, equality, and fairness.”

  “It is the policy of this administration that CRT, discrimination, and indoctrination have no place in Arkansas classrooms,” the executive order reads.

  ‘Prohibited Indoctrination’

  The executive order directs Arkansas’ education secretary to ensure that “prohibited indoctrination” is not communicated to students by any public school employee, public school representative, or guest speaker.

  CRT is considered prohibited indoctrination because it encourages students to adopt, affirm, and profess ideas that white people are inherently racist, in violation of the Civil Rights Act.

  “This prohibited indoctrination would include anything that teaches that people of one color, creed, race, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, familial status, disability, religion, national origin, or any other characteristic protected by federal or state law are inherently superior or inferior to people of another color, creed, race, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, familial status, disability, religion, national origin, or any other characteristic protected by federal or state law,” the order states.

  The order bans any requirement for school employees or students to attend any training sessions or orientations that on prohibited indoctrination or CRT.

  Curriculum Transparency

  In signing the executive order as one of her first acts as governor, Sanders has taken the stance that government education policies must empower parental rights and foster curriculum transparency across the state.

  The order directs the secretary of the state’s education department to review the rules, policies, materials, and communications of the department to ensure they comply with Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

  “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” Title VI of the Civil Rights Act states.

  Arkansas’ state constitution and the U.S. Constitution provide equal protection under the law, regardless of color, creed, race, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, familial status, disability, religion, and national origin.

  Sanders’ executive order directs the state’s secretary of education to probe the department for any “items” that promote ideologies such as CRT that purposely encourage students to discriminate based on race and other protected attributes.

  Any “items” that are found to indoctrinate students with ideologies like CRT, such as rules, regulations, policies, materials, or communications, must be changed or annulled, according to the order.

  Sanders Signals ‘Turning Point’

  Sanders took the oath of office in the lower chamber of the state Legislature ahead of a joint session and was formally inaugurated on the state Capitol steps on Tuesday afternoon.

  Speaking for roughly 15 minutes at her inauguration, Sanders said her ascension to the office marks a “turning point in the history of Arkansas” that would usher in a new era of “good jobs, great schools, safer streets, and stronger families.”

  “The people of Arkansas, in their vast wisdom, have entrusted a new generation to lead. This is our moment. This is our opportunity,” she said.

  Sanders, whose father Mike Huckabee was Arkansas governor from 1996 to 2007, is the first woman to hold the governor’s office in Arkansas. Her election marks the first time a father and daughter have been elected to the role.

  During her campaign, Sanders, who served for nearly two years as White House press secretary under former President Donald Trump, focused mainly on national issues. She regularly promised to use the office to fight the policies of President Joe Biden and the “radical left.”

  She succeeded incumbent Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, who left office as he cannot seek re-election to a third term because he is term-limited. Hutchinson endorsed Sanders’s bid, along with Trump.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 20:20

• America Runs On… Bottled Water
  America Runs On… Bottled Water

  The most popular drink in America is sold at a 4000 percent markup and is responsible for tens of millions of discarded containers each day: bottled water.

  

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, despite U.S. tap water – with some notable exceptions – being safe to drink, around one third of Americans don’t consume it at all, while another third is most likely to drink their tap water filtered.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Plastic bottles and plastic bottle caps are among the most common items to pollute oceans. Yet, the U.S. has introduced few regulations to reign it their use.

  The Statista Global Consumer Survey shows that 63 percent of Americans consume bottled water regularly, placing the drink ahead of coffee, which only 57 percent said they drank somewhat frequently.

  Almost as many people – 56 percent – said they regularly grabbed a soft drink.

  Alcoholic drinks – among those 21 years and older – proved less popular. Beer still beat wine at 25 percent vs. 24 percent popularity.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 20:00

• "This Is Election Interference": House Oversight Veteran On Biden Classified Documents
  “This Is Election Interference”: House Oversight Veteran On Biden Classified Documents

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A House Oversight Committee veteran said the delay in publicizing President Joe Biden’s retention of classified documents from his time as vice president amounts to election interference.

  “The documents were allegedly discovered on Nov. 2. The midterms are on Nov. 8. To me, this is election interference by omission,” Mike Howell said in a Jan. 11 interview with The Epoch Times.

  “Does anyone think if this had been President Trump or any other Republican, the news wouldn’t have been leaked immediately for political gain? We needn’t wonder—just look at all the affirmative updates, releases, and leaks in the Trump case,” he said in a Jan. 10 statement.

  

  Howell was an attorney for the Department of Homeland Security under President Donald Trump. He previously worked as a lawyer on the House Oversight Committee as well as the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

  

  He now leads the Oversight Project at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

  Heritage Oversight is, in Howell’s words, “suing the Biden administration aggressively” over Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

  “We’re gathering as much as we can and hoping that Congress makes use of it,” he said, noting that FOIA lawsuits are just one of the organization’s tactics.

  Notably, Heritage Oversight obtained an email to Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas that shows that he knew Haitian migrants weren’t whipped by Border Patrol agents at Del Rio, Texas, by Sept. 24, 2021.

  Yet during a press conference that same day, Mayorkas offered no clarification on the whipping allegations, instead saying that the images “painfully conjured up the worst elements of our nation’s ongoing battle against systemic racism.”

  FOIA Requests Filed

  “He [Mayorkas] chose to ignore the information to preserve the far-left narrative on this whole incident,” Howell said in a 2022 Heritage Foundation interview.

  Heritage Oversight filed FOIA requests with the Department of Justice and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) regarding the classified materials found at the Penn Biden Center.

  “Why was this information not made public prior [to] the election? It likely would have had substantial electoral salience,” Howell wrote in his FOIA request to the Department of Justice.

  Democrats have frequently accused Republicans of election interference, citing everything from voter I.D. laws to state-level election integrity legislation.

  Now, Republicans are zeroing in on the apparently coordinated suppression of stories prior to national elections in an election interference narrative of their own.

  The Penn Biden Center incident, which could have broken before the 2022 midterm election, comes just two years after the Hunter Biden laptop story was shut down in the run-up to the 2020 election.

  “People need to be aware that our elections, when things like this happen, are not free and fair,” Howell said.

  Comes Alongside House Oversight Requests

  Heritage Oversight’s FOIA requests come as the House Oversight Committee, now under Republican control, launches its own investigation into the Biden documents.

  In a Jan. 10 letter to White House counsel Stuart Delery, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) wrote that the committee he now leads is “concerned that President Biden has compromised sources and methods with his own mishandling of classified documents.”

  “The committee expects President Biden will receive equal treatment under the law given that he maintained classified documents in his unsecured office for several years with access to an unknown number of people,” the letter reads.

  

  Howell thinks Heritage Oversight’s FOIA requests will complement the House Oversight Committee’s accommodation process.

  “The accommodation process” refers to constitutionally sound negotiations between different branches of government, particularly when the legislative branch seeks information from the executive branch.

  The House Judiciary Committee has described the accommodation process as “the bedrock of congressional investigative activity.”

  “Now, the Biden administration is forced to deal with document requests from two different angles in two different legal proceedings,” Howell said.

  He foresees a long, tough fight to get answers.

  “This is going to be the most obstructive administration in history,” Howell said.

  He expects obstructionism from NARA, recently in the headlines over its referral to the Justice Department regarding documents at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago—the basis for a subsequent search warrant served by the FBI.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 19:40

• Delayed Flights – The New Post-Pandemic Normal?
  Delayed Flights – The New Post-Pandemic Normal?

  The outage of a Federal Aviation Administration system grounding thousands of U.S. flights Wednesday is just the latest in a string of events that have led to delays and cancellations in air travel lately.

  

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, looking at the share of major North American airline flights arriving late at their destination over the past years, a post-pandemic dip in punctuality becomes visible. 

  Reports by Cirium show that while some airlines have kept it together more, others’ on-time performance has virtually imploded.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Among the latter is Southwest Airlines, the biggest carrier with a majorly decreased punctuality score. While in 2019, only 18.6 percent of the airline’s flights were delayed, 2021 and 2022 saw the airline be late around 26-29 percent of the time. Interestingly, the complete meltdown of Southwest’s computer systems at the end of December – leading to droves of stranded customers and fliers separated from their luggage – did not create a worse score in 2022 than in 2021.

  Other airlines where tardiness skyrocketed were low(er)-cost carriers JetBlue, Frontier and Allegiant Air, the latter hitting 35.4 percent delayed flights in 2021 and 34.1 percent in 2022.

  Among the largest U.S. airlines, delays increased, but on a lower level. Delta Air Lines continued to be the most punctual carrier throughout the survey period, even though delays were somewhat up in 2022. Alaska Airlines and American Airlines also saw the share of delayed flights rise slightly, while United Airlines – only the seventh most punctual carrier in 2019 – improved its performance, landing in rank 2 of the most on-time airlines in 2022.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 19:20

• China's $7 Trillion "Hidden Debt" Is Back In Focus
  China’s $7 Trillion “Hidden Debt” Is Back In Focus

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

  While optimism toward China has been growing amid the economic reopening, the recent loan restructuring of a local government financing vehicle shined a light on this $7 trillion in “hidden” debt. While this group of borrowers has never defaulted, markets are starting to get worried, shunning some weaker borrowers.

  With Beijing pivoting on key policies, a cyclical recovery appears to be underway. But structural issues – such as the heavy debt load of local governments — haven’t gone away. On Dec. 30, Zunyi Road & Bridge Construction Group from Guizhou province, one of the poorest regions, extended its bank loans for two decades. It pledged to honor payments on its bonds.

  The restructuring caused a splash among market participants. Local government financing vehicles, or LGFVs, are mostly tasked with building infrastructure projects. They allow local authorities to raise money without having the debt appear on the government’s balance sheet. This “hidden” debts and contingent liabilities have risen to 47 trillion yuan ($7 trillion and 39% of GDP) in September, up from 20 trillion yuan at the end of 2016, according to Adam Wolfe, an economist at Absolute Strategy Research.

  

  So far, these risky state borrowers – with the perception of an implicit guarantee from local governments — have avoided default in public bond markets. But slumping land sales and massive Covid-induced expenditures weaken local governments’ finances and raise questions about their ability to pay, as shown by Zhunyi’s restructuring.

  Investors have already showed some concerns about the sector, shunning weaker LGFV and muni bonds. Exhibit 2: Guizhou has been squeezed out of muni market, with its share of issuances falling.

  

  Exhibit 3: The spread differential between AA-rated and AAA-rated five-year LGFV bonds has widened to the highest since 2018.

  

  The spread widening, in part, reflects offloading by wealth-management products to meet redemptions，but also signals “the tail risk concerns on weaker LGFVs,” according to Goldman Sachs analysts Kenneth Ho and Chakki Ting. The Zunyi restructuring “reinforces our view that an element of caution is warranted for China LGFVs, as we believe further credit differentiation is likely amongst LGFVs, exacerbated by uneven fiscal stress in local governments,” they wrote.

  LGFV bonds — known as “chengtou zhai” or “city investment debt” – are enormous, accounting for about a third of total issuance. The stress there could easily spread to the rest of the credit market.

  Moreover, their inability to borrow may reduce local governments’ spending. Losses at LGFVs could also increase non-performing loans at banks that lend to them.

  Few expect a full-blown crisis. As Bloomberg economist David Qu noted, many LGFVs have diversified away from real estate and government-related businesses, and the ones that still rely on local governments financially would probably get official aid in some form in a crunch.

  Still, this hidden debt remains what’s known as a “grey rhino” — a high-risk threat that is often ignored until it’s too late. In the words of Wolfe, Guizhou’s debt restructuring is just “a tip of the iceberg.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 19:00

• White House Argues That Sudden Disappearance Of Migrants During Biden Border Visit Coincidental
  White House Argues That Sudden Disappearance Of Migrants During Biden Border Visit Coincidental

  As we noted during Joe Biden’s recent lighting speed tour of southern border, El Paso was an epicenter of the illegal immigration crisis up until just two weeks ago, when suddenly and magically there was a mass exodus or removal of thousands of migrants from the streets of the city. 

  El Paso went from over 2500 migrants crossing the border per day to essentially zero after a quiet cleanup effort, increased border patrol and national guard as well as the building of a makeshift border wall using cargo containers and barbed wire.  

  When confronted with the fact that this purging of migrants from El Paso was rather opportune for Joe Biden, allowing him to tour the border and facilities without having to deal with the presence of hordes of illegal immigrants, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre clumsily insinuated that the lack of migrants in the city at the time was purely “coincidental.”

  Simultaneously, Pierre asserts that there was a cleanup and that this is a good thing. Of course, the removal of migrants from El Paso was not undertaken until the past two weeks because of optics.  It was done to ensure that no images of Joe Biden surrounded by illegal immigrants laying in garbage strewn streets see the light of day.  In other words, the cleanup was enacted to hide the extent of the migrant crisis, not fix it.

  Not only that, but it proves that the White House does have the means to stop the invasion at the border using the same measures they used in El Paso, they just don’t want to.

  The Biden Administration has ignored the increasingly dire state of affairs on the border ever since he took office.  His amnesty policies and attempts to shut down Title 42 have led to larger caravans of illegals each month.  With the recent tactics to obscure the situation in El Paso it would appear that Biden has no intention if changing his open border plans anytime soon.   

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 18:40

• American Ponzi
  American Ponzi

  Authored by Hardscrabble Farmer via The Burning Platform blog,

  The first question that came to mind as the closing credits rolled on the Netflix documentary Madoff The Monster of Wall Street was why?

  Why would they make a movie like this that connects as many dots?

  The film lays out so many of the obvious truths of how America and the economic systems we have come to depend upon are nothing more than a colossal fiction, a fraud operating at every level and throughout every aspect of our Government, and the institutions we have come to think of as our culture.

  And then it hit me.

  The purpose of this revelation is to serve as cover for the even larger Ponzi scheme that is SBF about to unravel, and eventually, if I suspect correctly, the death blow that will be discovered when BlackRock is finally shown to be the exact same kind of Ponzi scheme as all the others. When the final downturn in our economic collapse goes into full Krakatoa and wipes out every last vestige of economic stability in the Western World.

  The central underlying explanation for what transpired is based upon the rickety tripod of incompetence, misplaced altruism, and bad luck. Had it not been for the crisis of 2008, Madoff’s scheme would have continued to be as successful as it was up to 2007. Had it not been Madoff’s central concern to please people, he never would have made the kinds of promises he did. Had it not been for a couple of low level SEC examiners who weren’t properly trained, it would have been caught sooner. None of these explanations pass the sniff test of course.

  From the beginning the SEC with their bloated multi-billion dollar annual budget do little if any work on anything other than drawing paychecks and providing cover for large scale institutional level white collar criminals to operate without fear of accountability. Without the greed of the people helping to run the operation anyone with two eyeballs and a heart beat would have been able to discern what was going on inside the offices of Madoff’s criminal empire in a week or less.

  Had it not been for the gullibility and rank stupidity of the American people the common denominator between all of these parties, save for a few, low-level associates, would be readily discernible. The producers do not want anyone to notice these obvious signs of just how the global banking and economic systems really operate because if they were made clear there’d be a revolution tomorrow.

  Our entire system is a Ponzi scheme. Everyone is in on it. The government is a Potemkin village, populated by a criminal syndicate that is raping the American people and stealing every last thing of value right before our eyes, with impunity. On occasion when it becomes so obvious that nothing can conceal the crimes, they’ll toss one of their associates overboard to placate the roiling masses before quickly moving their shop to another 17th floor.

  This documentary is an absolute must see for anyone with even the slightest interest in how things are going to, in the not too distant future, play out in the last days of the dying Empire that was once America. The only requirement is to watch it unfold without listening to the rhetorical assurances of the ones trying to pull this polished wool over your eyes, but as you would a true con man with his hand on your wallet. In the final analysis the greatest con of all is in how this story is told by Netflix rather than the shoddily constructed grift that was Madoff Investments.

  *  *  *

  From Jim Quinn: It is my sincere desire to provide readers of The Burning Platform with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can’t do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 18:20

• Is It Payback Time For Democratic Zealots?
  Is It Payback Time For Democratic Zealots?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  The Left has gone mad over former President Donald J. Trump — past, present, and future.

  The current Democratic Party and NeverTrump “conservatives” assumed that Trump was and remains so obviously toxic that they do not have to define exactly what his evil entails.

  Accordingly, they believe that any means necessary are justified to stop him.

  And furthermore, these zealots, when out of power, insist such extraordinary measures should not be emulated and institutionalized by their opponents, much less ever boomeranged back upon their creators.

  In this context, the Republicans retaking control of the House of Representatives once again raises the question of whether they should reply in kind.

  

  Given the current investigation following the Mar-a-Lago raid, should there also be a mirror-image special prosecutor to examine President Joe Biden’s lost stash of classified documents in his insecure office following his vice presidency?

  Can House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., ever be considered too inflammatory, given that his predecessor, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tore up the president’s State of the Union address on national television?

  How many Democratic House members should be denied committee assignments to remind the Congress that Pelosi’s rejection of Republican nominees was a terrible precedent?

  How many congressional subpoenas with threats of criminal prosecution and performance-art arrests should be issued to Democratic politicos to stop the criminalization of political differences?

  In our current age, will all former president’s private homes, closets, and drawers now be subject to FBI raids to ensure that “classified” documents were not wrongly stored there?

  Are Biden’s current homes also a logical target, given his sloppy handling of classified foreign policy papers — eerily reminiscent of an abandoned laptop belonging to son Hunter Biden and daughter Ashley Biden’s lost diary?

  Was it ever a good idea to impeach a first-term president the moment he lost his party’s majority in the House — but without any hope of a conviction in the Senate? Would such a similar impeachment send a warning to Biden to honor his oath of office and start enforcing U.S. immigration law?

  Does a phone call now an impeachment make, on the grounds that Trump mixed domestic politics with foreign policy?

  But was Trump’s Ukrainian call that much different from former President Barack Obama’s 2012 quid pro quo in Seoul, South Korea, where he asked the Russian president to convey a deal to Vladmir Putin: Stay calm and give Obama space during his reelection bid while Obama in turn would be flexible on missile defense.

  Putin did just that and put off invading Ukraine until Obama was reelected. And Obama made sure there was no joint missile defense projects in Eastern Europe. Was that deal in America’s interest, or Obama’s own and thus similarly impeachable?

  Or consider Biden mixing foreign policy and politics on the eve of the midterm elections. For example, he kept draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to dangerously low levels while begging hostile foreign dictators to pump more oil.

  Thereby Biden sought to win votes from angry commuters buffeted by high fuel prices. And he also appeased the Left by not ordering more drilling for gas and oil. Was that gambit in the nation’s — or Biden’s — best interest?

  What is wrong with the House investigating whether the FBI infiltrated and contracted social media companies to warp news coverage and suppress free expression of American citizens?

  The Left certainly thought it was necessary in 1975 for the Church Committee to investigate the CIA. That committee found the agency was contracting new organizations to front for its covert operations, while partnering with telecommunications corporations to monitor the data of citizens on CIA watch lists. Sound familiar to today’s FBI?

  Was it a good idea for the Democratic House to release Trump’s tax returns?

  If the Republican House were to do the same with the Biden consortium’s tax records, would the result be far more incriminating?

  There was much talk once in Congress of evoking the 25th Amendment to remove a supposedly mentally impaired Trump. A Yale psychiatrist was even paraded before Congress to attest the president was dangerously unbalanced. Calls for aptitude testing resulted in Trump acing the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

  Should the House now follow the Democrats’ precedent? Should medical professionals review all of Biden’s incoherent utterances, his fantasy biographic tales, and his often physical fragility and determine whether he is non compos mentis? Is that a precedent we wish to follow?

  When a defeated first-term president leaves office and vows to return in four years, is it wise to impeach and try him as a private citizen?

  Did not the House impeach Trump in part because he warned the Ukrainians that Biden, a possible opponent in 2020, was likely corrupt?

  Do the endless Democratic efforts to go after Trump, a possible Biden opponent in 2024, constitute far more than a Trump single phone call to the president of Ukraine?

  Somehow supposedly worldly and sophisticated partisans in their self-righteousness ignored ancient laws of what goes around comes around, of Karma, of Nemesis, of payback’s a bit—h, and all that stuff.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 17:40

• PC Bust Cycle Will Last Until 2024
  PC Bust Cycle Will Last Until 2024

  The PC bust cycle will extend well into 2023 and might not see a turnaround until 2024. The pandemic-era demand has mostly evaporated as consumers and companies delay purchases. 

  The hangover for the PC market has been well underway for the last two quarters. A note from Gartner Inc. shows worldwide shipments of PCs fell 29% in the fourth quarter from a year ago. Another report from International Data Corp. confirmed the pandemic-era computer boom is over for now. 

  

  Mikako Kitagawa, the director analyst at Gartner, said the first cracks of the PC bust cycle materialized in the third quarter of last year when corporate buyers began to pull back on purchases. 

  “Enterprise buyers are extending PC life cycles and delaying purchases, meaning the business market will likely not return to growth until 2024,” Kitagawa said, who was quoted by WSJ. 

  Gartner’s report showed that PC makers shipped 65.3 to 67.3 million PCs in the fourth quarter. For the full year, shipments totaled about 286.2 million units, a 16% increase versus the year before. 

  IDC said Dell Technologies recorded the most significant decline in PC shipments for the year. Other PC brands that recorded shipment declines were Lenovo, HP, Apple, and Asus. 

  Despite all the gloom, Lenovo, a Chinese tech company, had the largest market share of all PC sales in the quarter at around 23%. 

  Entirely separate but worth noting is the computer-equipment maker Logitech that saw shares crash as much as 19% today, the most since April 2011. The company slashed guidance due to a slowdown in the PC space. 

  Recall that we have outlined how graphics cards, memory chips, and monitor prices have plunged in the last two quarters. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 17:20

• Roads Are Racist
  Roads Are Racist

  Authored by Eric Peters via EricPetersAutos.com,

  Everything is racist – even roads.

  

  It is why roads must be dug up and converted to foot/bicycle paths, which are more “equitable”-  since you do not need to own a car to be able to use those.

  Of course, without a car, you can only walk – or pedal – so far. You are kept in your place, as it were. But that’s not racist – because it keeps everyone in their place. Well, everyone except the you-know-who’s. Who come in all colors but are all the same in that they want everyone else  . . . kept in their place.

  Irony of ironies, they intend to use our taken-for-granted but slipping-away freedom of movement – by car – as the vehicle to put us back in our place, as they see it.

  By framing the car – and roads – as “racist.”

  

  The car, which freed everyone who owns one from being stuck where they are. Expanded their options – for work, employment, education and recreation. That made it – per James Brown – easy to get anywhere.

  For anyone.

  But not so, according to the Roads Are Racist narrative, which argues that the Interstate Highway System in particular was not meant to make it “easy to get anywhere” – but rather to make it easy for whites to get away from blacks. And – in the process – leave blacks “behind” in the bypassed ghettoes of the inner cities. This is like blaming the “unvaccinated” – that is, the un-drugged – for the serial sickness of the “vaccinated” (the people who took the drugs that neither prevent the getting nor the spreading of sickness).

  The downtown areas of big cities such as Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore have become blighted wastelands, it’s true. Full of boarded-up homes interspersed with liquor stores here and there – and derelicts everywhere. But this did not happen because the roads were built. It happened because the cities became shitholes. Many were burnt down by peaceful protestors back in the late ’60s – and were never rebuilt. People who wanted to live as far away as possible from the shit – literally, as in dumps on the sidewalk – and peaceful protests, too – left.

  Which they could, because there were roads for them to leave on.

  No one was kept from leaving.

  

  But it is evidence of “racism” that those who chose to stay did just that. As opposed to evidence of lack of initiative. Just saying that latter being extremely “racist” – because it isn’t racist to imply that black people lack initiative. Are not capable of apprehending that the neighborhood is turning to shit and leaving it.

  Which of course many did. Barack Obama, for instance.

  Never mind that. Black folks are too indolent to use the roads to escape to a better place, far away from the shit, the peaceful protestors and the high cost of living in cities controlled by Leftists who make it shitty and expensive to live in cities. Whose policies cause the population that remains to bifurcate into two classes – the very rich and the very poor.

  Who come in all colors.

  The tent cities one sees in cities such as LA and San Francisco are in fact very diverse. Except in one way. It is that everyone living in those tents is poor.

  

  Leftists see this and offer their analysis – and solution. Things must be made more equitable – by keeping everyone in his place. By making everyone equally poor.

  Themselves excepted, of course.

  Get rid of the roads. Get rid of cars, too. Make it harder for anyone to get anywhere, excepting the very affluent – who will as always be able to get anywhere they like. Viz, the Davos Crowd, private-jetting to their private conferences where the “racism” of freedom of movement is bruited about.

  

  Roads “increase access to resources like jobs, healthcare and education,” says one of these – a Young Leader-in-the-making by the name of Raaj Kumar.

  All of which is true and also the point. Why build – why travel upon – roads that don’t take you somewhere better than where you happen to be right now? But then he says “racist road planning and the proliferation of cars in white households, mega-highways  . . . directly contributed to the city’s serious segregation problem.”

  Italics added.

  He refers to Atlanta, a city notorious for its traffic. Which he synonymizes with “segregation.”

  This being akin to defining a drug that does not prevent the getting or spreading of sickness as a “vaccine.”

  No person – of any color – is being thwarted by law from going anywhere they please. Which they are able to do, courtesy of all those roads – which everyone is free to use. The fact that some choose not to use them is just that, a choice. The Leftist says it is a false choice, because some lack the means to make use of roads. But this isn’t a color barrier – the defining attribute of segregation. As in, no – you cannot go there. You must remain here.

  That is segregation.

  Anyone can buy a car. Assuming it’s not an electric car. (Is this pushing of electric cars on people who cannot afford them also “racist”?)

  And roads? They opened up America – all of it – to everyone.

  

  Digging them up and replacing them with foot and bike paths will close off most of America to almost everyone. This is the “15 minute city” vision of the Davos-set, who deploy useful idiots such as Raaj Kumar to foment resentment by crying “racism” at literally everything.

  Including the thing that has benefitted everyone.

  That being the roads – which have made it easy for all of us to be anywhere we like.

  *  *  *

  If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.  We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!  Our donate button is here.

  PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!). My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 17:00

• Seattle's "Dangerous" Homeless Camps Keep Catching On Fire
  Seattle’s “Dangerous” Homeless Camps Keep Catching On Fire

  The Seattle Fire Department has responded to over 1,500 incidents at local homeless encampments over the past two years, with some experts blaming drug use for some of the blazes – an 80% increase over 2020, according to data obtained by the Daily Caller.

  

  Some of the fires start because of intoxicated homeless people either cooking drugs, warming themselves or cooking food, former SFD firefighter Steve Collins, whose career spanned more than 25 years, told the DCNF.

  “What happens is, let’s just say they’re trying to heat up a can of spam or whatever they’re making for dinner, and they create a fire, and while they have a fire heating up their dinner they pass out because of excessive drug use and lack of sleep,” said Collins. “Well, they’re not gonna wake up. So then these fires get started, whether it’s in a building or it’s in a tent or a group of tents, and it’s off to the races.”

  Collins was one of 60 firefighters who were fired for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine. He’s one of nearly two dozen who are suing the City of Seattle for wrongful termination (good luck with that).

  “Pinpointing the cause of every encampment fire is difficult due to multiple possible ignition sources,” said SFD Communications Specialist David Cuerpo, adding “Many encampment fires are ruled as ‘accidental’ and are caused by warming or cooking fires getting out of control. Yes, some are also caused by drug use.”

  The Democratic stronghold is home to over 13,000 homeless people in 2022, more than every similarly sized area nationwide with the exception of Los Angeles County and New York City’s five-boroughs, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

  City statistics showed police responded to 113 calls about gunfire at or near encampments in 2021, up from 51 such calls in 2020, King 5 reported.

  Seattle had a 17% increase in medical responses to homeless people between 2020 and 2022, according to the SFD statistics. Homeless Persons’ Memorial Day vigil organizers said a 20-year record number of homeless people died in King County in 2022, KOUW reported.

  Washington Policy Center Vice President Paul Guppy argued the homeless encampment fire increase is part of a general public safety decline due to Seattle City Council policies that he called “the ongoing legacy of BLM riots and the defund the police movement, when arson and property destruction were widespread.” -Daily Caller

  What’s more, it’s dangerous for firefighters to respond to homeless encampments, as one might imagine.

  “Those places are always dangerous to firemen,” said Collins. “They have weapons, they don’t want you there, whether you’re gonna put out a fire or not, they have needles, they have all sorts of other stuff. The long-term danger is they have lots of bad things that when they burn and you inhale them, it harms you.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 16:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Massive Protests Erupt In China's Megacity Chongqing Over Abrupt Layoffs
  Massive Protests Erupt In China’s Megacity Chongqing Over Abrupt Layoffs

  Authored by Sophia Lam via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Large groups of workers staged protests on Jan. 7 at a pharmaceutical manufacturing company in Chongqing, a megacity in the southwest of China. The protests erupted after thousands of workers were abruptly laid off by Zybio, Inc., a manufacturer of COVID-19 test kits.

  

  Videos posted online show angry workers demolishing boxes of COVID-19 test kits, vandalizing the company’s offices, and clashing with police in riot gear. Protesters threw plastic boxes, water bottles, and cones at police, who ran from protesters—a rare occurrence in China.

  The unrest began when Zybio suddenly laid off nearly 8,000 employees, according to workers interviewed by the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times. The employees were notified that they could leave for the Chinese New Year, which is still two weeks away, effectively ending their employment.

  Zybio is a leading manufacturer of in vitro diagnostic reagents and equipment based in the Dadukou District of Chongqing, according to the company’s website. Many of those laid off had been recruited by Zybio last year to meet an urgent demand for tests under China’s zero-COVID policies.

  That demand did not materialize, as China abandoned the three-year-long measures abruptly in early December, ending massive mandatory PCR testing.  The halting of mandatory testing hit the pharmaceutical manufacturer hard.

  Layoffs Were the Last Straw

  Xiaodong (pseudonym), a Zybio worker, confirmed to the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times that the protests were sparked by the company’s abrupt layoffs.

  The last three years have seen Chongqing—which has a population of over 30 million—battered by lockdowns, November’s massive protests, and December’s COVID-19 surge. Coming shortly before the Chinese New Year, the sudden layoffs were the last straw for many workers.

  Speaking with The Epoch Times on Jan. 7, Xiaodong accused Zybio of not keeping its promises.

  “The company told us to leave, but it didn’t tell us when to come back and if it would pay us our wages,” Xiaodong said.

  According to Xiaodong, in addition to higher wages, Zybio had promised a 3,000 yuan (about $438) bonus to workers who would work for the company before and after the Chinese New Year.

  Xiaodong, who began working for the company in June, believed that it had a large order at the beginning of December and recruited 6,000 to 7,000 workers at that time.

  “[Zybio] recruited more workers at the beginning of December,” Xiaodong said, “They said that they would pay the bonus in three installments: the first installment of 1,000 yuan (about $146) would be paid if we worked until Jan. 21 and other installments would be paid if we worked until Feb. 15.”

  “I was assigned to make nucleic acid extractors in July. We earned pretty good income in November, about 8,000 yuan to 9,000 yuan ($1,170 to $1,316) for the month,” Xiaodong said. That was the month with the highest income, he said. In October, he earned over 6,000 yuan (roughly $877).

  However, the company’s income fell when the Chinese regime announced the lifting of lockdowns and the halting of mandatory PCR testing. The massive layoffs this month involved about 80 percent of the company’s total workforce, according to Xiaodong.

  From PCR to Antigen Testing

  China’s sudden relaxation of pandemic restrictions left the country in chaos. Chinese citizens complained of a shortage of medicines, hospitals were overwhelmed with patients, and crematories operated around the clock as bodies piled up.

  As the recent spike of COVID-19 swept across the country, residents and doctors in rural areas and remote townships in China complained of a shortage of medicines and antigen testing kits, according to interviews with the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times.

  Zybio pivoted from PCR tests to antigen tests, which offer less accurate, but more rapid results. However, it was not enough to save the Chongqing factory, which a Radio Free Asia report described as “now-defunct.”

  “Some provinces no longer imposed PCR testing in November, so the company [Zybio] began to manufacture antigen testing kits. The problem now is that it gets no more orders for these products,” said Xiaodong.

  ‘Don’t Create Any Trouble’

  The layoffs were handled in a perfunctory manner, infuriating workers, according to Xiaodong.

  “No management showed up or explained to us what was happening. Only a person from the recruitment company came and shouted at us, using a loudspeaker, and told us just to leave. He said: ‘You just go as you’re told to do so! Don’t create any trouble!’”

  Riot police and the head of the Dadukou District government were present during the protests on Jan. 7, according to Xiaodong.

  The protestors dispersed after Zybio agreed to pay workers.

  “The factory said that it would pay us our wages for December on Jan. 7 and our January income on Jan. 8,” Xiaodong said. He said that Zybio offered 1,000 yuan ($146) as a bonus to workers who still wanted to stay with the company.

  At the end of the video footage, police can be heard saying that the protesters are suspected of “disrupting public order” and that organizers will be arrested if they don’t leave immediately.

  The Epoch Times’ multiple calls to Zybio were not answered.

  Ning Haizhong and Gu Xiaohua contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 23:40

• Taliban Unveils Afghanistan's First 'Supercar'
  Taliban Unveils Afghanistan’s First ‘Supercar’

  Afghanistan is the last place anyone would expect a supercar to be built, but a team of 30 engineers at manufacturer ENTOP and Kabul’s Afghanistan Technical Vocational Institute unveiled a black-colored sports car.

  

  The first supercar from Afghanistan is called the “Mada 9” and looks similar to a McLaren or even Bugatti (from a distance). 

  

  Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid posted images of the Mada 9 on social media and said its beauty is an ‘honor’ for the entire country. 

  

  Beyond the pictures, the question remains what’s under the hood? Several tweets reveal the engine is comparable to a Toyota Corolla hatchback. 

  “The designers have used different parts of other vehicles, mostly Toyota parts, to build the first model,” Afghan press Khaama Press said. 

  A video on ENTOP’s Twitter shows the mechanics of the car. Any car enthusiast would compare it to a kit car. 

  Woman Gives Life pic.twitter.com/UOBV31TyxG

  — Entop (@entopco) December 31, 2022

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

  Khaama said ENTOP envisions Mada 9 featured at the 2023 Qatar Exhibition in Doha. Well, they better beef up the motor before that… 

  Does anyone want to guess the 0-60 mph? 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 23:20

• California's Emission Reduction Plan Lacks Clear Strategy: Report
  California’s Emission Reduction Plan Lacks Clear Strategy: Report

  Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

  California’s aggressive climate plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions “lacks a clear strategy,” the Legislative Analyst’s Office reported on Jan. 4.

  “Despite the significant reductions needed to meet these goals, CARB’s plan does not identify which specific policies it will implement,” the report stated.

  The California Air Resources Board (CARB) in December 2022 adopted an “equity-focused” 300-page climate action plan, or roadmap, to meet the state’s goal of drastically reducing emissions and reaching carbon neutrality by 2045.

  

  The agency also adopted a more ambitious goal for 2030, seeking to reduce emissions by 48 percent—instead of the statutory mandate’s 40 percent—below the 1990 level.

  The analyst’s office said that without a clear roadmap, state departments will be forced to identify and adopt necessary policy changes in a short time, which could make the process “costlier and/or disruptive for private businesses and households.”

  According to the report, CARB’s plan is unclear about how much the state will rely on financial incentives, regulatory programs, or cap-and-trade—a government program that puts a cap on emissions and requires companies to pay for extra allowances—to achieve these goals.

  The plan also didn’t provide the state Legislature with enough information on potential financial and environmental impacts, among other concerns, according to the report.

  “Failing to develop a credible plan … could adversely affect California’s ability to serve as an effective model for other jurisdictions or demonstrate global leadership,” the report stated.

  The office has recommended the Legislature direct CARB to submit a report by July 31 to clarify its plan.

  

  California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, speaks to reporters during a visit the Antioch Water Treatment Plant in Antioch, Calif., on Aug. 11, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

  In November 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom applauded the plan, calling it “the most ambitious set of climate goals of any jurisdiction in the world” that will “spur an economic transformation akin to the industrial revolution.”

  The plan reflected the governor’s call for more aggressive climate measures and a faster transition to clean energy. It aims to cut air pollution by 71 percent and reduce the consumption and demand of fossil fuel by 86 percent and 94 percent, respectively, by 2045.

  The state has reduced emissions by about 1 percent annually over the past decade. To meet CARB’s goals, the state would need to speed up to about 4 percent, the analyst’s office said.

  Most of the transformation would come from reducing the presence of fossil fuels as much as possible, including phasing out the use of natural gas for heating homes and buildings. It also means clamping down on chemicals and refrigerants and encouraging residents to walk, bike, and use public transit instead of driving.

  The plan also introduced four potential scenarios of how the state might become carbon neutral between 2035 and 2045, each with different levels of restrictions on residents and businesses.

  The first path, also the most restrictive, includes phasing out all fossil fuel refining in the state; reducing vehicle miles traveled by 30 percent; and allowing only electric vehicles on the road—all by 2035. It also calls for reducing heating, air conditioning, and water heaters in buildings and replacing them with electric appliances by the same year. Cutting dairy methane emissions—or cow manure emissions—by 50 to 75 percent by reducing the state’s dairy cow population is also mandated in this case.

  Other assumed scenarios allow longer transition time, with fewer restrictions but accelerated removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 23:00

• Former US Capitol Police Commander Reveals Failures In January 6 Evacuation Response
  Former US Capitol Police Commander Reveals Failures In January 6 Evacuation Response

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

  A top U.S. Capitol Police commander – recently retired Assistant Chief Yogananda Pittman – failed to respond to repeated urgent radio calls to evacuate the U.S. Congress on Jan. 6, 2021, causing the loss of precious time that might have prevented the shooting death of protester Ashli Babbitt, a former USCP commander said.

  

  The delay caused by the radio silence from the Capitol Police Command Center was so urgent that the 22-year veteran lieutenant located near the U.S. Senate chamber forged ahead with the evacuation anyway. He said he feared lawmakers would be injured or killed if he didn’t lead them to safety before the chamber doors were breached by protesters.

  In a series of exclusive interviews with The Epoch Times, former Lt. Tarik K. Johnson, 47, detailed allegations that Pittman failed to respond to multiple urgent calls for help.

  “I begged for help all day on Jan. 6, 2021, and I feel I was largely ignored,” Johnson told The Epoch Times. “I beg again on Jan. 6, 2023—exactly two years later—for the proper investigative entities to uncover what really occurred on J6 and I pray that the country hears my cry.”

  Johnson said the crucial delay in the evacuations should never have happened.

  “There was no response from anybody at the Command Center,” Johnson said. “I say even before I initiated evacuation, I say specifically, ‘We’ve got to start thinking about getting the people out before we don’t have a chance to.’ I heard no response. Then I asked for permission to evacuate. I heard no response.”

  Pittman, 49, who will begin a new job as chief of police at the University of California-Berkeley on Feb. 1, did not reply to messages seeking comment. She announced her retirement from USCP in November 2022.

  The USCP Command Center, located on the seventh floor of the headquarters building on D Street in Washington, is a 40-by-30-foot room staffed by Capitol Police and officials from partner agencies, including the DC Metropolitan Police Department, the FBI, U.S. Park Police, and others.

  In his new book, “Courage Under Fire,” published on Jan. 3, former USCP Chief Steven Sund, 57, said an area of the Command Center nicknamed “the pit” is used for monitoring “all the camera systems, radios, alarms, and a computer-aided dispatch terminal to monitor USCP and MPD calls for service.”

  Founded by an act of Congress in 1828, the U.S. Capitol Police has more than 1,800 sworn officers, more than 500 civilian employees, and an annual budget of $602.5 million.

  According to the book, Sund was in the Command Center the afternoon of Jan. 6, but was occupied making dozens of calls to the House and Senate sergeants at arms and the Pentagon, trying to get National Guard troops sent to the Capitol. He also made and took numerous calls to arrange for mutual aid from surrounding police agencies, the book said.

  There is no indication in the book that Sund was aware of the unanswered calls for help. Johnson does not fault him for the troubles. Sund did describe watching some of the Capitol violence unfold from the Command Center.

  “As I sit in my Command Center watching the video screens,” Sund wrote, “my frustration at the repeated delays from the sergeants at arms, along with my concern for my officers’ safety, is redlining. To be more precise, I am [expletive] livid.”

  Johnson became known to much of America as the Capitol Police lieutenant who wore a bright red Make America Great Again ball cap when he worked with a pair of Oath Keepers to rescue 16 USCP officers trapped in the foyer inside the massive Columbus Doors.

  Johnson was suspended by USCP and later accused of rules violations, including conduct unbecoming, for wearing the Trump hat and working with the Oath Keepers on the officer rescue. He said he believes those charges were actually brought because the evacuations and other split-second leadership decisions he made embarrassed Pittman.

  

  After about 17 months of suspension, Johnson got his job back, but chose to resign. Johnson said wearing the MAGA cap made the crowds more receptive to him, provided a level of safety that he likened to a tactical helmet, and served as a de-escalation tool.

  Johnson had been with USCP for 22 years at the time of the Jan. 6 events, serving as a police officer, dignitary special agent, sergeant, and lieutenant. For two years prior to his USCP service, he worked for the Senate Sergeant at Arms.

  One of the Oath Keepers, retired New York police Sgt. Michael Nichols, said Johnson’s actions during the officer rescue were heroic.

  “He adapted to the environment, put the officers’ and people’s safety before his own, and succeeded in defusing a tense situation that could have resulted in a mass-casualty incident,” Nichols said.

  Johnson’s actions throughout the day on Jan. 6 reminded Nichols of a character in the television miniseries “Band of Brothers.”

  “It’s not like he just helped these officers out, this man was like the lieutenant in Band of Brothers who just keeps running back and forth across the battlefield to get everyone in position and on task, with no regard for self—only for what needs to be done,” Nichols told The Epoch Times. “He really saw the big picture that day.”

  Rico La Starza, who documented the rescue operation on video, agreed. “He’s the leader people pray for,” La Starza said. “Quick on the feet and willing to go through flames for his team.”

  Radio Dispatch Recordings Confirm Events

  Johnson’s assertions about the Senate and House evacuations were corroborated by USCP radio dispatch recordings and transcripts obtained by The Epoch Times.

  The unanswered plea for authorization to evacuate was among at least four instances when Johnson or the USCP dispatcher asked in vain for help or direction from the Command Center, where Pittman sat at the center console near Chief Sund.

  Babbitt was shot and killed by USCP Lt. Michael Byrd at 2:44 p.m. as she attempted to climb through a broken window pane leading into the Speaker’s Lobby. Shortly before that, Babbitt shouted at rioters who were vandalizing the doors and windows and chastised three Capitol Police officers for doing nothing to stop the violence.

  

  Johnson said if the evacuation of Congress started when he first asked for help, Byrd would not have been near the Speaker’s Lobby entrance, and the House chamber would have been empty if the violent crowd had somehow breached the barricaded double doors.

  “I made the evacuation order at approximately 2:28 for the Senate, and then I did it maybe six to eight minutes later for the House,” Johnson said.

  “[Byrd] should not have been put in that situation. Had the evacuation occurred earlier, Lt. Michael Byrd would not have been there and Ashli Babbitt would have met a vacated lobby.”

  Senate Evacuation

  Audio from the main USCP radio channel provides dramatic testimony on the efforts to evacuate hundreds of lawmakers and staff.

  At about 2:23 p.m., Johnson asked for authorization to have one of the Senate doors unlocked so he could get Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger into the chamber. Thomas Lloyd, USCP inspector, crackled across the radio, “Approved.”

  Johnson shortly made his biggest and most urgent plea of the day.

  “405J-John with a message. I want to advise that we evacuate the Senate floor before [we] won’t have a chance to,” Johnson said over the radio just after 2:25 p.m. “We have a clear directional sight to get out of the Senate door from the second floor. I need permission to go ahead and initiate that, copy.”

  The dispatcher repeated Johnson’s plea. “…He has a clear sight to get everyone out,” the dispatcher said.

  For a second time, the dispatcher relayed the request. “405J-John requesting to clear the Senate floor,” he said. “He has a clear path. Clear ahead a path to get everyone out.”

  

  There was no reply from the command staff on the ground or in the Command Center. Johnson said Pittman, then the No. 2 official at U.S. Capitol Police, was the person who should have made that call.

  Johnson said his fear grew as the seconds and minutes ticked away.

  “405J-John disregard,” Johnson broadcast. “I’m going to go ahead and do it anyway. I’ll take the 550 or 534. We’re evacuating now on the north side, send everybody out the Senate door, copy.”

  The numbers 550 and 534 refer to officer disciplinary codes, Johnson said.

  The dispatcher responded: “I copy that. Evacuations being executed at this time, 1429 hours [2:29 p.m.].”

  The official USCP Jan. 6 timeline of events states that at 2:28 p.m., “remaining members evacuated from Senate floor.”

  Dispatch acknowledged the evacuation order at 2:29 p.m. At 2:32 p.m., Deputy Chief Eric Waldow broadcast, “Senate floor is continued to be evacuated. I’m moving with the members now.”

  The Senate was declared clear at 2:33 p.m.

  House Evacuation

  The House went into recess at 2:29 p.m. At about that time, a group of 75–100 protesters—including Babbitt—began filling up the hallway outside of the Speaker’s Lobby adjacent to the House chamber. Some members of the crowd turned violent and began rioting. Agitators smashed the glass in the doors with a helmet and flag poles.

  After leading the senators through the subway tunnel to safety, Johnson turned his attention to the evacuation of the House, coordinating over the radio with Sgt. Nelson Vargas, 49.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 22:20

• Visualizing $65 Trillion In Hidden Dollar Debt
  Visualizing $65 Trillion In Hidden Dollar Debt

  The scale of hidden dollar debt around the world is huge.

  As Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld details below, no less than $65 trillion in unrecorded dollar debt circulates across the global financial system in non-U.S. banks and shadow banks. To put in perspective, global GDP sits at $104 trillion.

  This dollar debt is in the form of foreign-exchange swaps, which have exploded over the last decade due to years of monetary easing and ultra-low interest rates, as investors searched for higher yields. Today, unrecorded debt from these foreign-exchange swaps is worth more than double the dollar debt officially recorded on balance sheets across these institutions.

  

  Based on analysis from the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the above infographic charts the rise in hidden dollar debt across non-U.S. financial institutions and examines the wider implications of its growth.

  Dollar Debt: A Beginners Guide

  To start, we will briefly look at the role of foreign-exchange (forex) swaps in the global economy. The forex market is the largest in the world by a long stretch, with trillions traded daily.

  Some of the key players that use foreign-exchange swaps are:

  • Corporations

  • Financial institutions

  • Central banks

  To understand forex swaps is to look at the role of currency risk. As we have seen in 2022, the U.S. dollar has been on a tear. When this happens, it hurts company earnings that generate revenue across borders. That’s because they earn revenue in foreign currencies (which have likely declined in value against the dollar) but end up converting earnings to U.S. dollars.

  In order to reduce currency risk, market participants will buy forex swaps. Here, two parties agree to exchange one currency for another. In short, this helps protect the company from unfavorable foreign exchange rates.

  What’s more, due to accounting rules, forex swaps are often unrecorded on balance sheets, and as a result are quite opaque.

  A Mountain of Debt

  Since 2008, the value of this opaque, unrecorded dollar debt has nearly doubled.

  

  *As of June 30, 2022

  Driving its rise in part was an era of rock-bottom interest rates globally. As investors sought out higher returns, they took on greater leverage—and forex swaps are one example of this.

  Now, as interest rates have been rising, forex swaps have increased amid higher market volatility as investors look to hedge currency risk. This appears in both non-U.S. banks and non-U.S. shadow banks, which are unregulated financial intermediaries.

  Overall, the value of unrecorded debt is staggering. An estimated $39 trillion is held by non-U.S. banks along with $26 trillion in overseas shadow banks around the world.

  Past Case Studies

  Why does the massive growth in dollar debt present risks?

  During the market crashes of 2008 and 2020, forex swaps faced a funding squeeze. To borrow U.S. dollars, market participants had to pay high rates. A lot of this hinged on the impact of extreme volatility on these swaps, putting pressure on funding rates.

  Here are two examples of how volatility can heighten risk in the forex market:

  • Exchange-rate volatility: Sharp swings in USD can spur a liquidity crunch

  • U.S. interest-rate volatility: Sudden rate fluctuations can mean much higher costs for these trades

  In both cases, the U.S. central bank had to step in to provide liquidity in the market and prevent dollar shortages. This was done through pumping cash into the system and creating swap lines with other non-U.S. banks such as the Bank of Canada or the Bank of Japan. These were designed to protect from declining currency values and a liquidity crunch.

  Dollar Debt: The Wider Implications

  The risk from growing dollar debt and these swap lines arises when a non-U.S. bank or shadow bank may not be able to hold up their end of the agreement. In fact, on a daily basis, there is an estimated $2.2 trillion in forex swaps exposed to settlement risk.

  Given its vast scale, this dollar debt could have greater systemic spillover effects. If participants fail to pay it could undermine financial market stability. Because demand for U.S. dollars increases during market uncertainty, a worsening economic climate could potentially expose the forex market to more vulnerabilities.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 22:00

• Experts Question Why Biden And Trump Treated Differently In Classified Document Cases
  Experts Question Why Biden And Trump Treated Differently In Classified Document Cases

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As Republican lawmakers such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) express concern that President Joe Biden’s retention of classified materials from his vice presidency may be “[swept] under the rug,” legal experts told The Epoch Times why Biden and former President Donald Trump appear to have been treated very differently in two strikingly parallel cases.

  

  FBI agents executed a search warrant on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida, in August 2022. The warrant said there was probable cause to believe there were “additional documents that contain classified NDI [national defense information]” or “presidential records subject to record retention requirements” at Mar-a-Lago.

  By contrast, neither the Penn Biden Center nor any other address associated with Biden has been raided after classified materials were reportedly found at the center’s Washington office, which is located in a nondescript building about a mile from the White House.

  “What’s the difference in what President Trump did versus what we now know President Biden did?” asked House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), as reported by CBS.

  Biden’s attorneys have said that the materials were identified on Nov. 2, just days before an underwhelming midterm election performance by Republicans. Yet, the public wasn’t told of the existence of those materials until Jan. 9, two months after those elections took place.

  That delay is indicative of “a political cover-up,” says Mike Davis, former chief counsel for nominations to then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and the founder of the Article III Project.

  He sees it as part of a pattern under the Biden administration.

  “There’s a clear political double standard at the Biden Justice Department, which has been politicized and weaponized against Republicans,” Davis told The Epoch Times on Jan. 10.

  An expert on administrative law had a similar perspective.

  “The fact that this has happened really creates a rule of law: if you’re a Republican, you have to meet certain exacting standards when it comes to records, and if you’re a Democrat, you don’t,” according to the expert, who requested anonymity because company policy doesn’t allow employees to speak to the media.

  “A Republican president must operate in a fishbowl. If you’re a Republican president, the presumption is you have to preserve everything. And you just have to be extra careful. If you’re a Democrat, rest assured, you’re going to have different procedures applied.”

  Under a more consistent system, he added, the standard set by Trump’s case would also have applied to Biden’s case.

  “The Justice Department shouldn’t have said, ‘Let’s negotiate. You guys review and tell us what you find.’ The Justice Department should have immediately had the FBI raid the offices. Why? How do we know, without documenting and creating an inventory, whether the documents were classified or top secret?”

  Davis contrasted the case of Trump’s records with the developing story of Biden’s handling of classified materials.

  “President Trump had the absolute constitutional and statutory power under the Presidential Records Act to declassify and take presidential records when he left office. Former Vice President Joe Biden absolutely did not,” he said.

  Citing an appeals court decision, an analysis of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant from the Congressional Research Service suggested that Trump’s broad authority to declassify information could be hemmed in if he failed to “‘follow established procedures.’”

  “It’s the process that’s the punishment. In other words, the bureaucrats make the rules, whether or not they’re in law or not. And if you violate those rules, there are consequences,” the anonymous legal expert said.

  For Davis, the more recent revelations about Biden’s vice presidential materials raise key questions pertinent to established procedures and also United States national security–questions he believes Republicans in the House must pursue through their oversight authority on a range of committees.

  

  “Did Hunter Biden have access to this office? Did James Biden have access to this office? What were these classified documents? Have they done an intel assessment? Are they planning to do an FBI raid? Are they planning to question Hunter Biden, James Biden, and Joe Biden [and] anyone else who [may have] had access to that office?” he asked.

  Archives Had ‘No Power’ in Trump Case: Expert

  The legal expert said the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) didn’t have the authority to refer the Trump records case to the Department of Justice, as occurred prior to the Mar-a-Lago raid.

  While Title 44 does specify that NARA can refer cases involving federal agency records to the Department of Justice, there’s no parallel language in that title pertaining to presidential records.

  “There is no power for the archivist in those cases to make referrals to the Justice Department,” the expert said.

  In the expert’s opinion, the former president’s legal team should have made a challenge on that basis.

  “Trump’s lawyers were asleep at the wheel,” the expert said, contrasting those lawyers with Biden’s “top-quality” legal representation.

  CBS has reported that Attorney General Merrick Garland assigned the U.S. attorney in Chicago, John R. Lausch Jr., to investigate why the Penn Biden Center came to hold classified material.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 21:40

• Iran's Navy To Sail Fleet To Panama Canal In Challenge To US
  Iran’s Navy To Sail Fleet To Panama Canal In Challenge To US

  Via The Cradle,

  According to a report by Tasnim News Agency, during a conference on maritime civilization in Tehran, Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral Shahram Irani announced on Wednesday that plans are in progress to dispatch the Iranian naval forces to the Panama Canal.

  “The Iranian Navy units are getting closer to the coasts of the Americas,” he stated. The navy commander elaborated that Iranian naval forces had already been deployed to all of the strategic straits across the world – with the exception of just two.

  

  “The Iranian Navy forces will sail into one of those two remaining straits this year while plans are being made for the presence of the Iranian naval forces in the Panama Canal.”

  Irani went on to add that the Iranian Navy has established three ocean commands supervising missions to the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean, and the Atlantic Ocean. “The equipment that will join the Navy in the future is in line with the missions of these three commands,” he explained.

  He highlighted the naval forces’ previous achievement of sailing across the Pacific Ocean and revealed that at the time, Australia and France both posed threats to Iran by breaking the regulations involving sailing past their coasts – regulations that they themselves had issued. In the face of these threats, however, Iran stood its ground and responded to them in accordance with the law.

  The Australian Department of Defense announced on January 2nd that two Iranian warships had been detected passing through the South Pacific.

  

  In August of 2022, the Iranian navy commander made clear that the “Iranian Navy Forces are present in any ocean if needed” and that they are “ready to counter any foreign danger powerfully.”

  That said, Iran is not seeking to engage in conflict and would only retaliate in the event that its security is endangered.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 21:00

• Computer Monitor Prices Slide As PC Bust Worsens
  Computer Monitor Prices Slide As PC Bust Worsens

  Readers have been well-informed about the pandemic-fueled personal computer boom that ended last year. 

  We have pointed out that graphics cards to memory chips have been deeply discounted in the last several months due to lackluster demand and rising supply. Another critical piece of the PC that is being discounted due to waning demand is the monitor. 

  Bloomberg Intelligence’s Steven Tseng and Sean Chen said a PC bust had added downward pressure on computer monitor shipments. 

  LCD monitor-panel shipments could continue to fall by double-digit percentages vs. a year ago in the coming months due to lackluster demand for PCs. Waning remote-working tailwinds and the transition to laptops from desktop PCs could weigh on monitor sales. Corporate IT spending might also become cautious this year due to escalating geopolitical tensions and risk of a recession. As panel makers convert some TV production lines for IT applications, the oversupply situation could linger and continue to pressure panel prices. 

  LCD monitor-panel shipments by area fell 29% in November vs. a year ago, according to IDC. Prices of 1080p monitor panels decreased 1.2% sequentially in December.

  

  Take a look at computer monitors on Amazon — many are heavily discounted, a sign demand has weakened. 

  

  The analyst said while the computer panel price downturn might continue, the bust in TV panel prices could recover from a trough. 

  Perhaps it’s time to upgrade the trading and/or research desk monitors with new monitors. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 20:40

• The US Consumer Product Safety Commission Denies Gas Stove Ban
  The US Consumer Product Safety Commission Denies Gas Stove Ban

  By Julianne Geiger of Oilprice.com,

  The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has no plans to ban gas stoves, the agency said, according to Bloomberg.

  

  A commissioner from the same agency, Richard Trumka Jr., earlier this week said that the CPSC had been considering a ban on gas stoves for months, with Trumka recommending in October that the agency seek public comment on the hazards of gas stoves.

  But the head of the CPSC, Alexander Hoehn-Saric, said on Wednesday that the agency had no such plans.

  “I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so,” Hoehn-Saric said in a statement to Bloomberg on Wednesday, just a day after discussions of a ban set off a flurry of reactions on both sides.

  Hoehn-Saric added that the Commission—made up of just four members—was researching emissions from gas stoves.

  Back in August of last year, the Committee on Oversight and Reform—the principal oversight committee of the House of Representatives, asked the Commission to turn over documents and information “about the CPSC’s failure to establish safety standards and provide adequate warnings to consumers addressing the significant health risks posed by indoor air pollution from gas stoves.” The Committee document was retrieved in Cached form, as the document can no longer be found at its original web location.

  The push against gas stoves has resulted in GOP backlash, with Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) also speaking out against the idea of a ban on the cooking appliance preferred by most chefs.

  “This is a recipe for disaster. The federal government has no business telling American families how to cook their dinner,” Manchin said, adding that if this was the CPSC’s greatest concern, “I think we need to reevaluate the commission.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 20:20

• Largest US Grid Saw Nearly 25% Of Power Generation Fail During Christmas Cold Blast
  Largest US Grid Saw Nearly 25% Of Power Generation Fail During Christmas Cold Blast

  PJM Interconnection, a regional power grid that stretches from Illinois to New Jersey, declared an emergency during Christmas and was on the brink of implementing rolling blackouts for millions of customers due to a partial power-generation fleet shutdown. 

  The regional power grid operator has over 65 million customers in 13 states and the District of Columbia. It published its first analysis explaining the grid strain when temperatures dove well below freezing due to 23% of its power-generation fleet shuttering on Dec. 24. 

  About 70% of the 46 gigawatts of outages were due to NatGas-fired power generation going offline, which left the grid operator in dire straits as temperatures continued to plunge and electricity demand soared as customers turned up their thermostats. 

  Here’s PJM’s report explaining how the cold blast last month nearly sparked an energy crisis. 

  PJM shows the cold shot lasted between Dec. 23-25. 

  

  Temperatures recorded one of the most dramatic drops in a decade.

  

  The grid saw a record-high load versus the previous ten years over the holiday weekend. 

  

  Power demand was elevated for days as the grid struggled to keep up. 

  

  Then came power generation outages. Here’s a timeline of what happened:

  

  Most of the power generation that was lost was natural gas and coal. 

  

  Even though the winter has been mild, there has been increasing chatter on Twitter about a possible cold snap at the end of January or next month. But remember, no forecast is locked yet. 

  Keeping an eye on differences in the extended range…

  🧐EPS would be a moderation with some cooler air behind storms.

  🥶GEFS taps into the Arctic a bit more and dumps colder air in at the end of the run.

  Our favored idea in this AM’s #energy report at https://t.co/UQhaRd1MOF pic.twitter.com/N2Bzu4gSvb

  — BAM Weather (BAMWX) (@bamwxcom) January 11, 2023

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

  #Natgas demand will be volatile over the next 2 weeks. Withdrawals will dip to -7 BCF/d tomorrow before jumping close to the 5-yr avg this weekend, only to drop back into single digits next week. By Jan 23 or 24, a more sustained shot of cooler temperatures may *finally* arrive. pic.twitter.com/b8TEH1A1V4

  — Celsius Energy (@CelsiusEnergyFM) January 11, 2023

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

  #natgas
  By Jan 27 the center of polar air is right over North America with -40C, an historic cold air mass. I am accumulating natgas derivatives for March. It is an outstanding opportunity, yet everybody has to decide on its own what to do with it. pic.twitter.com/VANIYpvXkd

  — Heinrich Leopold (@LeopoldHeinrich) January 11, 2023

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

  And what about the next cold blast? Is PJM ready? 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 20:00

• Chances Of Reenlistment Unclear For Discharged Troops After Pentagon Rescinds COVID Vaccine Mandate
  Chances Of Reenlistment Unclear For Discharged Troops After Pentagon Rescinds COVID Vaccine Mandate

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,

  The Department of Defense is formally ending the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for the U.S. military and the National Guard, but did not provide any signal as to whether those discharged over having refused the vaccine would have any chance of being reenlisted.

  

  Meanwhile, for those who are currently serving in the armed forces, none “shall be separated solely on the basis of their refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccination if they sought an accommodation on religious, administrative, or medical grounds,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin wrote in a memorandum (pdf) on Jan. 10.

  “The Military Departments will update the records of such individuals to remove any adverse actions solely associated with denials of such requests, including letters of reprimand,” Austin said in the memo.

  “The Secretaries of the Military Departments will further cease any ongoing reviews of current Service member religious, administrative, or medical accommodation requests solely for exemption from the COVID-19 vaccine or appeals of denials of such requests.”

  The directive comes after a Pentagon official announced on Jan. 5 the department had rescinded the mandate and was in the process of developing “further guidance” on vaccines for the force.

  All actions related to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, which Austin had imposed in August 2021, had been halted by the Pentagon in late December 2022.

  Austin said in the Jan. 10 memo that COVID-19 vaccines have been given to over 2 million service members and that 96 percent of the active and reserve forces are fully vaccinated against COVID-19. He said he is “deeply proud” of the Pentagon’s efforts to combat COVID-19.

  More than 8,000 service members have been discharged for refusing the vaccine.

  The Pentagon “will continue to promote and encourage COVID-19 vaccination for all Service members,” Austin said.

  For the service members who were administratively discharged “on the sole basis that the Service member failed to obey a lawful order” to take the vaccine, Austin said the Pentagon is prevented by law from giving anything less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. A general discharge is a step down from an honorable discharge and is generally given to troops who had satisfactory service but had minor misconduct.

  Those who received a general discharge may petition their military department’s discharge review boards for “correction of military or naval records” to request a correction to the characterization of their discharge, he said.

  Reenlistment Unclear After Thousands Discharged

  President Joe Biden, on Dec. 23, 2022, signed into law the $858 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year 2023, which had passed via bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate. The legislation stipulated that Austin must rescind the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for members of the armed forces within 30 days of Biden’s signature.

  Austin cited the legislation in repealing the mandates issued in August 2021 for U.S. military members and in November 2021 for the National Guard.

  Republican lawmakers, who comprised the minority in both chambers last year, had pushed for the removal of the vaccine mandate and celebrated the provision in the NDAA upon its passing in the House and Senate.

  The Pentagon discharged a total of “3,300 Marines, 1,800 soldiers, 1,800 sailors, and 900 airmen simply based on their personal decision to not take the COVID vaccine,” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a statement on Dec. 6, 2022.

  “These heroes deserve justice now that the mandate is no more,” he said.

  “The Biden administration must correct service records and not stand in the way of reenlisting any service member discharged simply for not taking the COVID vaccine.”

  The Pentagon has not immediately responded to a request for comment from The Epoch Times on whether it has any plans to reenlist those who had been discharged for the sole reason of refusing the COVID-19 vaccine.

  

  A member of the U.S. military receives the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine at Camp Foster in Ginowan, Japan, on April 28, 2021. (Carl Court/Getty Images)

  Opposition to Mandates

  Until the passing of the NDAA, the military COVID-19 mandates had been kept in place—even amid plummeting efficacy of the vaccine against infection and severe illness since the spread of the Omicron variant in late 2021, and research suggesting that natural immunity could be more effective than vaccination.

  The mandates saw resistance among troops and Americans at large, including lawmakers in Congress, who argued in favor of bodily autonomy free from coercion.

  Even before the mandates, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) in July 2021 shared that military members said they would quit instead of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.

  By October 2022, just two months before Congress passed the NDAA, The Epoch Times reported that military officers who became injured after their COVID-19 vaccinations called for the mandate to be scrapped.

  The military has notoriously issued mass rejections for religious requests for exemptions to the mandate, triggering multiple court challenges. Judges had blocked three of the four branches from discharging most members seeking religious exemptions over the treatment, which the judges said violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

  Just 0.5 percent of the religious accommodation requests have been approved by the Marines, followed by 1 percent for the Navy, 2.3 percent for the Air Force, and 6 percent for the Army. Thousands of requests were still not adjudicated before the mandate was withdrawn.

  

  Soldiers file paperwork before being administered COVID-19 vaccines in Fort Knox, Ky., on Sept. 9, 2021. (Jon Cherry/Getty Images)

  Troop Retention Concerns

  McCarthy said at the time the Army and Navy “missed their 2022 recruitment goals by thousands of service members.” Meanwhile, noting the thousands discharged, McCarthy said the COVID-19 vaccine mandate “was detrimental to the ranks, and there is no doubt it put our national security at risk.”

  McCarthy’s concerns over military retention were reflected in a projection by the Army National Guard in October 2022 of a loss of as many as 14,000 soldiers across the country over the next two years. This was attributed to refusals to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate. A loss of 9,000 soldiers was projected for the fiscal year 2023, and another 5,000 soldiers was projected for fiscal 2024, if the mandate persisted.

  Austin, also on Dec. 6, 2022, drew public attention to recruitment and said there’s no “hard data that directly links the COVID mandate to an affect on our recruiting.” A day later, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said in a statement that the mandate “appears to have very minimal impact on recruiting.” The two did not comment on retention.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 19:40

• Putin Again Replaces Commander Overseeing Russian Forces In Ukraine
  Putin Again Replaces Commander Overseeing Russian Forces In Ukraine

  It was only three months ago that the Kremlin named General Sergei Surovikin to head up Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine, which President Putin has since admitted is in fact a “war”. 

  He’s already been sacked, as on Wednesday the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced that Valery Gerasimov, who is head of the general staff of the Russian Armed Forces, is taking over the reigns of the operation.

  

  Surovikin will now serve as one of Gerasimov’s deputies, effectively a demotion. A MoD statement cited the “need to organize closer interaction between the branches and arms of the Armed Forces” in his appointment, and to improve the support and effectiveness of “command and control of groupings of troops,” as cited in Axios.

  According to a brief summary of Gerasimov’s bio (already a familiar face among top Kremlin leadership, and as Putin’s longtime military right-hand) in Sky News:

  Valery Gerasimov currently holds the job of Russia’s highest-ranking uniformed officer, as Chief of the General Staff.

  Sitting at the right hand of Vladimir Putin, he was one of only three people – including the president himself and the defence minister – who were in charge of plotting the invasion of Ukraine. 

  Back in May, he reportedly visited the frontline in the eastern Donbas region – as troops were apparently suffering from low morale and heavy losses. 

  Interestingly, Surovikin’s October appointment was intended to reverse a tide of setbacks for Russian forces in the east and south of Ukraine, as it struggled to control territory that Moscow is seeking to annex politically, especially after it held ‘popular referendums’ in late September.

  Many of the latest major setbacks, particularly the Russian forces’ withdrawal from Kherson, took place under Surovikin’s leadership.

  However, one prominent military analyst and commentator noted it could be more of a reshuffling for political reasons and not because Surovikin is fundamentally being viewed as a failure…

  I don’t think this is because Surovikin is viewed as a failure. Certainly possible that this was driven by political reasons. As the unified commander in Ukraine, Surovikin was becoming very powerful and was likely bypassing Shoigu/Gerasimov when talking to Putin.

  — Rob Lee (@RALee85) January 11, 2023

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

  At the same time, the private military firm Wagner Group, which has ties to Putin, has touted some of its own successes, sparking distrust and friction with the official military command structure.

  Gerasimov’s tenure was marked by an uptick in Russian air power targeting Ukraine’s national energy grid, in what’s now become an openly stated strategy to degrade and destroy the war-ravaged country’s power grid and resources. Ukraine has meanwhile been claiming that Moscow is readying a massive new mobilization of some 500,000 additional troops.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 19:20

• Emory Law Professor Denounces The Late Antonin Scalia As "Basically A Klansman"
  Emory Law Professor Denounces The Late Antonin Scalia As “Basically A Klansman”

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  In the age of rage, it often seems that the most rageful reign supreme. That appears to be the case of Emory law professor, Darren Hutchinson, who has claimed that the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was “basically a Klansman.”  The disgraceful attack was met by silence from most law professors despite the fact that Hutchinson’s support for the claim is breathtakingly off-base and would mean that a majority of the Court in 1986 were basically KKK members.

  There are many who disagree with the judicial philosophy of Scalia or particularly rulings that he wrote in his storied career. That is all fair game and Scalia loved such debates.

  

  However, Professor Hutchinson preferred character assassination rather than reasoned criticism of Scalia.

  Scalia is, of course, not alive to defend himself so it should fall to the rest of us to step forward. (Indeed, the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have likely been one of those who would have defended her close friend, if she were alive).

  Yet, the sad fact is that this type of ad hominem attack thrills many in academia while others are reluctant to speak out.

  Hutchinson recounted on Twitter how he taught a difficult lesson at Emory Law School on how “Justice Scalia was basically a Klansman.”

  The reason cited is his opinion he wrote in the 1987 case of McCleskey v. Kemp.

  That opinion was joined by four other justices (Powell, Rehnquist, White, O’Connor), who are also presumably klansmen under the logic of Professor Hutchinson.

  Indeed, Scalia did not write the majority opinion, which was penned by Justice Lewis Powell. Additionally, the appellate judges would also be de facto KKK members since they also rejected the argument.

  The case involved an African-American defendant, Warren McCleskey, who was convicted of two counts of armed robbery and one count of murder in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia. His victim was  white Atlanta Police Officer Frank Schlatt and the jury found that both the felony murder and the killing of a police officer were “aggravating circumstances” that justified the death penalty. In his habeas appeal, Hutchinson alleged that the capital sentencing process was administered in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. He based those arguments on a study of David C. Baldus, Charles Pulaski, and statistician George Woodworth known as the “Baldus study.”

  The issue on appeal was whether a general finding of racism in the system was sufficient or whether a defendant must show evidence of racism in his actual case. Both felony murder and the killing of an officer are commonly used as aggravating circumstances in capital cases.

  The United States for the Eleventh Circuit rejected this use of a statistical study without evidence that racism played a role in the specific case under review.  The court actually assumed the accuracy of the report for the purposes of the appeal but found that statistics are

  “insufficient to demonstrate discriminatory intent or unconstitutional discrimination in the Fourteenth Amendment context, [and] insufficient to show irrationality, arbitrariness and capriciousness under any kind of Eighth Amendment analysis.”

  Id. at 891. The Eleventh Circuit added:

  “The Baldus approach . . . would take the cases with different results on what are contended to be duplicate facts, where the differences could not be otherwise explained, and conclude that the different result was based on race alone. . . . This approach ignores the realities. . . . There are, in fact, no exact duplicates in capital crimes and capital defendants. The type of research submitted here tends to show which of the directed factors were effective, but is of restricted use in showing what undirected factors control the exercise of constitutionally required discretion.”

  The Supreme Court agreed. Powell wrote:

  To evaluate McCleskey’s challenge, we must examine exactly what the Baldus study may show. Even Professor Baldus does not contend that his statistics prove that race enters into any capital sentencing decisions, or that race was a factor in McCleskey’s particular case. [Footnote 29] Statistics, at most, may show only a likelihood that a particular factor entered into some decisions. There is, of course, some risk of racial prejudice influencing a jury’s decision in a criminal case. There are similar risks that other kinds of prejudice will influence other criminal trials. See infra at 481 U. S. 315-318. The question “is at what point that risk becomes constitutionally unacceptable,” Turner v. Murray, 476 U. S. 28, 476 U. S. 36, n. 8 (1986). McCleskey asks us to accept the likelihood allegedly shown by the Baldus study as the constitutional measure of an unacceptable risk of racial prejudice influencing capital sentencing decisions. This we decline to do.

  In dissent, Justice William Brennan maintained as did Justice Marshall in his dissent that “the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment forbidden by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.” Justice Stevens offered a more limited dissent in calling for a remand to consider the study further. Blackmun also supported the use of the study as the basis for a reversal.

  The case has long generated debate with many law professors disagreeing with the Court’s holding. However, one can disagree with the Eleventh Circuit and the Supreme Court without labeling such jurists as white robbed racists.

  It is also concerning that this is a reference to Hutchinson’s class. If the professor maintains that anyone supporting the decision is effectively a klansman, it is hard to see how students in his class would feel comfortable in voicing such a view. Indeed, such pedagogical positions may explain why 60 percent of students reportedly fear sharing their views in classes.

  Hutchinson’s bio states that he “is the Emory University School of Law inaugural John Lewis Chair for Civil Rights and Social Justice. He joined the faculty on July 1, 2021. At Emory Law, Hutchinson serves as the faculty director of the Emory University Center for Civil Rights and Social Justice. He was also appointed to the role of director of community and inclusion and chief diversity officer for the law school in fall 2022.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 19:00

• 21 Year Old Air Force Football Player 'Dies Suddenly' After Collapsing Walking To Class
  21 Year Old Air Force Football Player ‘Dies Suddenly’ After Collapsing Walking To Class

  Whether or not it is a ‘coincidence’ remains to be seen – but it is getting hard to ignore all of the recent stories about athletes, collegiate and professional, unexpectedly either collapsing or passing away.

  The nation’s attention was captured back on January 3, 2022 when NFL player Demar Hamlin collapsed on the field due to cardiac arrest after making what appeared to be a routine tackle and then standing up and clapping his hands. 

  Days after the incident, we highlighted Old Dominion basketball player Imo Essien collapsing on the court during the middle of a game against Georgia Southern. Video from the incident appeared to show Essien clutching his chest while on the ground. 

  And hours ago, the MMA world was shocked at the unexpected death of 18 year old Victoria Lee, a rising star on the the ONE Championship MMA promotion. “She has gone too soon and our family has been completely devastated since then,” her sister wrote on Instagram last weekend. 

  Now, yet another athlete has unexpectedly passed away at the tender age of 21. Air Force football player Hunter Brown suffered a “medical emergency” while walking to class on Monday of this week and passed away, according to Fox News. 

  With heavy hearts we share the loss of a cadet.
  C3C Hunter Brown died Monday after suffering a medical emergency while on his way to class.
  Our thoughts are with his family, friends, teammates and fellow cadets.#NeverForgotten pic.twitter.com/amPlznZqTC

  — U.S. Air Force Academy (@AF_Academy) January 10, 2023

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

  The report says that he “was on his way to class from his dorm room when he collapsed”, and that EMTs were unable to revive him with life-saving measures. 

  The two sport athlete at Barbe High School in Louisiana, who played football for Air Force and formerly played baseball and football in high school, was described by his coach as “a pure joy to coach and have as a teammate”. 

  Lt. Gen. Richard M. Clark, U.S. Air Force Academy Superintendent commented: “Hunter was a standout offensive lineman on the Falcon football team and was well-respected in his squadron, The entire U.S. Air Force Academy mourns his loss, and our hearts and condolences are with his family, his squadron, and all who were touched by this incredible young man.”

  Air Force Office of Special Investigations officials and the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office are both investigating the incident. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 18:40

• The Senator Who Didn't Know (But Thought She Did)
  The Senator Who Didn’t Know (But Thought She Did)

  Authored by Joakim Book via The Mises Institute,

  Legislators have a strange relationship with magic. To achieve that which physically cannot be done, they like to wave magic wands and pretend that it can. Reality puts a limit on political power, a realization that always sits poorly with those in charge of our trillion-dollar bureaucratic machinery.

  

  Senator Elizabeth Warren is a stunning case in point, and she’s had her aim at the magic-seeming world of digital assets like bitcoin for a while. Last month she cosponsored The Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2022 with Roger Marshall which attempts to put those assets under rules that echo the regulatory system that cryptocurrencies were created to escape.

  The bill’s purpose is “closing loopholes and bringing the digital asset ecosystem into greater compliance with the anti–money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) frameworks governing the greater financial system.”

  This turns tens of thousands of node runners, wallet users, or bitcoin holders into licensed money service businesses for running software on their computers. The bill’s text especially rallies against “unhosted” wallets, which are just assets that are not under the custody of a regulated exchange or bank-like entity—that are owned outright instead of being counterparty to a censorable banking contract. There can be no financial privacy in the senator’s world.

  Money transmitter entities would be required to perform the sort of identification and counterparty checks that banks submit to, but the bill takes things one step further:

  Prohibit financial institutions from using or transacting with digital asset mixers and other anonymity-enhancing technologies and from handling, using, or transacting with digital assets that have been anonymized using these technologies.

  An old-world analogy of the absurdity of this is physical cash, where using an ATM and then making a bank deposit is the most rudimentary form of “anonymity enhancing technologies.” If the senators get their way, the kind of privacy that cash permits would be ruled out in the new world of bitcoin: we must see what you’re up to and make sure you’re not spending any funds we disapprove of.    

  Reality Reasserts Itself

  Never before was a piece of proposed legislation so resolutely defeated by reality.

  Reality doesn’t go away simply because you label it “money laundering” or tangentially connect it to criminal behavior by the rogue states that ostensibly motived the bill.  

  Warren cannot do this for three reasons:

  1. Bitcoin doesn’t work the way she thinks.

  2. Congress is constitutionally barred from doing it.

  3. And because the bitcoin protocol doesn’t care about her magic-wand waving. 

  While bitcoin attempts to be money, it doesn’t conform to the physical properties of pieces of paper (or regulated banking institutions) that Warren pretends to understand. Paper dollars are handed over in trade, and bank transfers clear between banks or on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet; something that has monetary value moves, and we therefore get money transmitter laws to keep tabs on who is moving funds to whom.

  On the surface it seems that bitcoin operates in the same way: I have satoshis in a mobile app or a hardware wallet, I press send, and then you have sats in your wallet. Something money-like moved, right?

  Wrong. What shifts are the open sesame–like secret words that allow a transaction to be accepted by the tens of thousands of nodes running bitcoin, recognizing that now someone else is in command of the protocol address existing all over the world at the same time. It’s like passing secret notes to the entire world, enciphered by a secret code.

  There’s no bank for Warren to lean on for regulatory purposes. What shifts is the protocol-level recognition that someone else now has access to the funds, whereas the funds themselves never move. L0la L33tz writes in Bitcoin Magazine that “non-custodial wallets transmit Bitcoin the currency as much as the key to one’s door moves the house around.”

  And words are speech which Congress has long been forbidden from interfering with. The counterintuitive notion of a monetary system that operates without money moving has yet to reach the offices of America’s legislators. Money transmission laws are as unfit to regulate bitcoin as they are regulating the janitors in the Capitol.

  Bitcoin doesn’t move, so how can the software that manages one’s balance be subject to money transmitter laws? Warren faces problems on three levels:

  1. You can’t achieve it. Bitcoin was made for attacks like these, attempts to regulate or control it. It is resilient; its ledger and block confirmations are completely unresponsive to any magician’s waving. Last spring, China tried to ban bitcoin mining—a physical process more difficult and obvious than just holding, transacting, or validating bitcoin—in a state much more authoritarian than the US, and they couldn’t do it. A year and a half later, plenty of covert mining operations exist in China, not to mention the exodus of machinery that set up in the US, Canada, Kazakhstan, and Russia. A huge authoritarian crackdown with zero impact on bitcoin.

  Good luck subduing the mere transactions and privacy-enhancing methods that people run on their phones and computers.

  2. You’re not allowed to. The First Amendment says that government cannot abridge the freedom of speech, and since Bernstein v. United States in the 1990s, the Supreme Court has said that code is speech. Every aspect of bitcoin is code: The validators running bitcoin is code. The “unhosted” wallets and the mixers the bill laments are code.

  The mobile apps that allow spending is code. At no point does anything related to bitcoin cease being code. End of discussion.

  3. You’re not supposed to. Money is a neutral entity, a system that exists entirely to facilitate trade between humans. If it performs its role well, some unsavory types are going to use it (cue criminals and cash). When you meddle with it, it performs that function less well, and you harm the rest of society. Senators in a galaxy far, far away have no business interfering with it.

  You cannot make words illegal—primarily because they’re nonrivalrous and exist in the human mind, available for anyone to use. When Harry Potter’s enemies in J.K. Rowling’s fantastic world enforce the “Taboo”—an enchantment that lets the Death Eaters punish anyone who utters Voldemort’s name—they do so via the use of magic, a realm that Congress thankfully has not yet uncovered.

  Not for lack of trying, as we learned a few weeks ago when Senator Warren tried to regulate the code that people run when they use bitcoin. Central planners always try to plan that which is beyond their understanding—and frequently beyond their capacity.

  Good news is that it won’t pass; it’s the sort of Hail Mary marketing tool for which Warren has become quite known. Bad news is that it reflects the mistaken view held by many a legislator and plenty more everyday people.

  You can be in favor of bitcoin, oppose it, or be lukewarm or uninterested. What you can’t do is straw man its operation and then try to use government power to magically make it behave the way you want. Ignorance is not a good reason to mistakenly overstep one’s authority.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 18:20

• Humpday Humor: Coincidence Theorists
  Humpday Humor: Coincidence Theorists

  Presented with no comment…

  Coincidence Theorists pic.twitter.com/ZSK9nics5X

  — David Wolfe (@DavidWolfe) January 11, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 18:00

• Kash Patel Says Jan. 6 Committee Buried Key Evidence From His Testimony
  Kash Patel Says Jan. 6 Committee Buried Key Evidence From His Testimony

  Authored by Samantha Flom and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As the former chief of staff to the Defense Department under the Trump administration, Kash Patel was one of the first people the now-shuttered House Jan. 6 Committee sought testimony from in its investigation of the Capitol breach.

  

  Despite this, the transcript of his deposition was one of the last to be released as the committee concluded its work, and the reason, according to Patel, was simple.

  “I gave them the hard truths that they didn’t want the answers to because it didn’t fit their political narrative,” he told The Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek on the Jan. 6 episode of his Kash’s Corner podcast.

  Burying the Evidence

  Revisiting the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and the aftermath, Patel held that the committee failed to abide by its own rules when it excluded the exhibits he and his legal team entered into the record during his deposition.

  Among those exhibits, of which Patel said there were roughly nine, was a key report (pdf) released in November 2021 by the Biden Defense Department (DoD), which concluded that the actions the department took under the Trump administration to prepare for the Jan. 6 protests were “appropriate” and “complied with laws, regulations, and other applicable guidance.”

  

  That report, Patel said, along with his testimony that former President Donald Trump’s authorization of the deployment of 20,000 National Guardsmen to protect the Capitol, contradicted the committee’s conclusions that Trump was responsible for the violence that occurred that day.

  Patel also noted that, when they were offered additional assistance from federal law enforcement, both Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Capitol Police (USCP) declined.

  In fact, on Jan. 5, 2021, Bowser announced publicly that she would not be requesting additional federal law enforcement, sharing a letter she had written that stated as much to her Twitter account.

  “To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel, and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to, and consultation with, MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] if such plans are underway,” Bowser wrote in the letter to Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller, Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, and Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy.

  Likewise, according to the Capitol Police’s official Jan. 6 timeline, the Pentagon contacted USCP to confirm if a request for National Guardsmen was being considered. The next day, USCP Deputy Chief Gallagher replied that “a request for National Guard support is not forthcoming at this time after consultation with COP [chief of police] Sund.”

  According to Patel, both Bowser’s letter and USCP’s timeline were also submitted as exhibits but were not released along with the transcript of his deposition.

  Under the House’s rules (pdf) for deposition procedure, “the transcript and any exhibits shall be filed, as shall any video recording, with the clerk of the Committee.”

  While the committee released exhibits from other interviews with the supporting materials for its final report, none of the exhibits listed as being on file with the committee include those produced by Patel.

  “No surprise, the Jan. 6 Unselect Committee broke its rules, broke the House rules, broke its commitment—and not just orally, but in writing to my legal team—by saying the exhibits would be included,” he said. “They excluded every single exhibit.”

  Unanswered Questions

  Patel also slammed the committee for failing to investigate significant questions and concerns that remain largely unexplained.

  The majority of his deposition, he noted, was not even about Jan. 6 but other, unrelated matters the committee simply wanted information on.

  “That just showed me that all they cared about, this committee, was setting up perjury traps and looking for political ammunition, not the facts,” he said.

  

  One question Patel said he is still seeking an answer to is why a “no-climb” fence was not constructed around the Capitol prior to Jan. 6.

  Patel recounted how he showed up at the scene on Jan. 6, after the protests had broken out, to find no fence had been erected to help secure a perimeter.

  Noting that he had to buy the fence himself and have the National Guardsmen put it up later that day, he wondered: “If we could do it that fast, why wasn’t it done before? What are they going to say, optics? They didn’t have the intelligence? This committee never bothered to examine that question.”

  Further, according to Patel, he and other DoD officials offered to remove the fence after the protests had subsided, but their offers were rejected by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the incoming Biden administration.

  The fence would remain up for half a year, serving as a reminder of the events of Jan. 6 to all who passed by.

  “That’s what I believe that this partisan political charade was about,” Patel said. “They wanted the optics before Jan. 6 with no security, and they wanted the optics after Jan. 6 with heavy security to show that their political narrative was the one that was right. But when you look at the underlying facts, their narrative is defeated.”

  Another unexplained mystery Patel pointed to was the role played by Ray Epps, a former Arizona Oath Keepers leader who was filmed encouraging protesters to enter the Capitol on Jan. 6.

  While Epps maintains that he was at the Capitol that day to support Trump, many have come to believe that he was there as a provocateur, potentially on the orders of the FBI.

  Noting that the FBI has repeatedly failed to give a straight answer on whether Epps is an operative of theirs or not, Patel said: “Look, as a former federal prosecutor who ran sources and informants, if the answer is, ‘This guy is not on our payroll, and we don’t know him, and he did absolutely nothing for the United States government,’ you come out hard and fast out of your press office and say those things. And those things have never been said by this DOJ or FBI about Ray Epps.”

  Patel also pointed to the recent revelation that Pelosi’s office played a key role in planning security for the event and the fact that the FBI withheld a crucial report indicating thousands of protesters could show up at the Capitol as additional mysteries that should be investigated by the Republican-controlled House.

  “Look, if the FBI and DOJ are willing to subpoena my records from five years ago, maybe we can get this Congress to actually subpoena some records of consequence to answer some of these questions.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 17:40

• US To Hit Debt Ceiling One Week From Today, Starting Countdown To Epic Chaos
  US To Hit Debt Ceiling One Week From Today, Starting Countdown To Epic Chaos

  In the final days of 2022, Goldman’s economists predicted that “the biggest political risk” of 2023 will be the Congressional showdown over America’s favorite periodic drama: the debt limit.

  This is what the bank’s chief economist Jan Hatzius said then: “The debt limit likely poses the greatest political risk next year, and we expect it to rival the 2011 episode in its disruption to financial markets and the economy. That said, we do not expect Congress to enact major fiscal changes. Republicans might press for spending cuts in a debt limit deal, but we do not expect substantial cuts next year. The White House might press for increased fiscal support, but this also looks unlikely as we believe a soft landing is more likely and a divided Congress would have difficulty responding to a recession even if one occurs.”

  

  And while the US has about 9 months to go until the mid-September D-Day, or the moment when various emergency measures meant to provide breathing room under the debt ceiling, the existing US cash balance and new tax payments are all exhausted, a new analysis by Wrightson ICAP has calculated that the recent surge in Treasury bill supplies will likely push the outstanding amount of public debt about $10 billion above the debt ceiling after the close of business on Jan. 19, absent the implementation of measures to extend the government’s borrowing authority. Currently, the government is roughly $64 billion away from reaching its $31.4 trillion statutory borrowing limit, a level it will breach in about a week.

  

  More than half of that $64 billion buffer will be chewed up by a swath of benchmark bill, note and bond auctions taking place this week. The net increase to the debt pile from those, after the last of them is settled next Tuesday, will be around $36.6 billion, leaving a little under $27.7 billion of clearance, according to ICAP and Bloomberg.

  And that doesn’t even account for the new cash-management bill which settles two days later on Jan. 19. To accommodate that $60 billion security, it’s likely the Treasury will need to implement its extraordinary measures before then. The Treasury plans to sell $36 billion of four-month bills Wednesday, which is $3 billion larger than the previous week’s auction.

  Of course, all that hitting the debt threshold level – which is always just a formality for a country that is debt-funded like the US means, is that the Treasury will notify Congress it’s invoking extraordinary accounting measures in the next few days.

  “Even if our projections of nonmarketable debt are too high, the Treasury would probably be too close to the ceiling for day- to-day operational comfort,” Wrightson ICAP economist Lou Crandall writes in a note.

  Once the Treasury invokes its extraordinary measures, that will give it “ample borrowing capacity” for at least the next few weeks so it could continue increasing the size of the three- and six-month bill sales for the next couple of weeks. Still, Wrightson expects Treasury to keep the sizes steady when it announces the next round Thursday.

  Also, the fact that Treasury’s cash management bill offering is only 35 days suggests the department wants to “retain some flexibility” under the debt cap, which argues for relying on boosts to shorter maturities.

  And while the debt ceiling will likely be breached in about a week, as the Goldman chart below shows, analysts doubt the government is actually at risk of defaulting until the second half of 2023 because of the extraordinary measures the Treasury usually uses to avoid exceeding the cap, including using up the existing Treasury cash balance and funding from tax payments.

  
  And so, the question is not if and when the US will breach the debt ceiling and cross the infamous D-Day, but how will broken Congress reach a solution. As we explained one week ago in “Investors Are Already Dreading The Debt Ceiling Chaos In 2023”, not even the always cheerful Wall Street expects a smooth and drama-free resolution to a process that will be nothing short of absolutely chaotic and expose the full Congressional dysfunction for the entire world to see.

  For those who missed it, here are our thoughts from last week:

  With the House paralyzed indefinitely after Kevin McCarthy just lost his 10th House Speaker vote (the longest such stretch since before the civil war) as a group of Republican holdouts refuses to side the GOP establishment, Bloomberg rates strategist Alexandra Harris writes that the debt ceiling is already top of mind for investors even though the US isn’t likely to face the threat of a technical default until the second half of 2023 and Treasury bills aren’t yet pricing such concerns. That’s because the Republican standstill surrounding the House speak vote foreshadows the chaos that could unfold when must-pass bills, like government funding legislation and an increase or suspension of the debt ceiling, have to be addressed.

  clip and save for fights over government funding and the debt ceiling https://t.co/HQaF98JcRs

  — Grace Segers (@Grace_Segers) January 5, 2023

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

  “Although the markets did not react on Tuesday to the political chaos in the House, the dysfunction is a clear signal that House Republicans will struggle to raise the debt ceiling when the time comes in 3Q23,” Stifel Financial’s chief Washington policy strategist Brian Gardner says in a note.

  “Investors should be on guard as the summer approaches as to the possibility that the brinksmanship over the debt ceiling could lead to market volatility and a risk-off trade.” Well at least the Fed will be happy.

  The good news is that the debt ceiling crisis isn’t due for a while: the government is roughly $102 billion away from reaching the $31.4 trillion statutory limit, although analysts doubt the government is actually at risk of defaulting until the second half of 2023 because of the extraordinary measures it usually uses to avoid exceeding the cap.

  

  Treasury has been reducing its cache of bills in order to give itself more breathing room under the cap before invoking their accounting tricks. And speaking of tricks, California Democrat Brad Sherman floated a potential deal that would trade Democratic votes to make McCarthy the speaker of the House in return for rules aimed at preventing a US government shutdown or a debt limit crisis.

  According to Harris, from a money-market standpoint, a dragged-out fight over the debt ceiling will likely result in less T-bill supply at a time when there’s still a glut of cash in the overnight funding, pushing rates even lower and motivating eligible counterparties to keep parking cash at the Fed. Yes: that means the Overnight Reverse Repo balance will balloon even more.

  This comes at a time when Federal Reserve policy makers are expecting balances at the overnight reverse repo facility to drop from its current levels above $2 trillion. It rose by another $41 billion on Wednesday to $2.23 trillion. In the minutes of the December gathering, Patricia Zobel, manager pro tem of the New York Fed’s system open market account, noted that greater competition among banks for funding could contribute to drawdowns in the RRP, but clearly that has not been the case since most banks still refuse to raise rates on their deposits.

  All of which brings us to what Goldman predicted in its “10 questions for 2023“, would be the biggest political risk of this year. Not surprisingly, it was another debt ceiling crisis. For those who missed it, here is what Goldman said:

  Will the debt limit have as negative an impact on financial markets in 2023 as it in 2011?

  Yes. The political and fiscal conditions next year will be similar to the last two extremely disruptive debt limit increases, in 1995 and 2011. Like next year, in those periods a Democratic President in his third year faced a Republican House after losing the majority in the midterm election. Those episodes also followed a run-up in public debt as a share of GDP and/or a rise in federal interest expense, similar to the experience over the last few years. However, midterm gains of 54 seats in 1994 and 63 in 2010 gave Republicans a clearer political mandate and the votes to carry it out, at least in the House. By contrast, Republicans netted only 9 seats in the 2022 midterms and enter 2023 with a very thin House majority. Public focus on the public debt is also much lower compared to those prior periods, and Republicans have not emphasized fiscal restraint nearly as much recently as they had in the mid-1990s or early part of the Obama Administration.

  Prior disruptive debt limit standoffs led to increased market volatility and a sell-off in Treasury securities maturing around the debt limit deadline, and we would expect this to occur next year. In 2023, we would expect yields on bills maturing around the deadline to rise by at least as much as they did in 2011 and 2013, and for volatility in financial markets to rise similar to those periods (Exhibit 14).

  

  There is also a real chance that Congress fails to raise the debt limit in time next year, forcing Treasury to reduce daily payments to the level of receipts (i.e., immediately eliminating the budget deficit), resulting in a spending cut of around 10% of GDP at an annualized rate. While we think it is more likely that Congress manages to avoid this and raise the debt limit before it constrains Treasury’s ability to pay its obligations, the risk appears higher than at any point since 2011.

  The deadline for Congress to raise the debt limit before Treasury must cut back net borrowing will likely be sometime in August but could be as late as October depending on Treasury cash flows. An early signal of the risk the debt limit poses will come at the start of 2023, when the new House of Representatives is seated. If Republicans reinstate the “motion to vacate” that allows any member of the House to call for a vote for a new speaker of the House—several Republican House members have recently called for this in return for their vote for speaker—it could be difficult for the next speaker to put a clean debt limit increase to a vote until forced by financial markets.

  For more detailed on these, and other questions and predictions, read the full note available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 17:20

• It's "Silly" To Pretend Kiev Won't Become A NATO Member: Ukrainian Ambassador
  It’s “Silly” To Pretend Kiev Won’t Become A NATO Member: Ukrainian Ambassador

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute, 

  A Ukrainian official said it was logical for Kiev to become a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union. The country’s Ambassador to the UK, Vadym Prystaiko, claimed it was “silly” to exclude Kiev from the Brussels-based alliance because Ukraine will be “full” of weapons manufactured in NATO member states. 

  In an interview with Newsweek, Prystaiko called for Kiev to gain immediate ascension into the North Atlantic alliance. The Ambassador said, “NATO is just logical. Ukraine will be full of NATO weaponry, and the people will be prepared. So what is the difference? Just place a seat at the table.” He continued, “So we’re becoming interoperable because we’re doing it on the ground. And that’s why I’m sure that whether the political decision is here or not now, we will be a part of NATO.”

  

  Ukraine was put on the path to NATO membership, along with Georgia, in 2008. Giving Ukraine the status as a potential member crossed key redlines set out by the Kremlin.

  While Ukraine has been on the path to membership in the North Atlantic alliance for nearly 15 years, Kiev falls short of meeting several requirements to formally join the defense pact. 

  During that period, Washington has repeatedly told Kiev it does not qualify to join the alliance. At the same time, it refused to take membership off the table, violating a core Russian security concern. 

  Under President Joe Biden, Washington took several steps to make Kiev a member of the alliance, including; signing agreements, providing billions in military aid, and conducting NATO war games in Ukrainian territory.

  Ukraine’s growing military ties with NATO was a key factor in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade his neighbor. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed his country was already a “de facto” member of the alliance. 

  Prystaiko claimed that eventual membership in NATO and the EU was a guarantee for Kiev, and it was “silly” to pretend otherwise. “Our conversation with the rest of the world—at least the Western world—should be very easy. Ukraine wins, becomes a member of the European Union and NATO. And that’s it,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 17:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Digitization Of Humanity Shows Why The Globalist Agenda Is Evil
  The Digitization Of Humanity Shows Why The Globalist Agenda Is Evil

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  In recent weeks I’ve been seeing an interesting narrative fallacy being sold to the general public when it comes to the designs of globalists. The mainstream media and others are now openly suggesting that it’s actually okay to be opposed to certain aspects of groups like the World Economic Forum. They give you permission to be concerned, just don’t dare call it conspiracy.

  

  This propaganda is a deviation from the abject denials we’re accustomed to hearing in the Liberty Movement for the past decade or more. We have all been confronted with the usual cognitive dissonance – The claims that globalist groups “just sit around talking about boring economic issues” and nothing they do has any bearing on global politics or your everyday life. In some cases we were even told that these groups of elites “don’t exist”.

  Now, the media is admitting that yes, perhaps the globalists do have more than just a little influence over governments, social policies and economic outcomes. But, what the mainstream doesn’t like is the assertion that globalists have nefarious or authoritarian intentions. That’s just crazy tinfoil hat talk, right?

  The reason for the narrative shift is obvious. Far too many people witnessed the true globalist agenda in action during the pandemic lockdowns and now they see the conspiracy for what it is. The globalists, in turn, seem to have been shocked to discover many millions of people in opposition to the mandates and the refusals to comply were clearly far greater than they expected. They are still trying to push their brand of covid fear, but the cat is out of the bag now.

  They failed to get what they wanted in the west, which was a perpetual Chinese-style medical tyranny with vaccine passports as the norm. So, the globalist strategy has changed and they are seeking to adapt. They admit to a certain level of influence, but they pretend as if they are benevolent or indifferent.

  The response to this lie is relatively straightforward. I could point out how Klaus Schwab of the WEF savored the thrill of the initial pandemic outbreak and declared that covid was the perfect “opportunity” to initiate what the WEF calls the “Great Reset.”

  I could also point out that Klaus Schwab’s vision of the Reset, what he calls the “4th Industrial Revolution”, is a veritable nightmare world in which Artificial Intelligence runs everything, society is condensed into digital enclaves called “smart cities” and people are oppressed by carbon taxation. I could point out that the WEF actively supports the concept of the “Shared Economy” in which you will “own nothing, have no privacy” and you will supposedly be happy about it, but only because you won’t have any other choice.

  What I really want to talk about, however, is the process by which the elites hope to achieve their dystopian epoch, as well as the globalist mindset which lends itself to the horrors of technocracy. The common naive assumption among skeptics of conspiracy is that the globalists are regular human beings with the same drives and limited desires as the rest of us. They might have some power, but world events are still random and certainly not controlled.

  This is a fallacy. The globalists are not like us. They are not human. Or, I should say, they despise humanity and seek to do away with it. And, because of this, they have entirely different aspirations compared to the majority of us which include aspirations of dominance.

  What we are dealing with here are not normal people with conscience, ethics or empathy. Their behavior is much more akin to higher functioning psychopaths and sociopaths rather than the everyday person on the street. We saw this on full display during the covid lockdowns and the vicious attempts to enforce vaccine passports; their actions betray their long game.

  Take a look at comments by New Zealand’s prime minister and WEF attendee, Jacinda Ardern, from a year ago. She admits to the deliberate tactic of creating a two-tier class system within her own country based on vaccination status. There is no remorse or guilt in her demeanor, she is proud of taking such authoritarian actions despite numerous studies that prove the mandates are ineffective.

  Beyond the covid response, though, I suggest people who deny globalist conspiracy take a deeper dive into the philosophical roots of organizations like the WEF. Their entire ideology can be summed up in a couple words – Futurism and godhood.

  Futurism is an ideological movement which believes that all “new” innovations, social or technological, should supplant the previous existing systems for the sake of progress. They believe that all old ways of thinking, including notions of principles, heritage, religious belief systems, codes of conduct, etc. are crutches holding humanity back from greatness.

  But what is the greatness the futurists seek? As mentioned above, they want godhood. An era in which the natural world and human will is enslaved by the hands of a select few. Case in point – The following presentation from 2018 by WEF “guru” Yuval Harari on the future of humanity as the globalists see it:

  Harari’s conclusions are rooted in elitist biases and ignore numerous psychological and social realities, but we can set those aside for a moment and examine his basic premise that humanity as we know it will no longer exist in the next century because of “digital evolution” and “human hacking.”

  The foundation of the WEF vision is built on the idea that data is the new Holy Grail, the new conquest. This is something I have written about extensively in the past (check out my article ‘Artificial Intelligence: A Secular Look At The Digital Antichrist’) but it is good to see it expressed with such arrogance by someone like Harari because it is undeniable evidence – The globalists think they are going to build a completely centralized economy and society based on human data rather than production. In other words, YOU become the product. The average citizen, your thoughts and your behaviors, become the stock in trade.

  Globalists also believe that data is most valuable because it can be exploited to control people’s behaviors, to hack the body and mind in order to create human puppets, or create super-beings. They dream of becoming little gods with omnipotent knowledge. Yuval even proudly proclaims that intelligent design will no longer be the realm of God in heaven, but of the new digitized man.

  While Harari pays lip service to “democracy” vs “digital dictatorship”, he goes on to assert that centralization may become the defacto system of governance. He says this not because he fears dictatorship, but because that has always been the WEF’s intent. The globalist argues that governments cannot be trusted to hold a monopoly on the digital wellspring and that someone needs to step in to regulate data; but “who would do this?”, he asks.

  He already knows the answer. The UN, a globalist edifice, has consistently said it should be the governing body that takes control of AI and data regulation through UNESCO. That is to say, Harari is playing coy, he knows that the people who will step in to control the data are people just like him.

  At no point in Harari’s speech does he suggest that that any of these developments should be obstructed or stopped. At no point does he offer the idea that the digitization of humanity is wrong and that there are other better ways of living. He actually mocks the concept of “going back” to old ways; only the future and the Tabula Rasa (blank slate) hold promise for the globalists, everything else is an impediment to their designs.

  But here’s the thing, what the globalists are trying to accomplish is a fantasy. People are not algorithms, despite how much Harari would like them to be. People have habits, yes, but they are also unpredictable and are prone to sudden awakenings and epiphanies in the moment of crisis.

  Psychopaths tend to be robotic people, acting impulsively but also very predictably. They lack imagination, intuition and foresight, and so it’s not surprising that organizations of psychopaths like the WEF would place such an obsessive value on AI, algorithms and a cold technocratic evolution. They don’t view their data Shangri-La as humanity’s future; they see it as THEIR future – The future of the non-humans, or the anti-humans as it were.

  Who will produce all the goods, services and necessities required in this brave new world? Well, all of us peons, of course. Sure, the globalists will offer grand promises of a robot driven production economy in which people no longer need to engage in menial labor, but this will be another lie. They’ll still need people to plant the crops, maintain infrastructure, take care of manufacturing, do their fighting for them, etc., they’ll just need less of us.

  At bottom, an economy built on data is an economy dependent on illusion.

  Data is vaporous and oftentimes meaningless because it is subject to the biases of the interpreter. Algorithms can also be programmed to the biases of the engineers. There is nothing inherently objective about data – it is all dependent on the intentions of the people analyzing it.

  For example, to use Harari’s anecdote of an algorithm that “knows you are gay” before you do; any twisted group of people could simply write code for an algorithm that tells the majority of easily manipulated kids that they are gay, even when they are not. And, if you are gullible enough to believe the algorithm is infallible, then you could be led to believe that numerous falsehoods are true and be convinced to behave against your nature. You have allowed a biased digital phantom to dictate your identity, and have made yourself “hackable.”

  In the meantime, the elitists entertain delusions of surpassing their mortal limitations by “hacking” the human body, as well as reading the minds of the masses and predicting the future based on data trends. This is an obsession which ignores the unpredictable wages of the human soul, that very element of conscience and of imagination which psychopaths lack. It’s something that cannot be hacked.

  The legitimacy of the data based system and the hacking of humanity that the WEF aspires to is less important than what the masses can be convinced of. If the average person can be persuaded to implant their cell phone in their skull in the near future, then yes, humanity might become hackable in a rudimentary way.

  The algorithms then supplant conscience, empathy and principles.  And, without these things all morality becomes relative by default.  Evil becomes good, and good becomes evil. 

  By the same token, if humanity can be persuaded to set down their cell phones and live a less tech focused life, then the digital empire of the globalists comes crashing down quite easily. There is no system the elites can impose that would make their digital consciousness a reality without the consent of the public at large.

  Without a vast global framework in which people willingly embrace the algorithms rather than their own experience and intuitions, the globalist religion of total centralization dies. The first step is to accept that the conspiracy does indeed exist. The second step is to accept that the conspiracy is malicious and destructive. The third step is to refuse to comply, by whatever means necessary.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 00:05

• Australia Denies Asylum To Defecting Chinese Spy Wang Liqiang
  Australia Denies Asylum To Defecting Chinese Spy Wang Liqiang

  Authored by Cindy Zhan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Wang Liqiang, who publicly defected from Beijing on Australian national television, has been denied asylum.

  

  The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) said Wang could not be granted refugee status despite having “well-founded” concerns about returning to China because he committed fraud before entering Australia on a tourist visa, The Daily Telegraph reported.

  The AAT also doubted Wang’s espionage claims and questioned how it could “safely find that (Wang) was engaged in espionage ­activities.”

  Wang defected to Australia in 2019 and provided an unprecedented account of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) influence operations overseas.

  In an interview with The Epoch Times, the then 27-year-old talked about how he had become disillusioned by the CCP’s totalitarian agenda which led to his decision.

  “As I grew older and my worldview changed, I gradually realised the damage that the CCP’s authoritarianism was doing to democracy and human rights around the world,” Wang, the first Chinese spy to go public with his identity, said.

  “My opposition to the Party and communism became ever-clearer, so I made plans to leave this organisation.”

  

  “I thought and rethought it time and time again,” he said. “I wondered if this decision would be a good thing or a bad thing for my life. I couldn’t tell you definitively, but I firmly believe that if I had stayed with [the CCP], I would come to no good end.”

  The Australian Department of Home Affairs rejected Wang’s asylum application over an alleged fraud committed against Sydney businessman Filip Shu.

  Wang now faces potential deportation back to China.

  Espionage in Hong Kong and Taiwan

  “My jaw dropped as I read Wang’s 12-page Chinese-language confession and plea for help,” wrote Alex Joske, a former analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

  Other than admitting to being a CCP agent, Wang also disclosed to Australian immigration officials the communist regime’s espionage activities in Hong Kong and Taiwan.

  During 2018, Wang admitted to coordinating a mass disinformation campaign targeting “nine-in-one” regional elections in Taiwan aimed at undermining the administration of Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen. He travelled to Taiwan on a forged South Korean passport, where he took part in coordinating on-the-ground operations, he told Nine Network newspapers in 2019.

  Wang also said he was sent to Hong Kong, where he infiltrated universities and stole military and weapons intelligence, all on the orders of his CCP superiors.

  Wang provided the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) with a detailed account of everything he knew, including his role in the kidnapping of Causeway Bay bookstore owner Li in Hong Kong.

  Further, he claimed he secretly met with the head of the CCP’s spy operations in Australia, saying the man worked in the country’s energy sector.

  

  In a rare move, the CCP’s Political and Legal Affairs Commission responded swiftly to Wang Liqiang’s case after he went public saying Wang was unemployed and had been convicted of fraud.

  Wang said he had anticipated the CCP’s defamation campaign against him and, through his lawyer, refuted the claims saying he had given a sworn statement to the Australian government and that he was aware of the serious consequences of making false accounts.

  ‘Real and Chilling Impact’: Former Senator

  The denial of Wang’s asylum triggered concerns over the trial’s decision.

  Eric Abetz, a former Liberal senator for Tasmania, said he hoped due process was followed.

  “It would indeed be a sad and worrying outcome should genuine defectors not be assisted. This would have a very real and chilling impact if protection was not granted,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.

  “One must assume the decision to deport was made on legitimate grounds and not influenced by other considerations.”

  

  Policymakers from both major parties in Australia supported granting asylum to Wang Liqiang in 2019.

  Current Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said back then that Wang might have a “legitimate claim for asylum.”

  “We know that he has outlined a range of activities which clearly put him in a circumstance whereby it’s a legitimate claim for asylum,” said Albanese, then opposition leader.

  Liberal MP Shadow Minister for Defence Andrew Hastie also supported granting Wang asylum.

  “I’m of the view that anyone who’s willing to assist us in defending our sovereignty deserves our protection,” Hastie, who chaired the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, said at the time. “I think he deserves our protection and our support.”

  ‘Setting a Very Bad Precedent’: Australian Chinese Writer

  Jennifer Zeng, an Australian Chinese writer, and YouTuber focusing on Chinese politics, said the CCP would definitely exert pressure on the Australian government on such matters, particularly as the Labor government works to normalise ties with Beijing.

  During the pandemic, Beijing launched a comprehensive trade war against Australian exporters in response to calls for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19 by former Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

  Meanwhile, Zeng, who applied for asylum in Australia in 2001, cited her own experience of the CCP exerting pressure on Home Affairs during her asylum application.

  

  “Wang’s repatriation will set a very bad precedent for the future,” she told The Epoch Times in an interview. “It will discourage other defectors, including those who know other secrets in the CCP system, such as the secret of forced organ harvesting … They will lose trust in Western governments.”

  “The CCP punishes those who betray themselves very severely. They are ruthless in dealing with the so-called traitors … If that [the deportation] were to happen, it would be very regrettable and would make the free world, including the Chinese people in China who yearn for freedom, very disappointed with the Australian government.”

  The denial of Wang’s asylum comes after Foreign Minister Penny Wong visited China on Dec. 21, wishing to restart Australian exports to Beijing after years of diplomatic tension with the previous Liberal government.

  Chinese Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian said on Jan. 10 that Wong’s visit helped restart bilateral discussions on trade, economics, and investment. Xiao thanked the Albanese government and Australian media for sending “positive messages” to the public.

  

  Zeng, who currently lives in the United States, hopes that the U.S. government can step in and offer Wang asylum to avoid deportation to China.

  “Anything that is good for the Western free world and those who aspire to it, especially those in the CCP system, we should welcome them, support them, and help them,” she said.

  Both the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Department of Home Affairs told The Epoch Times that they were not able to comment on the case.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 23:45

• Jordan Peterson: Enemy Of The State
  Jordan Peterson: Enemy Of The State

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  The famed psychologist and scholar, and global media personality, Jordan Peterson is being told that he must report to the Ontario College of Psychologists for re-education or else lose his license to practice. He is challenging the order in court, for whatever that’s worth.

  

  No question that this follows his aggressive questioning of the whole of the Covidian agenda, including mass forced vaccination of the population.

  It’s hardly the first time he has gotten in trouble with the powers that be. His initial fame came from his brave refusal to acquiesce to the “preferred pronoun” movement in Canada that came before lockdowns. That he is now ensnared in the machinery of the biomedical security state is predictable; this is today’s means by which regime enemies are punished and silenced.

  It so happens that I heard Jordan speak in Budapest only months before the lockdowns that coincided with his own grave problem that he encountered with prescription medicine: as with many he was misled about what he believed was a simple medication. The timing was a tragedy because it took him out of the space of public intellectual life right when we needed him most: during the early months of lockdowns.

  His voice went silent during these times. It was heartbreaking. The very small resistance continued despite his incapacitation. Once he got better, he gradually became aware of what had taken place and then became ferocious, as any thinking person must. Thus his current issues with the authorities.

  Looking back at this date, it seems almost like he saw what was coming. In those months before lockdowns, I wrote the following report on what I saw in Budapest.

  *  *  *

  Almost from the first words of his outdoor lecture in Budapest, Hungary, held in the courtyard of the St. Stephen’s Basilica, Jordan Peterson’s eyes teared up and his voice cracked with emotion. Not just once. It happened repeatedly. His eyes never entirely dried. The audience could see it all because of the cameras and the huge monitors that made him some 25 times life-size, which is pretty apropos to his status as an intellectual in this part of the world. Indeed, in most parts of the world.

  Tonight was interesting, however, because his tears were clearly not performative in any sense. It was a show of extreme vulnerability that he surely hoped that he would not show. He strikes me as a deeply emotional person—a temperamental cryer—who has probably practiced a lifetime to stop this.

  It didn’t work this time. Before long, during his impassioned presentation on behalf of the dignity of every individual and the responsibility of living a life of truth, audience members too were tearing up in the midst of the awesome silence that fell over this massive crowd during the hour-long presentation.

  He never quite got around to explaining his emotion. I think I can, however. So here is my go at it.

  The first issue had to do with his introduction in this hugely dramatic space, which was filled with flares and fanfare and oceans of love from those who gathered, not just people with tickets (which were hard to get) but an equal number behind the barricades, extending as far back as one could see. It was impossible not to view this as a show of incredible affection for the man, his work, his influence, his personal courage, and his message. The crowds and the anticipation were overwhelming.

  Now, if you are Peterson, you would have to contrast this scene with the raging nonsense you will read about yourself in the mainstream press, to say nothing of the academic literature along with various left-wing hit sites out there who routinely twist anyone’s words to confirm their wild narratives. His every word is picked apart, his footnotes followed, his analogies deconstructed in an unending game of gotcha in order to put him into some kind of predefined political category for easy dismissal.

  For the easily led, he is a target. For the witch hunters in media and academia, he is a convenient scapegoat. Within the academy, he is the object of unrelenting envy. In the face of all this, including campus protests and media hectoring, he has been steadfast and brave, refusing to be intimidated and instead using the attention to get his message out there. To cut through all this nonsense, and like and appreciate him in any case, already marks you as being in possession of a discerning mind, a rebel against conventional wisdom. Apparently, there is no shortage of such rebels.

  The crowds—I don’t have an estimate but there were 20,000 people at the Brain Bar event at which he was a main draw—might have seemed to him as a tribute to the resiliency of the human spirit. That people were there at all, seeking not a confirmation of political bias but rather to gain a greater sense of personal purpose, shows that the powerful in this world cannot finally rule the day.

  He is just one man with a message against the world’s most powerful voices in media, academia, and government—and yet through ideas alone, beginning as nothing but one man in a classroom, he has become the world’s most influential public intellectual.

  As for his emotion this night, Jordan probably felt a deep sense of gratitude for being the recipient of this affection and for his place in inspiring people to become intellectual dissidents. That is enough to cause tears of gratitude.

  There is far more that overwhelms you about being in this remarkable and indescribably beautiful city. The history is deep and rich and present everywhere you look. There is drama within eyesight of anywhere you stand. The Danube river and bridges, the castles, the stunning Parliament building, the churches and universities, all of it, are not dusty old monuments but currently in use amidst a teeming commercial life that is equal parts old and new.

  The whole city also feels extremely young, similarly today to what it might have been like in the late 19th century, in the last years of the Belle Époque when Budapest’s cultural and commercial life rivaled Vienna’s. It’s a magical place, as delightful to visit as anywhere on the planet, in my view.

  But what you see is only on the surface. The scars of this city are extremely deep, having been put through astonishing traumas of totalitarianism of the left and right, the bombings, the terror and cruelty and poverty—the experience is not that far back in history. It was tyrannized by Soviet occupation twice, first after World War I and then following World War II, between which it experienced Nazi occupation and devastating Allied bombing that destroyed its infrastructure (all of which has since been rebuilt).

  And yet you can walk the city and not see this deep suffering overtly. The city, which wears this grim past lightly, is a tribute to the survival of hope in the face of overwhelming forces that sought to destroy it. The city lives. It thrives. It dreams anew.

  In addition to being a psychologist, Peterson is also a historian of totalitarianism. There are ways to read history as a dry reportage of events. That is not how he reads history. Good historians recount events. Great historians tell stories as if they lived them. Peterson is next level: he has sought the inner philosophical and psychological turmoil that shape history through the moral choices of both the oppressed and oppressors. He seeks to understand the inner horror from the point of view of human nature.

  As he exclaimed in a slightly terrifying moment, he has read about the history of Hungary and totalitarianism “not as a victim, not as a hero, but as a perpetrator.” What he means is that we must come to terms with evil not just as something external to ourselves but as a force deep within the human personality itself—not excluding our own personalities. What character traits do we need to acquire, what values do we need to adopt, that can prepare us to resist when evil invites our participation in violence and terror? He never stops reminding us what we are capable of doing both good and evil, and urges that we steel ourselves to live good lives even when it is not in our political and economic interests to do so.

  So here we were in St. Stephen’s square outside the great Basilica, packed with young people there to hear his message, in this remarkable city, a tribute to the resiliency of the human personality in the presence of one hundred years of oppression and violence. And yet there we were in this year, an age of hope, everyone given yet another chance to get it right, to live well, to treat others with dignity, to build peace and prosperity yet again.

  The look on his face, and tears in his eyes, seem to suggest to himself and others: we can do this. We will not give in to evil. We can be strong. We can learn, build, and achieve. Against all odds, he has emerged as a leading voice to add to the possibility of success in our times.

  I’ve heard Peterson live before and, like you, watched many of his speeches and interviews on YouTube. I can tell you, I’ve never heard anything like what he said on this evening. It was for the ages.

  The latter part of his presentation was lighter, with some very charming “one-minute therapy” sessions on stage with audience members that variously turned profound once again. And here is what is amazing: you discover that the real core of Peterson is not his political outlook or his role as a cultural pundit, historian, or philosopher but his professional training as a psychotherapist, just one man there to help one individual find a way forward through the terrifying struggles of life. Through technology, he finds himself in the blessed role of serving millions of willing readers and listeners.

  Even now he can’t possibly know the full impact of his influence. I suspect, for example, that he is unaware of the crucial role he played in American political life when only two years ago, young men were being drawn to the invidious politics of the so-called alt-right as an alternative to the false moralism of the social-justice left. They were drawn to his brave stances against speech controls, but he knew better than to side with any mob on either side of the extremes. He schooled even his new fans in the evils of every brand of identity politics—and the moral urgency of universal human dignity—and justly earned the wrath of alt-right leadership. Thus did he contribute to saving a generation from perdition in extremely volatile times. For this, he deserves the gratitude of every genuine liberal, but, so far as I know, he has never been publicly credited for this achievement.

  “Ego Sum Via Veritas et Vita,” read the sign above the entrance to the Basilica. I am the way, the truth, and the life. The sign reminds us of the universal hunger to find direction, purpose, meaning, and redemption in the midst of the chaos and anomy of the historical narrative.

  Peterson is not a religious man but he respects its ethos and contribution. This night he became a preacher of goodness, of civility, of moral strength in the face of struggle. The poetry of it all, and the promise that goodness and decency can prevail, was manifest in the crowds and the city right here, this night, in Budapest. It combined to inspire him to find the fullness of his voice.

  And this is why he cried tears of joy.

  *  *  *

  Soon after this presentation, Peterson was in the hospital in recovery at the same time the world of freedom and rights fell apart. He woke to a different world. He began to fight again. And here we are, exactly as he predicted: he is the enemy of the state. He has spent his entire professional career not only as a scholar and therapist—really a genius—but also as a resistor and a bringer of light in dark times.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 23:25

• The (Surprisingly High) Cost Of Mobile Internet Around The World
  The (Surprisingly High) Cost Of Mobile Internet Around The World

  Israel has the cheapest mobile internet in the world, with one gigabyte of data costing on average just $0.04 in 2022. With three in four Israelis owning a smartphone, the country has an even higher smartphone penetration than the United States.

  This is according to UK-based price comparison website cable.co.uk, who analyzed 5,292 mobile data plans across 233 countries.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the chart below, Italy places second in the global ranking, with a low cost of $0.12 per 1GB. The country has excellent internet infrastructure with 5G now available to around 95 percent of its residents. It also maintains the internet of neighboring San Marino ($0.14), which places third in the global ranking.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  According to Dan Howdle, a consumer telecoms analyst at cable.co.uk, many of the cheapest countries have excellent mobile and fixed broadband infrastructure which allows providers to offer large amounts of data at cheap prices.

  In some countries, economic conditions dictate the price which has to remain low so people can afford it.

  Some of the costliest data plans, however, are in the remote island nations of Africa and South America. For instance, the Falkland Islands rank in 231st place with 1GB of internet costing $38.45, while the same amount of mobile data in Saint Helena, a British Overseas Territory located in the South Atlantic, costs an average of $41.06 – more than 1,000 times that of Israel’s.

  Regionally, North America is the most expensive overall, with an average cost of $4.98 per GB, which is higher than the global average of $3.12.

  Canada is the most expensive of the region ($5.94), followed by the United States ($5.94), while Greenland is the cheapest ($3.36).

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 23:05

• A Day In The Life: Southern California's Fentanyl Crisis
  A Day In The Life: Southern California’s Fentanyl Crisis

  Authored by John Fredricks via The Epoch Times,

  “I don’t even know if I will be alive tomorrow. I might OD tonight,” Pete—a pseudonym—told The Epoch Times.

  “You are talking to a drug user right now and that’s the name of the game.”

  

  The 34-year-old comedian has been using the opiate fentanyl since the emergence of the coronavirus pandemic and commonly checks in and out of rehabilitation centers. With his addiction, he wakes up some mornings homeless on the streets of Southern California.

  “You are talking on the phone to a guy about to get his drugs right now,” he said slurring his words off of Huntington Beach’s 17th Street. “And you just missed me getting shaken down by some guy over here.”

  

  A homeless man contorts his body while working off a drug high in Santa Ana, Calif., on June 28, 2022. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  The “guy” Pete was referencing, a drug dealer, did not give Pete the drugs he wanted. Instead, he paid a nearby homeless individual $80 to help him track down a dealer.

  “I would say that the easiest cities to get [fentanyl] in Orange County would be either Costa Mesa or Santa Ana,” Pete said the morning after being arrested for public drunkenness by Newport Beach Police.

  “You can ask any homeless person and they can tell you where to find fentanyl to inject or smoke,” he said.

  Dealers which are nicknamed “Fentanyl Fairies” blend in with local homeless populations, even sometimes pushing shopping carts that appear to be filled with their belongings.

  There’s a “connection with homelessness and fentanyl,” Pete said.

  “When you are selling everything to feed your own addiction, you become homeless. Dealers look homeless and sell to the homeless.”

  A Record Year

  As 2022 came to a close, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency announced a record-breaking seizure of over 379 million deadly doses of fentanyl throughout the country.

  United States Customs and Border Protection agents also faced their busiest year on record regarding fentanyl seizures. According to the Department of Justice, 60 percent of apprehensions occurred in California’s Imperial and San Diego counties with more than 5,000 pounds of fentanyl confiscated from drug traffickers, just in the first nine months of the year.

  In San Diego County, the drug has been declared a public health crisis response with homeless individuals experiencing the greatest increase of deaths from fentanyl over the last three years, according to county officials.

  

  Mock sizing of a potentially lethal dose of fentanyl in a file photo. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  “From 2020 to 2021, the number of fentanyl overdose deaths increased by 90 percent among the unhoused population versus a 32 percent increase among individuals who were not experiencing homelessness,” County of San Diego spokesperson Fernanda Lopez Halvorson, told The Epoch times.

  According to Lopez Halvorson, the county is now saturated with naloxone, known best by its brand name Narcan, to reverse and block the effects of opioids, such as fentanyl.

  “The overarching goal is to distribute 33,000 naloxone kits by June 30, 2023,” Lopez Halvorson said.

  “Overdose deaths are preventable using a comprehensive approach that includes widespread public messaging on the risks of fentanyl and offering naloxone, a safe medication that can reverse an opioid overdose, and an effective treatment for opioid use disorder.”

  At 50 to 100 times more potent than heroin, deaths caused by fentanyl are on the rise in Southern California as the powerful opiate continues to be used more as a substitute ingredient for illicit drugs due to its powerful effect at a cheaper cost. Often, officials say, San Diego is a first stop for smugglers.

  

  A firefighter displays Narcan, a lifesaving medicine used to treat drug overdoses, on Feb 26, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  Just in north Orange County, fentanyl deaths among the homeless population continue to increase in Santa Ana and Anaheim, both of which topped the lists for homeless deaths involving the drug in 2020, according to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department (pdf).

  In Santa Ana, which recorded the most homeless deaths involving fentanyl, all officers are now equipped with naloxone, according to the Santa Ana Police Department.

  “With fentanyl being such a potent drug, our officers are instructed to take additional precautionary measures when handling this,” Santa Ana Police Department Sgt. Maria Lopez told The Epoch Times.

  “Our officers are trained in the use of Narcan and administer the medication when they suspect opioid overdose.”

  Further north, in Long Beach, medics recently shared having to use Narcan multiple times in one week on the same person.

  “Usually when it’s a fentanyl [overdose], most of these people have what we call the ‘agonal breathing.’ They look like they’re dead and they might be close to death, but they’re breathing maybe once every minute or so with unbelievably small pupils,” one Long Beach firefighter told The Epoch Times.

  

  A fast driving ambulance navigates the Los Angeles streets on April 4, 2012. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  As a first responder, the firefighter said he has become all too familiar with two usual responses of recovering someone who has overdosed on fentanyl.

  “More times than not, they are kind of mad at you for ruining the drug high that nearly killed them,” he said.

  The other response, he said, is projectile vomiting.

  The Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner’s office, which oversees Long Beach, told The Epoch Times that the total number of homeless deaths involving fentanyl as a contributing factor was 310 cases, with cases still pending to the yearly total.

  Sign of the Times

  Along 1st Street in Santa Ana, on a recent day, a man began stripping off his clothing and started clawing at the sky. Working up a sweat as the veins in his arms and head began to protrude, he suddenly bent forward with convulsions in what is known as “nodding out”—body language for an individual working off a fentanyl high.

  Just blocks away a group of about 10 who appeared homeless gathered under shelter at Birch Park as rain began to fall.

  “I’ve got a prize for you!” one man said, between toppling two metallic poles together, pointing his chin toward four homeless individuals to his right.

  

  A homeless encampment in Santa Ana, Calif., on Oct. 5, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  There, two men and two women in their mid-to-late 20s passed around a zip-locked bag of an off-white, powder-like substance. They were surrounded by others passed out on benches next to trash bags filled with dirty blankets and comforters.

  A clean-shaven Hispanic man, who appeared to be in his late 50s walked toward the group asking if they wanted money.

  “Nah, we’re alright,” one of the women said. “We’ll take some cigarettes, though.”

  The man then approached them, placing both knees on the ground before exchanging his cash for a smaller cut of the group’s product.

  Then the man with the metal poles began to tap them together at an even faster pace, showing the whites of his eyes as they locked on the man who then retreated.

  During 2022, fentanyl seizures increased 594 percent throughout the State of California, according to the office of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 22:45

• China's Credit Flood Is Coming, But December Was A Disappointment
  China’s Credit Flood Is Coming, But December Was A Disappointment

  Last week, when discussing the end of China’s “three red lines” policy to coincide with the premature end of China’s zero-covid policies, a policy U-turn which will have staggering consequences on the world’s biggest asset bubble and China’s economy, we said that “what China’s reversal means for the rest of the world is that a tidal wave of new credit is about to be unleashed, and as a recent report in Economic Information Daily said, the amount of new credit China issues is likely to reach another record high this year, while interest rates for longer-term loans could decline further. In other words, prepare for a surge in Chinese Total Social Financing as Beijing finally ends its latest experiment with austerity and is finally set to unleash the biggest credit expansion in history.”

  And it will… but not just yet because while we expect a deluge of new Chinese credit (forced or otherwise) to flood the country – and then the world – in 2023, the last month of 2022 was a damp squab, with the PBOC reporting December credit data that was mixed at best.

  On one hand, total RMB loans surprised the market to the upside and showed broad-based improvement – both mortgages and corporate medium to long term loan growth increased in December. According to Goldman, Beijing’s property policy easing after the “16 measures to support the property sector” and the accommodative monetary policy stance (the PBOC delivered the 25bp RRR cut in early December) likely both contributed to the acceleration in RMB loan growth.

  

  On the other hand, total social financing and M2 growth missed expectations and decelerated materially from November. Very weak corporate bond net issuance due to the bond market repricing around wealth management product redemption and liquidity concerns dragged down overall total social financing growth. The deceleration in M2 growth was likely due to the dissipation of one-off factors (PBOC stated that commercial banks converted some FX to RMB – and maybe gold – in November) and smaller balances of PSL. In addition, PBOC and CBIRC jointly held a meeting with major policy and commercial banks today (January 10th), urging banks to strengthen financial support to the real economy, and in particular to the property sector.

  Here are the details:

  • New CNY loans: RMB 1400Bn in December vs. Bloomberg consensus: RMB 1200bn, and up from 1213.59bn in Nov.
    • Outstanding CNY loan growth: 11.1% yoy in December; November: 11.0% yoy (+8.0% mom sa ann).
  • Total social financing: RMB 1310 billion in December, vs. consensus: RMB 1850 bn, and down sharply from 1.987.4 billion in November.
    • TSF stock growth: 9.6% yoy in December, vs. 10.0% in November. The implied month-on-month growth of TSF stock: 4.8% SAAR in December vs. 5.5% in November.
  • M2: 11.8% yoy in December vs. Bloomberg consensus: 12.3% yoy, and down from 12.4% yoy in November.

  And the main points, courtesy of Goldman:

  • 1. December total social financing (TSF) came in below market expectations. The sequential growth of TSF stock decelerated further to 4.8% mom sa annualized in December from 5.5% in November, and in year-on-year terms, TSF stock growth decelerated to 9.6% from 10.0% in November. Among major TSF components, new CNY loans rose after seasonal adjustment, while corporate and government bond net issuance, shadow banking credit slowed. Trust loans, entrusted loans and discounted bankers’ acceptance bills combined contracted by RMB 452bn in December, vs a contraction of RMB 116bn in November. Corporate bond showed net redemption of RMB 288bn, vs net issuance of RMB 15bn in November. Expect most of these categories to accelerate notably in 2023.

  

  • 2. Overall CNY loans came in above market expectations, and the sequential growth of RMB loans accelerated to 12.1% mom sa annualized from 8.0% in November. Year-on-year growth of RMB loans was 11.1% in December, edging up from 11.0% in November. The acceleration of loan growth is relatively broad based. Policymakers urged commercial banks to step up support to property developers after announcing “16 measures” to support the property sector, which likely contributed to the acceleration in corporate loans. Policy banks’ credit support to infrastructure projects likely also added to corporate loan growth. Corporate medium to long term loan growth increased to 24.4% mom sa annualized, vs 14.0% mom sa annualized in November. By comparison, household medium to long term loans, which are mostly mortgages, grew 5.3% mom sa annualized in December, vs. 4.8% in November. Household short-term loan (mostly consumer loans) extension also accelerated to 8.0% on a month-over-month basis, vs 2.8% mom sa annualized expansion in November.
  • 3. M2 growth decelerated to 11.8% yoy in December from 12.4% in November, below market expectations. Fiscal deposits declined by RMB 1086bn in December this year, similar to the RMB 1030bn decline in December 2021. The one-off FX conversion to RMB by commercial banks contributed to the acceleration in M2 growth in November. Moreover, in December, PSL balance shrank by RMB 17bn, in contrast to the expansion of RMB 368bn in November. The dissipation of one-off factors due to FX conversion and the net reduction in PSL balance might have both contributed to the slowdown of M2 growth in December vs November.

  

  Bottom line, the December loan and credit data was at best mixed. The acceleration in bank loans reflected policy support – commercial banks extended more loans to property developers after the “property 16 measures”, and policy banks’ credit facility targeting at infrastructure investment in recent months likely also added to overall RMB loan growth. On the other hand, TSF growth was weak and decelerated in December. Bond market volatility due to liquidity concerns and wealth management product redemption – which was catalyzed by the fears over Zero-Covid transition – reduced bond net issuance and potentially also dragged down shadow banking credit. The decline in corporate bond net issuance and the contraction in shadow banking credit more than offset the increase in RMB loans.

  That said, in today’s (January 10th) meeting with major policy and commercial banks, PBOC and CBIRC reiterated their accommodative stance and pledged to strengthen financial support to the real economy and in particular to the property sector. As such, the broad credit growth will almost certainly accelerate in early 2023 from the very low sequential growth in December 2022. High frequency activity indicators showed signs of stabilization, and nationwide Covid infections peaked in late December last year to early January this year. The recovery of broad activity growth could also add to credit demand and help with a rebound in overall credit growth in early 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 22:25

• War In Ukraine: Hunting For The Mega Trade
  War In Ukraine: Hunting For The Mega Trade

  By Russell Clark of The Capital Flows and Asset Markets Substack

  

  I get asked a lot about whether I am going to go back to the asset management industry. The temptation is strong. Lets say I find a great trade, then perhaps I can increase my net worth 3 or 4 times over a 10 year run. But if its a trade that can also raise capital, and become a cornerstone of a fund management business, then you are a looking at something that increase your wealth exponentially. The best trades are always contrarian in some way, and so you really need to be convinced to make them work.

  I have had two mega trades that really moved the needle for me. The first was China. In 1998, I was living in Hong Kong, and one job I had was to take Japanese executives up to visit factories in China. I learnt two things from this – first China had amazing infrastructure. I still remember arriving at a huge airport in Guilin and only seeing two flights scheduled to land that day. I asked my brother why build such a big airport, and he said the CCP plans for the future. From 1998 to 2008, I made it a priority to try and latch my career to that of China as close as possible. This was more difficult than you could imagine. In 2002, after two years working in Australia, I tried to get a transfer to Hong Kong. There were no jobs. The closest jobs to “China” I could come up with was an auto analyst in Japan, or an emerging market analyst in London. I went with the latter, but the pay was so low, the custom official asked me how I was going to survive in London. He only let me in when I assured him my company was paying for accommodation. And from 2002, I ran the bull market first as an analyst, and then from 2006 as fund manager all the way up.

  

  I managed to get short emerging markets and China in 2008, but was still short in 2009, when China launched its huge stimulus program. I was certain that a economic growth programme centred on not only building more housing, but getting house prices to rise was doomed to failure. At the time, Chinese induced stimulus and inflation, as well as the ongoing Eurocrisis had led people to be very bearish on bonds. But I was pretty certain that a country like Ireland would never be allowed to default, and that inflation was going to be much weaker than expected. In 2011, buying bonds was a 10 year mega trade.

  

  When Russia invaded Ukraine, this has made me think that the new mega trade, was short bonds long gold. This was part of a longer term idea that we are moving from pro-capital policies to pro-labor policies. This has led me to keep thinking that we might see a repeat of the 1970s in terms of gold versus bonds.

  

  However, as I have been reading about the war, a new thought, and potential variant mega trade has started to form in my mind.

  If you had previously asked me about Elon Musk’s SpaceX programme, Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin, or Branson’s Virgin Galactic, I would have assured you it was a good sign of the top of the tech market, just as Japanese plans to grow mushrooms on the moon was a top in 1980s. Space and the satellite business have tended to be blackholes (pun intended) for both private and public sector. Elon Musk with his development of reusable rockets, and has greatly reduced the cost of launching satellites. On the back of this he launched his Starlink business. The transformation of satellite business have been stunning.

  

  As the Economist article this week makes clear, Ukrainian access to Starlink has probably been one of the key factors in Ukrainian success in turning the tide of the war. Even more important, is that Starlink has continued to work despite Russian best efforts to disrupt it. This is the most important feature of the war. Musk is now in control a telecommunication network that cannot be disrupted by governments, and a telecommunication network that is better than the current satellite based networks that every other country uses. As far as I can tell, the satellites and the software used with Starlink can be easily copied. The real key is the ability to launch many satellites quickly and cheaply. That is SpaceX is really the valuable asset, not Starlink. The military implication is that every country that wishes to have an independent military, needs to develop its own SpaceX program. China and India definitely, Russia probably, Europe and Japan maybe. I think it will be reasonable to expect in 10 years time, that there will 3 or 4 SpaceXs operating, and that global launches to space could be almost a daily event. I am pretty sure, this will not be a profitable venture, but as it is necessary for military advantage, it will happen anyway. One area that should see surging demand is rocket fuel – and particularly liquid oxygen. Space travel is a new area of research for me, but the internet suggest Air Liquide and Air Products (the clue is in the name) are key supplies of liquid oxygen, and both stocks have been reassuringly good performers.

  

  Thinking more long term, the emergence of competitive satellite business with limited latency and/or ability to be disrupted will have significance consequences for land based telecommunication businesses. The current mobile phone base tower businesses have been built around monopolising the best area for base towers, and the getting mobile phone companies to agree CPI + price agreements over many years. And like any good short idea, they have been reassuringly weak.

  

  When Russia originally invaded Ukraine, I worried that this would lead China to either join Russia, or catalyse a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. The military success of Starlink, makes this seem less likely to me. So this is bullish in some respects. But Starlink is going to cause a new arms/space race, and within that I can see a good trade in long space fuel, and short tower companies. Space fuel is commodity linked, and tower companies were seen as bond proxies for years, so after all that, I end up back with a surrogate long GLD/short TLT trade. That’s still fine by me – hopefully for you too. Space is a mega trade, that seems to fit into the political environment of a shift to pro-labour. Maybe I should set up a fund – but in the mean time, I will keep publishing my ideas here.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 22:05

• Fragile Global Democracy
  Fragile Global Democracy

  With comparisons to January 6 immediately being drawn, thousands of supporters of Brazil’s far-right former president Jair Bolsonaro forced their way into the country’s congress, presidential palace and supreme court on Sunday. It took roughly three hours for security forces to regain control of the situation, with at least 300 arrests being made. The main motivation behind the riot has been linked to Bolsonaro’s followers’ refusal to accept the results of October’s election, which led to the return to power of leftist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

  While democracy has held out in the United States after the Capitol riot and so far in Brazil now too, an analysis collated by Our World in Data highlights how fragile it can be.

  The share of the world living in either an electoral or liberal democracy was at its highest in the year 2000 when the figure was at 54 percent.

  As Statista’s Martin Armstrong shows in the infographic below, ‘global democracy’ took a steep dive in 2019, dropping from 50 percent down to just 32. While the fragility of democracy is also plain to see elsewhere in the chart, this is the most dramatic example over the assessed period.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The main cause of this decrease was India and its downgrade by Freedom House to a ‘partially free democracy’ and to an ‘electoral autocracy’ by the V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg since Modi‘s win in the country’s 2019 election. The latter downgrade was justified by the alleged “increased pressure on human rights organizations, rising intimidation of academics and journalists, and a spate of bigoted attacks, including lynchings, aimed at Muslims” leading to a “deterioration of political rights and civil liberties”.

  The rise of democracy has been one of the greatest collective human achievements of the last century, allowing large shares of the world’s population to live in relative freedom and have the ability to alter the politics and society of their country. Has this expansion already peaked though?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 21:45

• Hundreds Of Illegal Aliens Intercepted Off Florida Coast Repatriated To Cuba, Haiti
  Hundreds Of Illegal Aliens Intercepted Off Florida Coast Repatriated To Cuba, Haiti

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times,

  The U.S. Coast Guard repatriated 83 illegal aliens to Haiti on Monday and 273 to Cuba on Sunday after they were intercepted in the Florida Keys over the New Year period.

  

  (L) An illegal alien vessel about seven miles south of Big Pine Key, Florida, on Jan. 1, 2023; (R) A vessel carrying Haitians on Jan. 3, 2023, who were repatriated to Haiti on Jan. 9, 2023. (Courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard)

  The Coast Guard said it continues to intercept and rescue illegal aliens from overloaded and unseaworthy vessels and warned that those interdicted at sea would be repatriated.

  In a statement about the 83 Haitians repatriated on Monday, Lt. Travis Poulos said Coast Guard District Seven and partner agencies continue to patrol the Florida Straits, Windward, and Mona passages.

  “These ventures are extremely dangerous and could cost you your life,” Poulos said.

  

  The Coast Guard Cutter Mohawk’s crew departs Matanzas, Cuba, following a repatriation of Cuban illegal aliens to Cuba on Jan. 8, 2023. (Lt. Cmdr. Ryan Newmeyer/U.S. Coast Guard)

  The 83 Haitians were first spotted in a sailing vessel by a West Palm Beach Coast Guard crew near Hobe Sound on Jan. 2, then again by a good Samaritan on Jan. 4 about five miles east of Key Lago—around 156 miles apart. There were men, women, and children aboard, according to the Coast Guard.

  Lt. Cmdr. John Beal said Coast Guard District Seven crew continue to intercept and rescue Cubans “from grossly overloaded, unseaworthy vessels.”

  “These illegal voyages are always dangerous and often deadly,” Beal said in a statement on Sunday.

  “We are working closely with partner agencies to save lives and prevent illegal entry to the United States via our southeast maritime border. Those interdicted at sea will be repatriated.”

  Florida’s state government will also deploy aircraft from the Florida National Guard to back up marine patrols to “support water interdictions and ensure the safety of migrants attempting to reach Florida through the Florida Straits.”

  

  A vessel carrying illegal aliens who were repatriated to Cuba on Jan. 8, 2023; reported to U.S. Coast Guard Sector Key West watchstanders by a good Samaritan about four miles south of Duck Key, Florida, Jan. 1, 2023. (Courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard Station Marathon’s crew)

  DeSantis Activates National Guard

  Over 300 illegal aliens unlawfully arrived in the Florida Keys over the New Year period, prompting Gov. Ron DeSantis to sign an executive order on Jan. 6 to activate the National Guard.

  State officials were forced to shut the Dry Tortugas National Park, about 70 miles west of Key West, after 300 aliens landed there, while a further 45 arrived in Key West. The Coast Guard said around 10 vessels were reported and intercepted throughout the Florida Keys between Dec. 31 and Jan. 1.

  “As the negative impacts of [President Joe] Biden’s lawless immigration policies continue unabated, the burden of the Biden administration’s failure falls on local law enforcement who lack the resources to deal with the crisis,” the Republican governor said in a statement.

  “That is why I am activating the National Guard and directing state resources to help alleviate the strain on local resources. When Biden continues to ignore his legal responsibilities, we will step in to support our communities.”

  

  A boat that was left along the shoreline after it was used recently to transport Cuban illegal aliens from the island nation to America in Key West, Florida, on Jan. 6, 2023. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

  In addition, DeSantis’s executive order (pdf) directs state law enforcement and other state agencies to “provide resources in support of local governments” responding to the influx of illegal aliens in the Florida Keys, as well as “additional support toward efforts to prevent further migrant landings on Florida’s shores.”

  The 194 deputies of the Monroe County Sheriff’s Department struggled to manage the influx of hundreds of illegal aliens while also trying to ensure public safety, according to DeSantis’s office.

  Biden Parole Program

  On Jan. 5, Biden announced a new policy to turn back Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans who arrive illegally in the United States. People from these four countries make up the majority of illegal aliens crossing the southwest border, Biden said.

  The “parole program” will allow up to 30,000 people a month from those four countries to seek asylum in the United States, provided they apply online while in a non-U.S. country, pay their airfare, and find a U.S. sponsor. They then need to make an appointment via the CBP One app to meet with a border agent.

  “But if their application is denied or if they attempt to cross into the United States unlawfully, they will be returned back to Mexico and will not be eligible for this program after that,” Biden said.

  The president said his administration expects this will “substantially reduce” the number of people attempting to cross the southwest border “without going through a legal process.”

  “We can’t stop people from making the journey, but we can require … that they come here in an orderly way under U.S. law,” he added.

  “And let me say it again: The actions we’re announcing today will make things better … but will not fix the border problem completely.”

  The Coast Guard said it’s intercepted and blocked 4,795 Cubans trying to enter the United States illegally since October, while the governor’s office said over 8,000 illegal aliens have been encountered in the waters off Florida since August.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 21:25

• Cannabis Grower Tilray Mulls Expansion Into Fruit And Vegetable Growing, Alcohol, While Awaiting U.S. Legalization
  Cannabis Grower Tilray Mulls Expansion Into Fruit And Vegetable Growing, Alcohol, While Awaiting U.S. Legalization

  We once thought the obvious pivot would be traditional food and beverage manufacturers looking to eventually incorporate marijuana based products into their portfolios of products. Now, it looks like the opposite could be happening. 

  As marijuana legalization at the federal level in the U.S. has not proceeded as expediently as once predicted, grower Tilray Brands is now considering acquisitions that could move it into the alcohol – or even the produce – space. 

  Chief Executive Officer Irwin Simon said this week that, while it has set up infrastructure for the eventual distribution of its products in the U.S., a “lack of political action” has caused it to shift its vision, Yahoo reported. 

  Now the company is considering using some of its growing capacity for fruits and vegetables as a short term measure. It is also considering acquisitions that would move it further into setting up a U.S. distribution network, for when marijuana is eventually legalized. 

  

  Simon asked rhetorically on a company conference call this week: “There’s food shortages in the world of lettuce, tomatoes, strawberries. If we have overcapacity, how do we start growing fruits and vegetables at some of these facilities and supply food to the world?”

  Analysts were hesitant at the idea, instead asking if the company should simply be focused on reducing its growing capacity. In response, Simon reminded them that the company’s top priority remains cannabis and that the idea of growing fruits and vegetables would only be a “temporary bridge”. Later in the day, on a different call, Simon reassured analysts that facilities would be easily converted for legalized cannabis in the U.S. or Europe when the time was right. 

  Tilray already owns SweetWater Brewing Co and Montauk Brewing Co, as well as a bourbon maker, Breckenridge Distillery, Yahoo reported. While those names are small in size, the company isn’t against taking on a larger potential brand name. “If there was a national brand, we would look at that too,” Simon concluded. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 21:05

• Privacy Watchdog: ATF Uses Stingrays To Track Americans
  Privacy Watchdog: ATF Uses Stingrays To Track Americans

  Authored by Ken Silva via Headline USA (emphasis ours),

  The Project for Privacy & Surveillance Accountability announced this week that it has obtained records about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ use of stingrays to track Americans.

  

  Stingrays are a relatively new technology that simulate cell towers and collect signals from devices nearby.

  PPSA filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the ATF in February 2021, and announced on Wednesday that it had received a batch of documents. According to PPSA, those documents show that the agency uses stingrays.

  “The information released by the ATF confirms the agency is indeed utilizing stingray technology,” PPSA said. “Although the agency attempted to minimize the usage of stingrays, it is clear they are being widely used against Americans.”

  PPSA has not published the documents it received, but described some of their contents.

  “The ATF stressed that stingrays are not precise location trackers like GPS, despite the plethora of information stingrays can still provide,” the organization said. “Answers to questions from the Senate Appropriations Committee about the ATF’s usage of stingrays and license plate reader technology are entirely blacked out in the ATF documents we received.”

  PPSA added that ATF policy conceals the use of these devices from their targets, even when relevant to their legal defense.

  PPSA said there’s an example of this in the documents it received.

  “When an ATF agent interviewed by a defense attorney revealed the use of the equipment, a large group email was sent out saying: ‘This was obviously a mistake and is being handled,’” the privacy watchdog said.

  PPSA said it will continue to track stingray usage and report the responses it receives to its FOIA requests with various federal agencies.

  Civil liberties activists have noted that the use of stingrays by law enforcement dramatically increased after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Carpenter v. U.S., which found that law enforcement’s warrantless collection of cell phone geolocation data violated the Fourth Amendment. Instead of obtaining warrants, police agencies have used stingrays as a workaround.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 20:45

• When Will The Fallen Generals Rise
  When Will The Fallen Generals Rise

  The S&P 500, the world’s biggest and most liquid equity index influences the sentiment or price of most global assets. However, as discussed here repeatedly over the past few years, its performance has been skewed by mega-cap growth stocks, i.e., the Generals. Of course, in 2022, they had a very tough time. Tesla (-65.0%), Meta (-64.2%), Amazon (-49.6%), Alphabet (-39.1%), Microsoft (-28.0%), and Apple (-26.4%) all underperformed to sometimes dramatic effect. And given these 6 names alone still comprise around 19% (down from 26% this time last year) of the world’s most important stock index, DB’s Jim Reid notes that even macro-only investors need to pay attention.

  Of this list, Tesla has been the most volatile this year falling 12.2% on the first day but having two +5% plus days, including yesterday. It’s -2.8% so far in 2023.

  Which brings us to today’s Chart of the Day from Jim Reid, which updates a graph from his “bubble chart book” in January 2021. Back then, he showed that Tesla’s market cap was around as big as the next largest 8 global auto companies. That was obviously a premature concern as at the peak in November 2021 (market cap $1.24tn), it was then worth around the same amount as the next 13 largest – an incredible stat.

  Fast forward to today and it’s now back down to being worth a bit more than just the next two largest ($378bn market cap).

  

  While Reid admits that he not is a single-name stock analyst, he says it’s interesting to debate what valuation such a disruptor should have relative to the competition: “After all, non-fossil fuel cars will continue to dominate the roads for some years, but most car companies will also compete for the spoils in the electric market. It is true that Tesla bulls have pointed out for some years that disruptors such as Apple and Amazon have maintained a dominant position in their respective sectors. But it’s not clear if the sectors/products are comparable. The bulls might also point to Tesla still having increased by 5 times since the March 2020 Covid lows. So, the starting point is important.”

  In any event, at the peak, we were still in a world of zero yields and expected to stay there in perpetuity by many. As such, companies with an expected high earnings stream in the future were given very high multiples. This wasn’t the fault of those companies impacted.

  So for macro, Reid says that “it is interesting to debate how much of the recent fall in such stocks is down to the interest rate environment changing, and how much was a fundamental overvaluation story.” That matters if the interest rate environment changes again (not if but when) and as such is important for macro.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 20:25

• US Should Remain In Ukraine Until "Putin Is Out": Senator
  US Should Remain In Ukraine Until “Putin Is Out”: Senator

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone & Connor Freeman via The Libertarian Institute,

  Senator Angus King said the US should not put a timetable on support for Ukraine and remain involved in the war until “Putin is out.” Comparing the current situation with Russia to the Allies’ failure to stop Nazi Germany before World War II, the Maine senator insisted on more Western aid for Kiev.

  During a virtual press conference following his recent visit to the Ukrainian capital, King was asked how long the United States should continue its role in the conflict, replying that support for Kiev should be indefinite. “I believe we should remain there until Putin is out,” he said. 

  

  It is unclear if King was calling for Putin’s removal from power in a coup d’etat, or merely for Russian troops to vacate all Ukrainian-claimed territory. The two warring parties maintain conflicting territorial claims and King acknowledged the war is now in a stalemate, but he nonetheless claimed the conflict would not be a “20-year struggle” like America’s experience in Afghanistan.

  Throughout the virtual presser, King referenced a historical need to prevail over Russia, saying nothing of the potential for escalation to nuclear war between the world’s largest atomic arsenals. 

  The senator noted that he often receives questions from constituents about the wisdom of US involvement in the war, but went on to cite his own version of a Bush-era epithet: ‘We fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.’

  “I get letters every now and then, people saying, ‘Why are we doing this? Ukraine’s far away. It’s not our fight.’ Well, it is our fight, because if we don’t fight it now, it will spread,” King said. “And it will become something that we can’t avoid being involved in, just as occurred in the late 1930s at the beginning of World War II.”

  He went on to claim that if Putin was not stopped in Ukraine, he would go on to conquer more of Europe, comparing the Russian leader to Adolf Hitler several times. 

  King also suggested the US could give additional aid to Ukraine, pointing to allies who are giving more when compared to their overall gross domestic product. “If you measure it in terms of GDP, we’re between fifth and tenth in the world, and other countries are contributing actually larger shares of their GDP to the defense of Ukraine,” he continued, “Why? Because they recognized, as hopefully we will continue to recognize, that this is really a fight for Western values.”

  Since Russia’s invasion kicked off last February, Congress has authorized nearly $120 billion in aid for Kiev, including more than $21 billion in direct military assistance and a series of other financial and humanitarian aid packages. King claimed the American tax dollars are being well spent and accounted for, arguing “The software that they’re using, working with Deloitte and SAP, to track everything coming in – every spare part, every dollar.”

  Amazing candor from Iran-Contra felon Ollie North:

  Ukraine is just like Reagan’s dirty wars in Central America, Africa and Afghanistan

  Most of the aid is a kickback to US weapons makers and Beltway contractors

  The proxy war is preparation for a larger war w/ China over Taiwan pic.twitter.com/kmKW2JZCH4

  — Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) December 29, 2022

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

  However, CNN has reported that US arms sent to Ukraine quickly fall into a “black hole” and are nearly impossible to track. In October, Finland’s national law enforcement agency warned that weapons being shipped to Ukraine are ending up in the hands of criminal gangs, while Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari warned weeks later that “the situation in the Sahel and the raging war in Ukraine serve as major sources of weapons and fighters that bolster the ranks of the terrorists in the Lake Chad Region.”

  King’s latest presser followed a trip to Ukraine last week, where he said he held a “thrilling” meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky and described him as among “the great leaders of the century.”

  While the senator claimed Zelensky and Ukraine are champions of democracy, some analysts have argued that Kiev has only continued its transformation into an authoritarian state under his rule. As commentator Ted Galen Carpenter wrote in The American Conservative, “genuine democracies do not ban multiple opposition parties or close opposition media outlets. Nor do they rigorously censor (and put under strict government control) media outlets that they allow to remain open. Genuine democracies do not outlaw churches that advocate policies the government dislikes.” He added, “yet the Ukrainian government has committed not just one or two, but all of those abuses.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 20:05

• Shortage Fears Spike As Some Costco And Walmart Stores Run Out Of Eggs
  Shortage Fears Spike As Some Costco And Walmart Stores Run Out Of Eggs

  Most Americans have watched their food expenses at grocery stores ballon in recent years. The one item that likely shocked consumers the most is the skyrocketing price of a dozen eggs.

  Avian flu has decimated the US egg-laying hen population at commercial farms. Tens of millions of hens have been culled to prevent one of the worst bird flu outbreaks on record from spreading, though efforts have failed as the virus continues to decimate US egg production, sending retail prices sky-high. 

  

  Readers have known about the dire egg situation for many quarters, but the evolving story is that people are now posting images of supermarkets across the country running out of eggs.

  Never in our life’s has this country run out of #Egg #eggflation thanks to the irresponsible money printing of @TheDemocrats @POTUS and #FederalReserve pic.twitter.com/0A2I9YWM5Y

  — Golden Coast (Cassandra) (@GregCrennan) January 10, 2023

  Costco customers are stunned by the egg shortage.  

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

  This Costco is now completely sold out of eggs.🚨

  2020 was toilet paper.
  2023 is going to be a run on eggs. Get yours now.

  Part of this is avian flu and reduced numbers production.

  🔊sound …🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/GfyyEu2dpz

  — Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) January 10, 2023

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

  2 weeks still no eggs at Costco in So cal!#thanksbiden pic.twitter.com/0iZeIbrP4o

  — Wakethruster (@wakethruster) January 10, 2023

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

  Wow even Costco is out of eggs. pic.twitter.com/9V4PkR57wz

  — Joshua T. Hosler (@JoshuaHosler) December 31, 2022

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

  Not only is an 18 pack of eggs $8, there’s now these signs all over the place. Costco can’t even keep their eggs in stock past 830am.

  We need to be talking about this more. I don’t care what the President and his people say, it’s getting worse, not better. pic.twitter.com/e0d0Uf0gNI

  — Tuggs🍷🥩✝️ (@thattugglife) January 4, 2023

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

  I don’t really want to panic….but Costco is out of eggs and egg whites now too pic.twitter.com/ZVdkpZODda

  — DJ Romeo (@ROMEOREYES) January 10, 2023

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

  @costco no eggs… pic.twitter.com/rroR03acHn

  — Tom Young (@TomYoungSoup) January 8, 2023

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

  Costco and Walmart were both out yesterday…and when they have them there’s a limit now. #EggShortage https://t.co/A35CPUQnjB

  — Matt McAllister (@MorningWolfMatt) January 10, 2023

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

  My #Costco in Tumwater WA was completely out of eggs on Saturday. We have #WilcoxFarms here in Washington. I was told by the store the egg shortage is due to the #birdflu.

  — Kimberly Barr (@Kimberl74195353) January 10, 2023

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

  Hmmm.. that’s the issue with information. What do we even believe anymore.. all I DO know is I eat eggs daily and the shelves are empty… something is causing this shortage.

  I can understand Gas or Toilet Paper.. but, come on.. EGGS?! … before Easter too? pic.twitter.com/9D7qjsHJ8C

  — 49er Luke 💪🏼🏋🏻‍♂️🥇 (@Luke_AZ) January 9, 2023

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

  #Goteggs #eggshortage @Safeway #costco pic.twitter.com/UgXV7VZrwP

  — Stanley Roberts (@StanleyRoberts) January 4, 2023

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

  The search trend “egg shortage” has hit a new high. 

  

  News stories across the web featuring “egg shortage” have also surged, the highest since the last avian flu outbreak in 2015. 

  

  In 2020, toilet paper was in short supply. Now it’s 2023, and it appears nationwide egg supplies are dwindling. 

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

  Looks like eggs are the new toilet paper 👀😳 pic.twitter.com/cnpgEEC43y

  — Emily Hoeven (@emily_hoeven) January 10, 2023

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

  How long until people figure out that becoming your supplier of food (i.e., farmer) and living as much as you can off the grid can save you from the pain of shortages and inflation? Perhaps, people will panic search for where to buy egg-laying hens and start their own farm — clearly, America’s food supply chain continues to fracture. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 19:45

• Can 'The Magnificent 20' Remake The Republican Party For The Better?
  Can ‘The Magnificent 20’ Remake The Republican Party For The Better?

  Authored by Roger L. Simon via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The success of what we might call “The Magnificent 20”—after the film “The Magnificent Seven,” itself a remake of Akira Kurosawa’s classic “Seven Samurai”—who were able to win many concessions in return for allowing Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) to become speaker of the House, has implications far beyond Congress.

  

  It could and should be a harbinger of a new Republican Party, a party that’s actually responsive to the people, to the will of its voters.

  This would be something unique in recent American politics, right or left.

  For this to happen, two important things must happen.

  One, those voters must keep their politicians’ feet to the proverbial fire; in fact, they must redouble or more their vigilance.

  Two, Republican establishment politicians must themselves do either of two things: get off the playing field or show some real courage by demonstrably, and not just verbally, reforming.

  We’ll have a rapid measure of the latter with the behavior of McCarthy.

  But it’s a far greater problem than that. The Republican Party, high and low—including all its institutions from the Republican National Committee down to the county level—are shot through with “Six Degrees of RINOism”—those who occasionally say the right things for the public, but rarely follow through in private.

  Often, they deliberately obstruct real constitutional progress and the very things the 20 were fighting for. The primary interest of these people isn’t the wishes of the people but their own self-interest, preservation of power, and, most of all, financial gain.

  Even at those lower levels—down to the selection of textbooks, local candidates for seemingly minor positions, and, it should go without saying, voting methods themselves—political power has become a royal road to riches. At the higher level, it has become a royal road to spectacular riches with Big Tech and Big Pharma, not to mention China, providing virtually limitless wherewithal.

  To put an end to this and to honor the courage of “The Magnificent 20,” the Republican Party needs what communists used to call a rectification program. That’s becoming evident from those Republicans who are suddenly rising in resistance to the House Rules package with the bogus excuse that it was negotiated behind closed doors, as if it could have been done otherwise, given the current state of our country.

  But there’s good news, optimistic news, with excellent ramifications for the future, including and especially the announcement that Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) will chair the select committee on the “Weaponization of Government.” Nothing could possibly be more urgent for the survival of our republic.

  So let’s cheer on the work of “The Magnificent 20” and their comrades-in-arms, such as Jordan and the others who supported them in their quiet, let’s hope now-public, ways.

  And if you’ll excuse this onetime Hollywood screenwriter (special advice: avoid the acclaimed but über-pretentious and boring “Tár” at all costs), I would like to explain my reference to “Seven Samurai,” which was directed by Kurosawa, possibly the greatest filmmaker of all time.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 19:25

• Pentagon Drops COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate For Troops
  Pentagon Drops COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate For Troops

  The Pentagon announced on Tuesday that the Covid-19 vaccine will no longer be required for troops, according to a new memo signed by Defense Secretary Lloyd “Raytheon” Austin.

  

  The memo – widely anticipated wince new legislation signed into law on Dec. 23 required him to rescind the mandate within 30 days – does give commanders discretion over how unvaccinated troops are deployed, whatever that means.

  Leading up to the decision, the Defense Department had already ceased all punitive actions against personnel who refused the shot.

  “The Department will continue to promote and encourage COVID-19 vaccination for all service members,” reads Austin’s memo. “Vaccination enhances operational readiness and protects the force.”

  

  The 30-day requirement to rescind the mandate was instituted under an $858 billion defense spending bill signed into law in December by President Joe Biden, who had opposed the GOP-backed provision, and agreed with Austin who at the time said that lifting the mandate wasn’t in the best interests of the military.

  Ultimately, Biden caved in order to win passage of the legislation.

  More than 8,400 troops were forced out of the military for refusing the jab.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 19:05

• The Present Fiat Monetary System Is Breaking Down
  The Present Fiat Monetary System Is Breaking Down

  Authored by Frank Shostak via The Mises Institute,

  The heart of economic growth is an expanding subsistence fund, or the pool of real savings. This pool, which is composed of final consumer goods, sustains individuals in the various stages of the production process. The increase in the pool of real savings permits the expansion and the enhancement of the infrastructure, and this strengthens economic growth. An increase in economic growth for a given stock of money implies more goods per unit of money. This means that economic growth, all other things being equal increases the purchasing power of money.

  

  Note that most individuals are likely to strive to improve their living standards. This means that individuals are likely to aim at expanding the pool of real savings, which will in turn strengthen economic growth and the purchasing power of money. In the framework of market-selected money such as gold, the purchasing power of money is likely to strengthen over time.

  According to Joseph Salerno,

  Historically, the natural tendency in the industrial market economy under a commodity money such as gold has been for general prices to persistently decline as ongoing capital accumulation and advances in industrial techniques led to a continual expansion in the supplies of goods.

  Hence, in the framework of a gold standard, the purchasing power of financial assets such as stocks and bonds is likely to strengthen alongside economic growth. Note that stronger economic growth, all other things being equal, implies a strengthening in the pool of real savings; i.e., the pool of final consumer goods.

  Under the present monetary standard—i.e., the paper standard—an increase in the quantity of money, because of the loose policy of the central bank, undermines the pool of real savings and in turn undermines economic growth.

  (Observe that loose monetary policy sets in motion an exchange of nothing for something.)

  As long as the pool of real savings is expanding, the increase in the money supply creates the illusion that the central bank can generate real economic growth and strengthen assets’ purchasing power. However, once the pool of real savings comes under pressure because of the monetary pumping, the growth in assets’ purchasing power starts to slow. According to Richard von Strigl,

  Let us assume that in some country production must be completely rebuilt. The only factors of production available to the population besides labourers are those factors of production provided by nature. Now, if production is to be carried out by a roundabout method, let us assume of one year’s duration, then it is self-evident that production can only begin if, in addition to these originary factors of production, a subsistence fund is available to the population which will secure their nourishment and any other needs for a period of one year. . . . The greater this fund, the longer is the roundabout factor of production that can be undertaken, and the greater the output will be.

  The Subsistence Fund and Money

  When producers exchange their produce for money, they can then exchange their money for various consumer goods; i.e., they can access the subsistence fund whenever they deem this necessary. When an individuals exchanges their money for goods, this is an act of exchange and not an act of payment—money is just the medium of exchange. Payment is made by means of various goods.

  For instance, a baker pays for shoes by means of the bread he produced, while the shoemaker pays for the bread by means of the shoes he made. (Both shoes and bread are part of the subsistence fund, as they are final consumer goods.) When the baker exchanges his money for shoes, he has already paid for the shoes with the bread that he produced prior to this exchange.

  Trouble erupts when, on account of loose monetary policies, a structure of production emerges that ties up much more consumer goods than it creates. This excessive consumption relative to the production of consumer goods leads to a decline in the subsistence fund, meaning that there is less economic support for the individuals that are employed in the various stages of the production structure. This results in an economic slump.

  Intermediate Goods

  What about a producer of intermediate goods, like a producer of a special tool—what is his contribution to the subsistence fund?

  An individual who exchanges his money for the tool will employ the tool in the production of final consumer goods or in the production of other tools and machinery that, in turn, will contribute to the production of final consumer goods sometime in the future. The producer of the special tool does not directly supply final consumer goods. However, he does offer means to secure these goods. He also offers time.

  According to Murray Rothbard:

  Crusoe without the axe is two hundred fifty hours away from his desired house; Crusoe with the axe is only two hundred hours away. If the logs of wood had been piled up ready-made on his arrival, he would be that much closer to his objective; and if the house were there to begin with, he would achieve his desire immediately. He would be further advanced toward his goal without the necessity of further restriction of consumption.

  Now, what about education and the arts? Should we include them in the subsistence fund? Without the availability of consumer goods that sustain individuals, education and the arts are likely to be lower on individuals’ priority lists.

  Once the individuals’ living standard increases, all these things become affordable to them. Hence, anything that undermines the subsistence fund undermines the ability to live like human beings, as opposed to existing like other animals.

  The Purchasing Power of Financial Assets and Monetary Liquidity

  An important factor that causes fluctuations in financial asset prices is monetary liquidity. Monetary liquidity depicts the interaction between the supply and the demand for money. Now, the increase in liquidity—an increase in the supply of money relative to the demand for money—does not enter all asset markets instantaneously. It enters various markets sequentially. Note that the price of an asset is the amount of money paid for the asset.

  When money enters a particular asset market, there is now more money per unit of the asset. This means that the price of the asset in this market has gone up. After a time lapse, once investors have adopted the view that the asset is overvalued, they move the monetary liquidity to other asset markets. This shows that there is a time lag between changes in liquidity and changes in the average price of assets.

  Observe that the increase in the momentum of asset prices is driven by the increase in the lagged liquidity momentum. Conversely, a decline in the liquidity momentum after a time lag results in a decline in the momentum of asset prices. It would appear that the monetary liquidity is the key driver of asset prices. This is not the case. The pool of real savings, which gives rise to economic growth, determines the purchasing power of assets in money terms.

  Notwithstanding the popular view that increases in the money supply can help grow the economy, money cannot do such things. More money cannot replace real savings that sustain individuals in the various stages of production. According to  Rothbard, this is revealed once the pool of real savings starts to decline and the central bank’s monetary pumping becomes ineffective in reviving the pace of economic activity.

  In the framework of market-selected money such as gold and in the absence of a central bank, an increase in assets’ purchasing power is going to reflect an increase in the pool of real savings and thus economic growth.

  Central bank policies, however, curtail investors’ ability to distinguish wealth-generating activities from non-wealth-generating ones; i.e., bubble activities. An increase in money supply masquerades as an increase in real wealth. This results in erroneous investment decisions. Hence, all other things being equal, the exchange value of assets is set by the pool of real savings. Changes in monetary liquidity because of central bank policies cause disruptions known as bull-bear markets.

  Summary and Conclusions

  An important factor that appears to drive financial asset prices is monetary liquidity, defined as the growth rate in money supply minus the growth rate in the demand for money. This is not the case. The pool of real savings gives rise to economic growth, which for a given stock of money determines the purchasing power of assets.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 18:45

• Apartment Demand "Evaporated" As Inflation Crushed Consumer Confidence
  Apartment Demand “Evaporated” As Inflation Crushed Consumer Confidence

  Property management firm RealPage published new data that shows demand for US apartments began “evaporating” as early as last summer as the highest inflation in a generation crushed consumer confidence.

  “We’ve never before seen a period like this – weak demand for all types of housing despite robust job growth and sizable wage gains,” RealPage Chief Economist Jay Parsons told commercial real estate news website “GlobeSt.” 

  “It wasn’t just apartment demand that shot up in 2021 and plunged in 2022. The same pattern played out to varying degrees in other rentals and in for-sale homes,” Parsons said. 

  Parsons noted, “while some pundits have suggested demand is slowing due to affordability challenges, there’s not yet any evidence that’s true within the professionally managed, market-rate apartment market.” He said turnover, while normalizing, is still very low, and about 96% of renters were paying on time as of November. 

  In addition, “there’s no indication renters are doubling up to any significant degree,” he said, adding, “that may occur later, but as the publicly traded apartment REITs all reported in their last earnings call, it’s not a major factor yet.” 

  Parsons pointed out, “there’s no ‘flight to affordability’ – meaning that renters aren’t moving down from more expensive units or markets into more affordable units or markets” and said sliding demand is at all price points and every market. 

  RealPage’s top economist believes plunging demand is the cause of macroeconomic headwinds denting consumer confidence:

  “Low consumer confidence means many American households feel nervous and uncertain, and that has a freezing effect on household formation and housing demand.

  “Human nature is that when we feel uncertain, we’re much more likely to stay put – and that’s what happened in 2022.”

  Separately, Parsons tweeted an image that shows rental demand “evaporated” in the second half of last year. 

  “Both Q3 and Q4 recorded the weakest numbers since 2013. The Dec 2022 numbers were especially low. While December is always slow, Dec 2022 was the slowest month in at least 12 years,” he said. 

  

  Parsons continued in a series of tweets about how the collapse in rental demand is “truly unprecedented.” 

  

  Recall back in October, we explained to readers when it comes to measuring inflation, the Fed Reserve is looking at inaccurate and out-of-date data, the result of Shelter Inflation and Owner Equivalent Rent – the most significant weight of the CPI basket – being about 9-12 months behind the curve when it comes what’s really happening in the housing market. 

  Indeed, as we recently said in “Why The CPI Is Making The Same Huge Mistake Now It Did One Year Ago,” the time to panic about soaring rent was more than a year ago — as we noted in September 2021 – but not the Fed which was busy spreading fake news that inflation was transitory. And now what’s happening is that BLS is finally caught up to the reality 6-9 months ago when rents and home prices were indeed soaring… meanwhile, rental markets are cooling across the country as the US risks sliding into a Fed-induced recession. 

  RealPage’s data and the mounting evidence we’ve provided over the last few quarters shows the Fed chooses to ignore high-frequency data for laggard data in how it views the shelter inflation situation. Of course, the Fed will realize when it’s too late that it overtightened.  

  And perhaps Fed Chair Powell should take a look at Goldman Sachs’ CPI preview for this week, where chief economist Jan Hatzius is certainly paying attention to high-frequency rent data that has all but gone negative on an annualized basis, an indication CPI shelter inflation could begin to recede as early as December. 

  

  Pro subs can read the full note in the usual place. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 18:25

• Tverberg: In 2023, Expect A Financial Crash Followed By Major Energy-Related Changes
  Tverberg: In 2023, Expect A Financial Crash Followed By Major Energy-Related Changes

  Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

  Why is the economy headed for a financial crash? It appears to me that the world economy hit Limits to Growth about 2018 because of a combination of diminishing returns in resource extraction together with rising population. The Covid-19 pandemic and the accompanying financial manipulations hid these problems for a few years, but now, as the world economy tries to reopen, the problems are back with a vengeance.

  

  Figure 1. World primary energy consumption per capita based on BP’s 2022 Statistical Review of World Energy. Same chart shown in post, Today’s Energy Crisis Is Very Different from the Energy Crisis of 2005.

  In the period between 1981 and 2022, the economy was lubricated by a combination of ever-rising debt, falling interest rates, and the growing use of Quantitative Easing. These financial manipulations helped to hide the rising cost of fossil fuel extraction after 1970. Even more money supply was added in 2020. Now central bankers are trying to squeeze the excesses out of the system using a combination of higher interest rates and Quantitative Tightening.

  After central bankers brought about recessions in the past, the world economy was able to recover by adding more energy supply. However, this time we are dealing with a situation of true depletion; there is no good way to recover by adding more energy supplies to the system. Instead, the only way the world economy can recover, at least partially, is by squeezing some non-essential energy uses out of the system. Hopefully, this can be done in such a way that a substantial part of the world economy can continue to operate in a manner close to that in the past.

  One approach to making the economy more efficient in its energy use is by greater regionalization. If countries can start trading almost entirely with nearby neighbors, this will reduce the world’s energy consumption. In parts of the world with plentiful resources and manufacturing capability, the economy can perhaps continue without major changes. Another way of squeezing out excesses might be through the elimination (at least in part) of the trade advantage the US obtains by using the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. In this post, I will also mention a few other ways that non-essential energy consumption might be reduced.

  I believe that a financial crash is likely sometime during 2023. After the crash, the system will start squeezing down on the less necessary parts of the economy. While these changes will start in 2023, they will likely take place over a period of years. In this post, I will try to explain what I see happening.

  [1] The world economy, in its currently highly leveraged state, cannot withstand both higher interest rates and Quantitative Tightening.

  With higher interest rates, the value of bonds falls. With bonds “worth less,” the financial statements of pension plans, insurance companies, banks and others holding those bonds all look worse. More contributions are suddenly needed to fund pension funds. Governments may find themselves needing to bail out many of these organizations.

  At the same time, individual borrowers find that debt becomes more expensive to finance. Thus, it becomes more expensive to buy a home, vehicle, or farm. Debt to speculate in the stock market becomes more expensive. With higher debt costs, there is a tendency for asset prices, such as home prices and stock prices, to fall. With this combination (lower asset prices and higher interest rates) debt defaults are likely to become more common.

  Quantitative Tightening makes it harder to obtain liquidity to buy goods internationally. This change is more subtle, but it also works in the direction of causing disruptions to financial markets.

  Other stresses to the financial system can be expected, as well, in the near term. For example, Biden’s program that allows students to delay payments on their student loans will be ending in the next few months, adding more stress to the system. China has had huge problems with loans to property developers, and these may continue or get worse. Many of the poor countries around the world are asking the IMF to provide debt relief because they cannot afford energy supplies and other materials at today’s prices. Europe is concerned about possible high energy prices.

  This is all happening at a time when total debt levels are even higher than they were in 2008. In addition to “regular” debt, the economic system includes trillions of dollars of derivative promises. Based on these considerations alone, a much worse crash than occurred in 2008 seems possible.

  [2] The world as a whole is already headed into a major recession. This situation seems likely to get worse in 2023.

  The Global Purchasing Managers Index (PMI) has been signaling problems for months. A few bullet points from their site include the following:

  • Service sector output declined in October, registering the worst monthly performance since mid-2020.

  • Manufacturing output meanwhile fell for a third consecutive month, also declining at the steepest rate since June 2020.

  • PMI subindices showed new business contracting at the quickest rate since June 2020, with the weak demand environment continuing to be underpinned by declining worldwide trade.

  • The global manufacturing PMI’s new export orders index has now signaled a reduction in worldwide goods exports for eight straight months.

  • Price inflationary pressures remained solid in October, despite rates of increase in input costs and output charges easing to 19-month lows.

  The economic situation in the US doesn’t look as bad as it does for the world as a whole, perhaps because the US dollar has been at a relatively high level. However, a situation with the US doing well and other countries doing poorly is unsustainable. If nothing else, the US needs to be able to buy raw materials and to sell finished goods and services to these other countries. Thus, recession can be expected to spread.

  [3] The underlying issue that the world is starting to experience is overshoot and collapse, related to a combination of rising population and diminishing returns with respect to resource extraction.

  In a recent post, I explained that the world seems to be reaching the limits of fossil fuel extraction. So-called renewables are not doing much to supplement fossil fuels. As a result, energy consumption per capita seems to have hit a peak in 2018 (Figure 1) and now cannot keep up with population growth without prices that rise to the point of becoming unaffordable for consumers.

  The economy, like the human body, is a self-organizing system powered by energy. In physics terminology, both are dissipative structures. We humans can get along for a while with less food (our source of energy), but we will lose weight. Without enough food, we are more likely to catch illnesses. We might even die, if the lack of food is severe enough.

  The world economy can perhaps get along with less energy for a while, but it will behave strangely. It needs to cut back, in a way that might be thought of as being analogous to a human losing weight, on a permanent basis. On Figure 1 (above), we can see evidence of two temporary cutbacks. One was in 2009, reflecting the impact of the Great Financial Crisis of 2008-2009. Another related to the changes associated with Covid-19 in 2020.

  If energy supply is really reaching extraction limits, and this is causing the recent inflation, there needs to be a permanent way of cutting back energy consumption, relative to the output of the economy. I expect that changes in this direction will start happening about the time of the upcoming financial crash.

  [4] A major financial crash in 2023 may adversely affect many people’s ability to buy goods and services.

  A financial discontinuity, including major defaults that spread from country to country, is certain to adversely affect banks, insurance companies and pension plans. If problems are widespread, governments may not be able to bail out all these institutions. This, by itself, may make the purchasing of goods and services more difficult. Citizens may find that the funds they thought were in the bank are subject to daily withdrawal limits, or they may find that the value of shares of stock they owned is much lower. As a result of such changes, they will not have the funds to buy the goods they want, even if the goods are available in shops.

  Alternatively, citizens may find that their local governments have issued so much money (to try to bail out all these institutions) that there is hyperinflation. In such a case, there may be plenty of money available, but very few goods to buy. As a result, it still may be very difficult to buy the goods a family needs.

  [5] Many people believe that oil prices will rise in response to falling production. If the real issue is that the world is reaching extraction limits, the problem may be inadequate demand and falling prices instead.

  If people have less to spend following the financial crash, based on the reasoning in Section [4], this could lead to lower demand, and thus lower prices.

  It also might be noted that both the 2009 and 2020 dips in consumption (on Figure 1) corresponded to times of low oil prices, not high. Oil companies cut back on production if they find that prices are too low for them to expect to make a profit on new production.

  We also know that a major problem as limits are reached is wage disparity. The wealthy use more energy products than poor people, but not in proportion to their higher wealth. The wealthy tend to buy more services, such as health care and education, which are not as energy intensive.

  If the poor get too poor, they find that they must cut back on things like meat consumption, housing expenses, and transportation expenses. All these things are energy intensive. If very many poor people cut back on products that indirectly require energy consumption, the prices for oil and other energy products are likely to fall, perhaps below the level required by producers for profitability.

  [6] If I am right about low energy prices, especially after a financial discontinuity, we can expect oil, coal, and natural gas production to fall in 2023.

  Producers tend to produce less oil, coal and natural gas if prices are too low.

  Also, government leaders know that high energy prices (especially oil prices) lead to high food prices and high inflation. If they want to be re-elected, they will do everything in their power to keep energy prices down.

  [7] Without enough energy to go around, more conflict can be expected.

  Additional conflict can be expected to come in many forms. It can look like local demonstrations by citizens who are unhappy about their wages or other conditions. If wage disparity is a problem, it will be the low-wage workers who will be demonstrating. I understand that demonstrations in Europe have recently been a problem.

  Conflict can also take the form of wide differences among political parties, and even within political parties. The difficulty that the US recently encountered electing a Speaker of the House of Representatives is an example of such conflict. Political parties may splinter, making it difficult to form a government and get any business accomplished.

  Conflict may also take the form of conflict among countries, such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. I expect most wars today will be undeclared wars. With less energy to go around, the emphasis will be on approaches that require less energy. Deception will become important. Destruction of another country’s energy infrastructure, such as pipelines or electricity transmission, may be part of the plan. Another form of deception may involve the use of bioweapons and supposed cures for these bioweapons.

  [8] After the discontinuity, the world economy is likely to become more disconnected and more regionally aligned. Russia and China will tend to be aligned. The US seems likely to be another center of influence.

  A major use of oil is transporting goods and people around the globe. If there is not enough oil to go around, one way of saving oil is to transport goods over shorter distances. People can talk by telephone or video conferences to save on oil used in long distance transportation. Thus, increased regionalization seems likely to take place.

  In fact, the pattern is already beginning. Russia and China have recently been forging long-term alliances centered on providing natural gas supplies to China and on strengthening military ties. Being geographically adjacent is clearly helpful. Furthermore, major US oil companies are now focusing more on developments in the Americas, rather than on big international projects, according to the Wall Street Journal.

  Countries that are geographically close to Russia-China may choose to align with them, especially if they have resources or finished products (such as televisions or cars) to sell. Likewise, countries near the US with suitable products to sell may align with the United States.

  Countries that are too distant, or that don’t have resources or finished products to sell (goods, rather than services), may largely be left out. For example, European countries that specialize in financial services and tourism may have difficulty finding trading partners. Their economies may shrink more rapidly than those of other countries.

  [9] In a regionally aligned world, the US dollar is likely to lose its status as the world’s reserve currency.

  With increased regionalization, I would expect that the US dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency would tend to disappear, perhaps starting as soon as 2023. For example, transactions between Russia and China may begin to take place directly in yuan, without reference to a price in US dollars, and without the need for US funds to allow such transactions to take place.

  Transactions within the Americas seem likely to continue taking place using US dollars, especially when they involve the buying and selling of energy-related products.

  With the US dollar as the reserve currency, the US has been able to import far more than it exports, year after year. Based on World Bank data, in 2021 the US imported $2.85 trillion of goods (including fossil fuels, but excluding services) and exported $1.76 trillion of goods, leading to a goods-only excess of imports over exports of $1.09 trillion. When exports of services are included, the excess of imports over exports shrinks to “only” $845 billion. It is hard to see how this large a gap can continue. Such a significant difference between imports and exports would tend to shrink if the US were to lose its reserve currency status.

  [10] In a disconnected world, manufacturing of all kinds will fall, especially outside of Southeast Asia (including China and India), where a major share of today’s manufacturing is performed.

  A huge share of today’s manufacturing capability is now in China and India. If these countries have access to oil from the Middle East and Russia, I expect they will continue to produce goods and services. If there are not enough of these goods to go around, I would expect that they would primarily be exported to other countries within their own geographic region.

  The Americas and Europe will be at a disadvantage because they have fewer manufactured goods to sell. (The US, of course, has a significant quantity of food to export.) Starting in the 1980s, the US and Europe moved a large share of their manufacturing to Southeast Asia. Now, when these countries talk about ramping up clean energy production, they find that they are largely without the resources and the processing needed for such clean energy projects.

  

  Figure 2: New York Times chart based on International Energy Agency data. February 22, 2022.

  In fact, ramping up “regular” manufacturing production of any type in the US, (for example, local manufacturing of generic pharmaceutical drugs, or manufacturing of steel pipe used in the drilling of oil wells) would not be easy. Most of today’s manufacturing capability is elsewhere. Even if the materials could easily be gathered into one place in the US, it would take time to get factories up and running and to train workers. If some necessary items are lacking, such as particular raw materials or semiconductor chips, transitioning to US manufacturing capability might prove to be impossible in practice.

  [11] After a financial discontinuity, “empty shelves” are likely to become increasingly prevalent.

  We can expect that the total quantity of goods and services produced worldwide will begin to fall for several reasons. First, regionalized economies cannot access as diverse a set of raw materials as a world economy. This, by itself, will limit the types of goods that an economy can produce. Second, if the total quantity of raw materials used in making the inputs declines over time, the total amount of finished goods and services can be expected to fall. Finally, as mentioned in Section [4], financial problems may cut back on buyers’ ability to purchase goods and services, limiting the number of buyers available for finished products, and thus holding down sales prices.

  A major reason empty shelves become can be expected to become more prevalent is because more distant countries will tend to get cut out of the distribution of goods. This is especially the case as the total quantity of goods and services produced falls. A huge share of the manufacturing of goods is now done in China, India, and other countries in Southeast Asia.

  If the world economy shifts toward mostly local trade, the US and Europe are likely to find it harder to find new computers and new cell phones since these tend to be manufactured in Southeast Asia. Other goods made in Southeast Asia include furniture and appliances. These, too, may be harder to find. Even replacement car parts may be difficult to find, especially if a car was manufactured in Southeast Asia.

  [12] There seem to be many other ways the self-organizing economy could shrink back to make itself a more efficient dissipative structure.

  We cannot know in advance exactly how the economy will shrink back its energy consumption, besides regionalization and pushing the US dollar (at least partially) out of being the reserve currency. Some other areas where the physics of the economy might force cutbacks include the following:

  • Vacation travel

  • Banks, insurance companies, pension programs (much less needed)

  • The use of financial leverage of all kinds

  • Governmental programs providing payments to those not actively in the workforce (such as pensions, unemployment insurance, disability payments)

  • Higher education programs (many graduates today cannot get jobs that pay for the high cost of their educations)

  • Extensive healthcare programs, especially for people who have no hope of ever re-entering the workforce

  In fact, the population may start to fall because of epidemics, poor health, or even too little food. With fewer people, limited energy supply will go further.

  Governments and intergovernmental agencies may start to fail because they cannot get enough tax revenue. Of course, the underlying issue for the lack of tax revenue is likely to be that the businesses within the governed area cannot operate because they cannot obtain enough inexpensive energy resources for operation.

  [13] Conclusion.

  If the world economy experiences major financial turbulence in 2023, we could be in for a rough ride. In my opinion, a major financial crash seems likely. This is could upset the economy far more seriously than the 2008 crash.

  I am certain that some mitigation measures can be implemented. For example, there could be a major push toward trying to make everything that we have today last longer. Materials can be salvaged from structures that are no longer used. And some types of local production can be ramped up.

  We can keep our fingers crossed that I am wrong but, with fewer oil and other energy resources available per person, moving goods shorter distances makes sense. Thus, the initial trends we are seeing toward regionalization are likely to continue. The move away from the US dollar as the reserve currency also looks likely to continue. Moreover, if the changes I am talking about don’t occur in 2023, they are likely to begin in 2024 or 2025.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/10/2023 – 18:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Invasion Equation
  The Invasion Equation

  Authored by Clarence Henderson via RealClear Wire,

  Rape trees, river floaters, skeletal remains, and fentanyl candy. The new vernacular of illegal immigration is an indictment of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) loss of operational control along the U.S.-Southern border. A consequence of this is the transformation of cartel insurgencies into well-formed armies that recruit and employ uniformed soldiers, have supporting intelligence operations, and control terrain. The challenge now confronting state and federal law enforcement is no longer how to deter an insurgency; it’s how to defeat an army.

  

  Modern armies are resourced by nation-states who provide moral leadership in times of war. But the accountable governments of nation-states can falter and fail. Mexico in particular has a compromised central government that is not protecting its own homeland from subversive actors. When this happens, a conglomerate of paid professionals, mercenaries, conscripts, and criminals fills the void to either protect or exploit the resources of a community. It was true within the first communities of Mesopotamia, and it is happening now in communities across Mexico. This is how armies begin. A state is incapable of securing its communities, accountable governments lose legitimacy, and subversive actors start vying for control of terrain to exploit resources.  

  The hallmark of any effective army is its ability to control terrain. The cartel armies have done that by co-opting the gangs of the U.S. and operate the world’s largest crime syndicate complete with narco distribution hubs throughout the U.S.. In Mexico they cordon cities and run roadblocks to collect information and extort residents. To date, as much as 20 percent of Mexico has come under control of the cartels as previously reported by CIA analysts. Their center of gravity is the illicit drug and human trafficking revenues from which they derive their strength. The illegal aliens that they infiltrate, the drugs that they smuggle, and the terrorist that they give safe passage each infiltrate the Southern border under their control and further empower their control of terrain.

  The Invasion Word

  Armies deter aggression and win the nation’s wars by dominating the land. So, the maxim goes… But this is a description that prescribes to a classical definition of state-on-state aggression initiated by an invasion of one state’s sponsored military against another’s. Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution even guarantees that the U.S. shall protect its states against invasion. And if not, Article 1, Section 10 permits states the right to protect themselves from an invasion. These “invasion clauses” are the genesis of the debate that is occurring between the federal government and border states. The federal government clings to the classic definition of an invasion and does not believe the humanitarian disaster occurring under the control of cartel armies constitutes an invasion. Whereas border state Governors believe in a 21st century asymmetric style of invasion pointing to the infiltration of bad actors causing economic and criminal harm to their states. Regardless, the federal dogma continues along the line that an invasion is an “armed hostility from another political entity.”

  To date, America’s next great leader has yet to emerge and articulate a coherent unified response to the 21st century cartel invasion. Instead, a range of state-based strategies and stunts have been developed. Governor Gregg Abbott of Texas has passed an executive order empowering his state to apprehend illegal immigrants in certain circumstances as well as designating Mexican cartels as terrorist organizations, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey was seeking court affirmation for his state’s right to defend itself, and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is focusing on trafficking operations. And each of the aforementioned Governors has since adopted the political stunt of giving illegal aliens safe passage to sanctuary cities in northern states via bussing. As a result, cartel armies continue to consolidate power and gain control of territories while states bear the brunt of economic and criminal impacts.

  Deploying the National Guard

  The loss of operational control along the U.S.-Southern border by DHS has forced border state Governors into a constitutional dilemma. To date, no Governor has challenged the federal government to enforce federal immigration law and turn back persons seeking illegal entry. Instead, states such as Texas are relying on their own state constitutional authority to use the National Guard to arrest illegal aliens committing crimes. In fact, the National Guard has had a continuous presence on the Southern border since 2014 when former Texas Governor Perry deployed 1,000 troops to interdict Cartel del Golfo (Gulf Cartel). Deploying the National Guard to interdict cartel armies remains a desirable option due to the federal government’s abandonment of the border. But when opting for this option the Governor’s and their military commanders must maintain strategic symmetry throughout all facets of the operation. On-going challenges the National Guard is confronting on the border has generated the following principles that should be addressed when conducting border operations.

  1. A Task Force is not a Strategy
  2. Don’t Surge Your Troops to Failure
  3. You Can’t Go to War with a Border
  4. Build Consensus Between the Diplomats, the Bureaucrats, and the Generals

  A Task Force is Not a Strategy

  Governors love a good Task Force. And they exist for virtually every political, economic, and social purpose. As far as the border is concerned, Current task forces include Arizona’s Task Force Badge to support local law enforcement in border towns; New Mexico’s Human Trafficking Task Force; and Texas’ Task Force on Border and Homeland Security. These task forces sometimes strain due to the broad scope of concerns they attempt to address. Governor’s fall into a ‘my task force is bigger than yours” mentality and end up creating over representative committees. For instance, Texas’ Task Force on Border and Homeland Security has representatives from eight state agencies, the Border Sheriffs’ Coalition, county judges, mayors, property rights organizations, concerned citizens, and border community prosecutors. Good luck with that task force developing a specific focus.

  A bloated think-tank style “task force” creates ambiguity at the operational level that lacks strategic context. What often results are large task forces that try to cover all conceivable scenarios due to the absence of a unified strategy. Inevitably, the Governor responds to think-tank style task forces and their recommendations and begins to implement what is confused as a strategy. Whereas the General tries to facilitate force structure and build a strategy within their joint staff. Thus, the two begin to react to separate problem sets.

  Don’t Surge Your Troops to Failure

  The National Guard is an operational force that provides strategic depth to our nation’s Army and Air Force. Over the past two decades the National Guard became quite adept as a resource provider to the Middle Eastern wars. In this federal role the National Guard followed a deliberate mobilization process lasting up to a year that culminated with properly trained, equipped, and missioned Soldiers. State led missions on the other hand are led by the Governor and TAG who controls the state’s National Guard. These National Guard soldiers and airmen are activated on state active duty and remain under the command and control of the Governor while costs are incurred by the taxpayers of the state. In this capacity the state’s TAG is responsible for training, readiness, and oversight of soldiers and airmen.

  Governors don’t understand this concept and instead believe that the military exists within a perpetual state of readiness. And because of this belief they are quick to surge troops to the border when political pressure builds. Doing this wrong had disastrous results in Texas. Just this past summer a “no notice surge” of up to 10,000 troops to the Texas-Mexico border was attempted by the Governor. What resulted was a logistical nightmare of delayed pay, substandard living conditions, and equipment shortages. Most egregious were a number of suicides attributed to forced mobilizations because of no warning, and a tragic drowning due to limited training. In the wake of this disaster the TAG, Major General Tracy Norris, was replaced due to her inability to plan an operation, other senior officers were reassigned, and the number of troops on the border was reduced.  

  You Can’t Go to War with a Border

  The Prussian Soldier and writer Carl von Clausewitz wrote over two hundred years ago that war is not exerted on inanimate or passive human material. The U.S.-Mexico border is an inanimate terrain feature. It does not think or fight. The thinkers and fighters are “Cartel Americana” that have saturated the Americas in depth throughout the northern and Southern hemispheres. Defeating the illicit activities of the cartel armies requires a defense in depth strategy extending to within the cities and towns of the U.S. away from the border. What is required is a higher order of operational strategy consisting of what military theorist Liddell Hart refers to as the “concentration of strengths against weaknesses”.

  The strength of the National Guard is its array of specialized units and human capital that do not exist within the active component of the U.S. military. Units such as homeland response forces, counter drug programs, cyber defense teams, and information operations; amongst other specialized capabilities could be the focus beyond the border. The primary intent should be to reclaim the physical and digital terrain that the cartel armies have seized. Augmenting the special agents within the Criminal Investigation Divisions of each state’s County Sheriff’s Offices, Attorney General’s Office, and Departments of Public Safety would provide a real threat to the cartel army’s self-preservation. Physical interdictions do not cease but instead become enhanced on the border.  

  Build Consensus Between the Diplomats, the Bureaucrats, and the Generals

  A Governor that decides to deploy the National Guard takes on the role of a diplomat to convince both the citizenry and state legislature for the need of civil self-protection. The messaging that the Governor delivers must be persuasive enough to receive popular support, pass legislation, and forge a budget. In Arizona Governor Doug Ducey influenced state legislators to create a border security fund consisting of $55 million; Florida Governor Ron DeSantis created a consortium of state law enforcement agencies expending $1.6 million to provide border security support to Texas; and Texas Governor Greg Abbott influenced his state legislature to provide $3 billion to finance the Operation Lone Star mission. Building consensus for a budget proposal is a core competency of Governorship. However, building funding consensus is not synonymous with strategic consensus. 

  Governors, as the Commander in Chief of state military forces, are responsible for providing a strategic context to their National Guard troops. They should be able to rely on their existing agencies to craft that strategic context. The strategic aptitudes of a state exist within the Department of Emergency Management, Department of Public Safety, and Military Department (National Guard) who possess competent strategic planners. It is within these departments and agencies that a strategic framework is developed to visualize the operation in time, space, and purpose. From that, operations at the tactical level are developed, and resources applied through existing state bureaucracies. Doing this right requires strategic patience which is antithetical to a Governor who may have just negotiated a “border package” and needs a surge to commence. Thus consensus on a strategy often is strained from the very first press conference.

  Conclusion

  Current border state Governors have been forced into a situation non dissimilar to Reagan’s dilemma of 1984 when he responded to the Soviet Union’s influence in our hemisphere. During that time Reagan stated, “the United States has a legal right and a moral duty to help resist the subversive activities of the Soviet Union.” The dilemma of our hemisphere today is how to defend the United States from cartel armies. It’s not good practice to commit large military formations to long term criminal enforcement. It’s simply not within the DNA of America’s founding principles. However, the U.S. is being invaded by cartel armies as they continue to infiltrate the U.S.. How our Governors decide to leverage Constitutional authorities will determine if this war can be won.  

  Colonel Clarence Henderson (U.S. Army, ret.) is a former Infantry Brigade Combat Team Commander and U.S. Army War College graduate with over 20 years of active service and multiple worldwide deployments. He was the former commander of all troops on the border under Governors Rick Perry and Greg Abbott of Texas.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 23:40

• Email Reveals AR-15 Pistol Brace Company Hit With Data Breach Ahead Of ATF Ruling
  Email Reveals AR-15 Pistol Brace Company Hit With Data Breach Ahead Of ATF Ruling

  SB Tactical, one of the most popular AR-15 pistol brace manufacturers, appears to have been hit with a data breach, where customer data, including names, addresses, and credit card information, was leaked online. 

  A snapshot of an email from SB Tactical’s customer support has surfaced on Reddit and Twitter in the last few days detailing “a data security incident that may involve unauthorized access to your personal information.” 

  “SB Tactical was recently informed by law enforcement that our website was compromised. It is possible that your credit card number, expiration date, CCV code, cardholder name, address, phone number, and email address were exposed,” the email said.

  The pistol brace manufacturer has sold millions of units and is arguably one of the most popular stabilizing brace brands in the US. The email continued by indicating “the timeframe of the compromise to be between September 19, 2022, through December 13. 2022.” 

  

  We contacted customer service regarding the data breach, who told us, “we recommend that you remain vigilant by reviewing your account statements and credit reports closely.” They said, “some customers have chosen to take the preemptive measure by requesting a new card from their financial institution,” adding, “our sincere apologies for the frustration.” 

  

  The timing of the hack is very suspicious because tens of millions of Americans could become lawbreakers overnight, pending a decision by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to classify stabilizing braces as short-barreled rifles. Anyone who doesn’t register with the ATF would possess an illegal SBR. 

  Redditors on forums r/CAguns and r/AR15 have been discussing the hack for the last several days. 

  “I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but wouldn’t that be a nice list for a three letter agency to have if a brace ban goes into effect…..,” a Redditor said on r/CAguns. 

  Another said, “Hot take: it was actually the ATF trying to see who owns pistol braces.” 

  “How convenient before the AFT brace decision. Sounds like a data grab by the government,” someone else said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 23:20

• FDA Deviated From Normal Process In Pfizer Vaccine Approval, Documents Show
  FDA Deviated From Normal Process In Pfizer Vaccine Approval, Documents Show

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  U.S. drug regulators acknowledged deviating from the normal vaccine approval process when dealing with Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot, according to newly disclosed documents.

  

  Weeks after Pfizer and its partner BioNTech announced they started a rolling submission of documents for approval of their COVID-19 vaccine, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration official penned a memorandum authorizing the release of a Biologics License Application (BLA) number for the shot even as regulators weighed whether to approve the BLA, one of the documents shows.

  “This deviation from our normal practice is done to facilitate product labeling and distribution and is consistent with other Center practices to facilitate vaccine delivery during the declared Public Health Emergency,” Christopher Joneckis, the FDA’s associate director for review management, wrote in the June 17, 2021, memo. “When providing the license number, we should communicate that this license number does not constitute any determination by FDA on the application.”

  Joneckis said the decision stemmed in part from the FDA having granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the shot in late 2020. That means the FDA “is familiar with and has reviewed much of the information provided in the BLA application,” which primarily consisted of data used in the application for emergency clearance, he said.

  EUAs can be granted if a public health emergency has been declared and the FDA determines it’s “reasonable to believe” that the vaccine or other product in question “may be effective” in preventing, diagnosing, or treating the disease or condition caused by the public health threat. BLAs require a higher threshold of evidence, demonstrating that a product is “safe, pure, and potent.”

  A separate document made public this week showed that the license number was given to Pfizer even though no approval decision had been made after Pfizer requested it.

  “The Applicant requested a U.S. License Number for BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH with agreement that they will not use it until after the BLA is approved,” the document, a summary of a June 29, 2021, FDA meeting discussing Pfizer’s application, stated.

  The summary noted that Joneckis wrote the memo authorizing the release of the number “in advance of the typical notification in the approval letter.” After that, the FDA “generated the license number which will be provided to the Applicant, after filing, in an email message.”

  The FDA granted a BLA to Pfizer’s vaccine for individuals 16 and older on Aug. 23, 2021. The vaccine was later approved for children as young as six months of age. The FDA has also authorized or approved multiple boosters due to the vaccine performing poorly against newer variants.

  The documents were released by the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), which successfully convinced a court to order the FDA to produce documents related to its actions on the COVID-19 vaccines after the agency had claimed it would take decades to do so. The government has been providing ICAN documents in response to the suit and Freedom of Information Act requests.

  Aaron Siri, a lawyer representing the network, told The Epoch Times in an email that the new documents are “another piece of evidence that supports that licensure of this product quickly became a foregone conclusion.”

  The FDA did not respond to a request for comment.

  Advisory Committee Meeting ‘Not Needed’

  The FDA only held one meeting with its advisory panel, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), after Pfizer and BioNTech lodged their BLA request. That meeting focused on whether to clear vaccines for younger populations, and not the new application.

  During the meeting, multiple panelists expressed confusion about when they would be consulted on any BLA requests.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 23:00

• "This Got Way Overhyped": 2016 Russian Twitter Trolls Were Dismal Failure: WaPo
  “This Got Way Overhyped”: 2016 Russian Twitter Trolls Were Dismal Failure: WaPo

  In a report that should come as a surprise to no one (especially after the TWITTER FILES drops), Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 US election via Twitter were a dismal failure that reached relatively few users, and had “no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior,” according to the Washington Post, citing a study published Monday from the NYU Center for Social Media and Politics.

  

  “My personal sense coming out of this is that this got way overhyped,” said report co-author Josh Tucker, who co-directs the NYU center. “Now we’re looking back at data and we can see how concentrated this was in one small portion of the population, and how the fact that people who were being exposed to these were really, really likely to vote for Trump,” he added.

  “And then we have this data to show we can’t find any relationship between being exposed to these tweets and people’s change in attitudes.”

  Key findings via the Post:

  • Only 1 percent of Twitter users accounted for 70 percent of the exposure to accounts that Twitter identified as Russian troll accounts.
  • Highly partisan Republicans were exposed to nine times more posts than non-Republicans.
  • Content from the news media and U.S. politicians dwarfed the amount of Russian influence content the electorate was exposed to during the 2016 race.
  • There was no measurable impact on “political attitudes, polarization, and vote preferences and behavior” from the Russian accounts and posts.

  Recall just three weeks ago we learned that Twitter saw little to no evidence of foreign influence in the 2016 US election, which the FBI repeatedly sought.

  21. Despite Twitter’s pushback, the FBI repeatedly requests information from Twitter that Twitter has already made clear it will not share outside of normal legal channels. pic.twitter.com/WyI03iZ0WF

  — Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) December 19, 2022

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

  WaPo‘s caveat here is that Russian influence ops on other platforms may have been more successful.

  The study, published this morning in Nature Communications — an offshoot of the science journal Nature magazine — is years in the making. That’s due to the amount of time needed to acquire data from Twitter, conduct the study, carry out surveys and run it through the peer review process, Tucker said.

  And Twitter is easier to get data from than Facebook, given that posts are public, among other reasons, he said. Thus, the focus on Twitter, despite its smaller user base.

  Plus, there were some fundamental differences with observing how people absorbed information on Twitter versus Facebook, Tucker said. “One of the super interesting things we were able to do in this paper is show that lots of what people were exposed to here was not because they were following the accounts of these Russian trolls, but because they follow people who retweeted tweets that came from these Russian trolls, and that’s easier on Twitter, where almost everything is open,” Tucker said. -WaPo

  Except that we know Russian influence campaigns on Facebook in 2016 totaled roughly $100,000.

  So yeah, all of that was a lie.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 22:40

• Where's The Woodward And Bernstein Of The COVID Scandals?
  Where’s The Woodward And Bernstein Of The COVID Scandals?

  Authored by Bill Rice via The Brownstone Institute,

  I was just a kid, but I’m old enough to remember Watergate. As I grew older, I learned more specific details about this historic event. Here’s my Watergate takeaway, which I think is the accepted “narrative” on this historic event:

  Watergate was the biggest political scandal of the century. The fallout or denouement caused President Nixon to resign from office and sent several “conspirators” to prison. 

  

  It also made Woodward and Bernstein the most famous journalists of all time. 

  Few people had heard of these journalists when they began compiling relevant facts about the original Watergate crime and obligatory cover-up, but this changed over the span of about two years.

  Based in part on these two journalists doing their jobs, Congressional officials decided to also do their jobs and before you knew it, most of the sordid story was known to the world. 

  Woodward and Bernstein, who were already minor celebrities, really cashed in with the publication of their best-selling book All the President’s Men, which was adapted into an Academy Award-winning movie starring Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman, two of the biggest stars of our era.

  After filling their mantles with every journalism prize, the Washington Post scribes parlayed this fame and success into a lifetime of speaking gigs. By “breaking” the Watergate scandal, they also acquired the panache that allowed them to play leading roles in future investigations that resulted in even more best-selling books.

  Today, the names of both journalists are literally in the history books, where their journalistic accomplishments will live forever. 

  Every ambitious journalist who followed wanted to be the next Woodward and Bernstein and break some huge scandal that might elevate them onto a similar professional pedestal. 

  The employer of Woodward and Bernstein, the Washington Post, built most of its reputation on the fact it was the newspaper that did more than any other to expose Watergate.

  So … It pays handsomely – directly and indirectly with benefits that will last a lifetime – to be the journalists or news organization that breaks the “scandal of the century.”

  Which leads to THE question: Given all of the above, why doesn’t any journalist, editor or publisher want to be the next Woodward and Bernstein when it comes to Covid scandals? 

  The Covid scandals that could be exposed by an enterprising journalist(s) are vastly larger and more important than those involving Watergate.

  To cite one difference … nobody died in Watergate.

  In way of comparison, the disease Covid – as well as all the calamitous responses to Covid – must have killed and injured 10, 20, 50 million (a billion?) people by now. And these casualty figures are still growing.

  Nor did Watergate cripple the economy nor lead to rampant inflation. 

  Nor did it lead to mass censorship and the evisceration of civil liberties. 

  Also, the Watergate conspiracies and cover-ups included only a small group of Nixon loyalists in the White House, plus a few people who actually did the “dirty tricks.”

  It takes no Woodward and Bernstein for the Man on the Street to realize that Covid crimes and cover-ups must have involved practically every agency in government by now. 

  NIH, NIAID, CDC, FDA, the Pentagon, the FBI, the CIA, the White House, the Department of Homeland Defense, Congress, the Justice Department, the courts , judges, governors, mayors, OSHA, the Departments of Transportation, Commerce, Labor, HHS … local police departments, all the state and local health agencies, colleges, school boards … almost all of these agencies went “all in” on the bogus Covid narratives and requisite cover-ups.

  Then we have all of the private sector cronies and conspirators. 

  In Watergate, at least that I am aware of, Big Pharma was not implicated. With Watergate, none of the world’s major corporations signed onto the program. 

  With Covid, as far as I can tell, every big company endorsed the CDC’s policy guidebook and did their patriotic best to make sure the conspiracy went off without a hitch. 

  When you stop and think about it, there’s no way a “Woodward and Bernstein” could tell the story of the Covid Scandal. There’s simply too many scandals that would have to be exposed. It would take an army of Woodward and Bernsteins to break the pieces down into individual, sub-scandal components. 

  Still, the journalists who provided the public with a few key answers to what really happened and why, journalists who told the world the names of the people who committed the biggest crimes and cover-ups, would surely go down in history as the most important journalists of world history. 

  That is, Woodward and Bernstein would have to move down to second place. 

  Which isn’t their fault. It’s just that, compared to Covid, Watergate seems like a scandal to fix a few parking tickets. 

  But, still, not ONE mainstream media journalist nor one mainstream media news organization has shown any interest in exposing any parts of the scandal of all time. 

  How does one explain such a surreal reality? 

  If saving lives and exposing corrupt (I’d say evil) officials doesn’t motivate today’s journalists, one would think that the All-American values of wanting to become rich and famous would get the adrenalin of a few crackerjack journalists flowing.

  But, no. 

  As it turns out, nobody wants to be the next Woodward and Bernstein. Nobody cares about earning that spot in the history books and making their children and grandchildren proud. (“My Dad scored four touchdowns in a high school football game.” “… Well, my Dad broke the Covid scandal …”)

  Why doesn’t any journalist want to expose the real truth about the myriad Covid scandals? 

  The answer to this puzzler seems pretty obvious to me. The watchdog press must be a part of the conspiracy. The conspiracy must be that vast. This is the only possible answer I can come up with.

  The reason Woodward and Bernstein were able to tell the the world that Nixon’s White House was full of crooks is because the Washington Post wasn’t part of that conspiracy.

  In fact, the journalists and their employer were part of a massive group effort involving hundreds of news organizations that were working around the clock, trying to expose the crimes and cover-ups.

  When you realize this, you realize that Nixon and his team never had a chance of getting away with it. 

  But skip forward 50 years to Covid times and we see that the scales of journalism have completely flipped.  

  The key to the modern-day scandal is …

  Of course everyone will get away with their miscellaneous crimes and misdemeanors because nobody who could expose the crooks is trying to do this. 

  The lesson here is a big one: If you want to get away with “crimes against humanity,” you better make sure you’ve fully captured the watchdog press. (Even Woodward and Bernstein, who are still alive and cranking out stories, don’t care about no Covid scandals.)

  How the Bad Guys were able to capture and control approximately 40,000 mainstream journalists would itself be one heck of a story.

  But who’s going to tell that story?

  Don’t laugh, but I guess it will end up being someone like me.

  In the past, I would never have considered that some small-time freelance journalist could break some big, historic scoop. I mean, I can’t even get one government official to return my calls or emails (“Dr. Fauci, Bill Rice, Jr. on the phone …”)

  Nor do I have a partner like Woodward helping me with any digging.

  But, I’ll say this: I’m not like today’s other 40,000 mainstream journalists. Becoming rich and famous wouldn’t bother me. If I could save a few lives and help put a few diabolical crooks into prison, this would check my “I did something meaningful with my life” box.

  Plus, I’ve had this thought: Nobody else is really on the case. Even today, Woodward and Bernstein – with some research help from some of theWashington Post’s army of interns – could expose some of these scandals in three weeks … if they tried. 

  But we all know these guys are sitting this scandal out. 

  Breaking this scandal would make them even richer and more famous, but it would also prove all the conspiracy “kooks” were right all along. The embarrassment and professional stigma would be too great for them to bear. The mean tweets from former colleagues (“Why did you go and do that? You’re not in our club anymore!”) wouldn’t be worth the cost.

  As it turns out, for reasons that boggle the mind, the amateurs on Substack have been granted complete monopoly rights to investigate the Story of All Time. 

  What the heck. If the Big Leaguers don’t want play, I say, “Put me in, Coach …” 

  Anyway, if anyone reading this happens to be a potential whistleblower with information that would tell your fellow citizens what really took place with Covid, please contact me via this Substack site.

  I also know this. In 2023, Covid’s version of Deep Throat would be wasting his breath to call anyone at theWashington Post. But every real journalist at Substack would take that call and run with it. 

  *  *  *

  Reposted from the author’s Substack

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 22:20

• China Eases Ban On Australian Coal Imports, But Impact Will Be Mostly Symbolic
  China Eases Ban On Australian Coal Imports, But Impact Will Be Mostly Symbolic

  China has allowed several large coal importers to resume purchases of Australian coal, easing an unofficial ban that has lasted more than two years, as Beijing looks to strengthen energy security after ditching the zero Covid policy. 

  China enacted an unofficial ban on Australian coal in October 2020 after Australia backed a call for an international inquiry into the way China handled the initial COVID outbreak in early 2020. China’s decision to allow four big importers to restart imports of coal from Australia is a sign of a thawing in relations between the two nations and sparked hope that trade between the two could return to normal. 

  As OilPrice notes, last week China’s National Development and Reform Commission discussed the idea to allow four large Chinese coal importers to make new purchases of Australian coal this year. These are China Baowu Steel Group Corp, China Datang Corporation, China Huaneng Group Co, and China Energy Investment Corporation.

  China Energy Investment Corp has already placed an order for purchasing coal from Australia, and the first cargo could load as early as this month, according to Reuters. Moreover, the surge in Covid cases after the end of the restrictions has resulted in lower coal supply from China’s key coal-producing centers Shanxi and Inner Mongolia, traders told Reuters.

  At the same time, Reuters also notes that China’s decision to allow imports of Australian coal after more than two years of an unofficial ban is one of those moves where the symbolic importance outweighs the practical impact. The partial easing of the ban will see three utilities and a major steelmaker given permission to resume imports from Australia, which used to be the second-biggest supplier to China prior to the curbs being imposed in mid-2020.

  As Reuters adds, while there is likely to be some interest among Chinese buyers for cargoes from Australia, the likelihood of a return to prior levels of trade is limited as regional and global market dynamics have shifted substantially.

  That doesn’t mean the move is without significance, but the impact is likely to be more about improving ties between China and Australia, which became strained when Canberra called for an investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, resulting in China banning imports of several goods from Australia, including barley, wine and lobsters.

  The partial easing of the ban will see three utilities and a major steelmaker given permission to resume imports from Australia, which used to be the second-biggest supplier to China prior to the curbs being imposed in mid-2020.

  That said, there are several reasons why Australian coal won’t once again become a major factor in China, the world’s largest importer of the fuel used mainly for power generation or to make steel.

  The first, and most important, is that Australian coal will struggle to compete on price in China, especially thermal grades used to make electricity.

  Prior to the ban in July 2020, China was importing in the region of 3.5 to 4.3 million tonnes of thermal coal from Australia, with the 2020 peak coming in at 4.26 million in April of that year, according to data compiled by commodity analysts Kpler.

  For that month, it gave Australia a market share of 21% of China’s total thermal coal imports, well behind the leader Indonesia, which had a share of 69%.

  While the numbers did move around somewhat on a monthly basis, the April 2020 data is representative of the broader trend in China’s imports of thermal coal, namely Indonesia dominated and Australia was a distant second.

  Once the informal ban came into effect, Australia’s share of China’s imports dropped to zero by early 2021.

  It’s also the case that China’s overall imports slumped in the months after the ban was imposed, but they started to recover from November 2020 onwards and by June 2021 thermal coal arrivals were exceeding 2020 levels.

  What effectively happened is that Russian cargoes replaced Australian, with seaborne thermal coal imports from China’s northern neighbour reaching 3.37 million tonnes by June 2021, having been just 1.07 million in April 2020, the peak month for imports from Australia that year.

  China’s imports of Russian thermal coal have remained solid, with some seasonal variations, since then and were 2.96 million tonnes in December, according to Kpler.

  The question is whether Australian coal miners can compete on price with Russian thermal supplies, and the answer is probably not. Chinese utilities previously imported lower grade Australian thermal coal, so the closest match is the 5,500 kilocalories per kg (kcal/kg) assessment by commodity price reporting agency Argus. This was pegged at $132 a tonne in the week to Jan. 6, which is roughly similar to Russian thermal coal at the eastern port of Nakhodka, which was assessed by McCloskey at $130.

  However, the freight rate strongly favours Russian supplies given the shorter distance to reach Chinese ports.

  There is also more than price to consider.

  Australian coal miners, as well as the region’s traders, shippers and bankers, will be wary of going back into the Chinese market, having been burnt by the unofficial ban back in 2020. This means they are likely to be willing to sell again to China, but will also be more demanding in terms of price and guarantees. They may also be reluctant to divert coal away from the buyers they gained after the Chinese ban, especially those in places like India and Vietnam.

  In short, it will likely take some time to rebuild trust and trading relationships. Add in a likely price disadvantage and it’s hard to see Australian thermal coal charging back into China.

  Where there is more scope is in metallurgical, or coking, coal, where Australian cargoes are likely to be more price competitive against those from Russia and the United States. Australia used to be China’s top supplier of imported seaborne coking coal, with imports peaking at 6.84 million tonnes in June 2020, for a market share of 94%. Russia was a distant second in June 2020, supplying just 409,916 tonnes, according to Kpler.

  The unofficial ban on Australia coal saw China’s imports of seaborne coking coal plunge, and unlike thermal coal they have not recovered and were just 2.14 million tonnes in December 2022, or just under 30% of June 2020 levels. China has been forced to import more coking coal overland from neighbouring Mongolia and has also boosted domestic output to make up for the shortfall.

  While Australian coking coal is likely to be more pricey than that from Mongolia, it can also be delivered to coastal steel mills more easily. Australian supplies may also be more costly than those from Russia, but Russia has limited capacity to supply more volumes, which means Chinese buyers may be willing to purchase Australian supplies to ensure security of supply.

  But it may take some time for Australian coking coal to return to China in meaningful volumes for much the same reasons as thermal coal, a lack of trust, the need to rebuild trading relationships and a reluctance to cut off other buyers.

  * * *

  With demand for winter heating rising, China now looks to avoid another coal crunch. China has put more emphasis on energy security since the autumn of 2021 when power shortages crippled its industry. In 2022, China said it would continue to maximize the use of coal in the coming years as it caters to its energy security, despite pledges to contribute to global efforts to reduce emissions.

  In recent months, China has significantly boosted its coal production, following government orders. China’s daily coal production hit a record high in November 2022 as demand for heating jumped, beating the previous record set in September 2022.  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 22:00

• Oregon Advises Schools To Keep Students' 'Gender Identity' Hidden From Families
  Oregon Advises Schools To Keep Students’ ‘Gender Identity’ Hidden From Families

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

  

  The Oregon Department of Education (ODE) has released a document advising schools on how to support “gender expansive” students, including keeping their so-called gender identities a secret from family members.

  If a student discloses their “gender expansive” identity to school staff, the guidance asks staff members to respect the child’s “confidentiality needs.” Students who do not publicly assert their “gender identity” might have concerns about their families and community members finding out, the new guidance (pdf) states.

  “Parent and family support is the goal when supporting gender expansive students, but may not be possible in all situations,” according to the document.

  “Schools should refer to their current policies when there may be a safety concern. To the extent possible, schools should refrain from revealing information about a student’s gender identity, even to parents, caregivers, or other school administrators, without permission from the student.”

  The updated guidance “clarifies new and evolving laws and policies” on how to address the needs of “gender expansive” students and the school districts that serve them, ODE Director Colt Gill says in the letter.

  Speaking to Fox News, an ODE spokesperson confirmed that when students claim that notifying their parents about their “gender expansive” identity might be a safety concern, the department encourages schools to “prioritize the student’s safety within all school environments.”

  ‘Gender-Affirming’ Care

  The document pushes for providing “gender-affirming care” in schools. Services like social affirmation through name, gender markers, pronoun use, access to facilities, athletics, etc. are likely to occur in schools. Medical services like access to puberty blockers, “gender-affirming” surgeries, and hormone therapy are likely to occur within a school-based health center (SBHC), the document noted.

  It cited a survey by a Gender and Sexuality Alliance (GSA) at a middle school in which respondents picked “gender-affirming” items like clothing, makeup, chest binders, and menstrual products as something the school should focus on for the upcoming year.

  The ODE’s updated gender policy has riled some parents. “Oregon is demonstrating for parents that, once again, academics and education are not the priority of our government school system,” Laura Zorc, executive director of Building Education for Students Together, a group focused on parental rights in education, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

  “There are so few hours in a day, yet Oregon is committed to pushing and retraining teachers on gender issues rather than educating our children.”

  State Gender Agenda

  Oregon has been the scene of various attempts at pushing gender agenda among school kids. In August, it was reported that Oregon’s Driftwood Public Library was teaming up with a local high school to establish a “gender-affirming” closet for students that is aimed at helping children get access to items like underwear, makeup, and chest binders.

  In December, the ODE was reportedly set to spend $2 million on a campaign seeking to launch a pro-“LGBTQ2SIA+” curriculum, pride events, and teacher training. The plus sign was said to stand for a “myriad of additional marginalized gender identities, expressions, and sexual and romantic orientations,” according to Breitbart.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 21:40

• Citadel's Ken Griffin Plans To Build 'Supertall' Skyscraper In Manhattan
  Citadel’s Ken Griffin Plans To Build ‘Supertall’ Skyscraper In Manhattan

  Billionaire Citadel boss Ken Griffin plans to build a new skyscraper in Manhattan that would serve as the flagship tower for his financial empire, according to Bloomberg, citing people familiar with initial proposals. 

  Griffin plans to build a 1,350 feet (411 meters) skyscraper with 51 office floors and seven terraces. Citadel will occupy at least 54% of the building. Foster + Partners, the firm founded by architect Norman Foster, will be the lead designer of the tower that could be completed by 2032. 

  

  Last month, Vornado Realty Trust and Rudin Management reached an agreement with Citadel that allows the developers to construct the 1.7 million-square-foot skyscraper by replacing three adjacent properties in Midtown, at 350 Park Avenue, 40 East 52nd Street, and 39 East 51st Street. 

  “We expect that if this building is built it will be able to house all of our New York City employees for both Citadel and Citadel Securities, which will reduce the need for us to have them spread across multiple sites in New York City as they currently are,” Zia Ahmed, a spokesperson for Citadel, told Bloomberg last month. 

  The tower’s height would make it one of the tallest buildings in the borough and rival JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s new headquarters in Midtown that is being built, as well as the skyscraper near Grand Central Terminal. 

  “We want to have exceptional work environments around the world that provide an unparalleled experience for our team members, reflecting the commitment they make to us,” Griffin recently said about the firm’s office buildings. 

  Griffin is worth an estimated $29.1 billion and ranks 40 on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. He moved Citadel’s headquarters to Miami’s Brickell area from Chicago, citing out-of-control violent crime. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 21:20

• House Republicans Adopt Rules Package
  House Republicans Adopt Rules Package

  Update (1925ET): After last week’s dramatic speaker election, House Republicans adopted a rules package that will govern how the chamber operates until 2025 – Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) first legislative win as the newly-elected Speaker.

  The vote of 220-213 was mainly along party lines.

  No word on the mystery addendum.

  *  *  *

  Update (1445ET): There’s word of a ‘much-fabled 3-page House rules addendum’ circulating throughout certain GOP offices in which McCarthy reportedly agrees on everything from the 20-holdout demands on everything from strategy on the debt ceiling, to committee assignments.

  Via Axios‘ Andrew Solender:

  At least one GOP office apparently has the much-fabled 3-page House rules addendum.

  “We’re taking a look at it … we’re just going through it,” Rep. Ken Calvert, a Steering Committee member, tells @Axios

  Asked if members have received a copy: “I don’t know if everybody has.”

  — Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) January 9, 2023

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

  According to Punchbowl News,

  there’s also a secret three-page addendum that McCarthy and his allies hashed out during several days of grueling negotiations with the House Freedom Caucus. This pact includes the most controversial concessions McCarthy made in order to become speaker – three seats on the Rules Committee for conservatives, freezing spending at FY2022 levels, a debt-ceiling strategy, coveted committee assignments and more.

  *  *  *

  How that Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has been elected Speaker of the House, his first order of business is presiding over the Republican rules package for the 118th Congress.

  

  That said, in order to finally win the gavel after 14 failed votes, McCarthy had to make massive concessions to a group of 20 holdout Republicans, including the ability for just one member to vote to vacate the speaker’s chair.

  In a Sunday night tweet, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) tweeted “This is what we’ve been fighting for,” in relation to seven bills that the holdouts were able to include in the rules package, which is expected to be put to a vote on Monday.

  1) A bill to cut some of the additional funding that was made available to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

  2) A bill to authorize the secretary of Homeland Security to turn away people crossing the border illegally.

  3) A bill that includes prohibiting the secretary of energy from sending petroleum products from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to China.

  4) A tough-on-crime bill that includes amending the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act to direct the district attorney and prosecutor’s office to report to the attorney general.

  5) A bill to require a national instant crime background check system to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other law enforcement agencies when information surfaces that a person present in the United States illegally may be trying to obtain a firearm.

  6) A bill to prohibit taxpayer funded abortions.

  7) A bill to amend Title 18, United States Code, to prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion. –Epoch Times

  “When we come back, our very first bill will repeal the funding for 87,000 new IRS agents,” McCarthy said on Jan. 7, shortly after being elected Speaker, adding that Republicans “believe government should be to help you, not go after you.”

  In a recent letter, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), said that legislation is “ready to go” which will be brought to the House floor over the next two weeks. According to the Epoch Times, the House rules package largely mirrors Scalise’s list.

  More via The Epoch Times‘ Tom Ozimek:

  According to Scalise’s letter, the first bill, dubbed the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Protection Act (pdf), aims to revoke some of the additional IRS funding that Democrats passed as part of their Inflation Reduction Act that the agency plans to use for tax enforcement.

  

  With the first bill, Republicans are targeting what Scalise said was “tens of billions of dollars allocated to the IRS for 87,000 new IRS agents.” That figure is in dispute, with the Biden administration saying much of the money would go to non-enforcement staff like customer service.

  Another bill Scalise put in the schedule is the Strategic Production Response Act (pdf), which would prohibit non-emergency drawdowns of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve without a parallel plan to boost energy production on federal lands.

  Republicans have been highly critical of President Joe Biden for ordering the release of oil from the strategic reserve, arguing that it was a ploy to win votes ahead of the midterms by trying to lower pump prices.

  Biden, for his part, has insisted the release was meant to stabilize global oil markets amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing energy price shock, as well as trying to lower prices for Americans amid decades-high inflation, of which a major component is the cost of energy.

  Scalise has scheduled another related bill, called Protecting America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve from China Act (pdf), which would restrict the energy secretary from selling oil from the strategic reserve to China.

  Another bill is the Prosecutors Need to Prosecute Act (pdf), which would allow the public to see how many cases prosecutors are declining to prosecute, along with the number of criminals released onto the streets and the number of offenses committed by career criminals.

  On border security, Scalise put forward a bill called the Border Safety and Security Act (pdf), which would give the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the power to turn away people crossing the border illegally in order to gain “operational control” of the border.

  Another bill, called the Illegal Alien NICS Alert Act (pdf) would require the National Instant Criminal Background Check system (NICS) to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and relevant local law enforcement if someone trying to buy a firearm is an illegal immigrant.

  One bill, called the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act (pdf), seeks to make the Hyde Amendment permanent and prohibit federal funding for abortions as well as funding for any insurance plans that include on-demand abortion.

  Another bill, called Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (pdf), would ensure that infants born alive after a failed abortion would receive the same legal protection and health care as a newborn.

  McCarthy’s Concessions

  Besides the bills, McCarthy had to make numerous concessions to win over the holdout Republicans, including giving the Freedom Caucus members seats on the powerful House Rules Committee, taking a hard line on the debt limit, and reducing spending.

  McCarthy was elected as the 55th House Speaker in the early hours of Jan. 7 by a vote of 216–212.

  While it normally takes 218 votes—a majority of the House—to become speaker, that threshold can be reduced if members are absent or merely vote present.

  It’s precisely this maneuver that gave McCarthy his coveted win, as six Republicans voted “present” instead of “yea” in the final vote: Reps. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Bob Good (R-Va.), and Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.).

  In a 20-minute speech following the vote, McCarthy laid out his priorities for the 118th Congress, including securing the southern border, combating “woke” indoctrination in American schools, and unleashing domestic energy production.

  “We must get America back on track,” he said. “We’ll hold the swamp accountable.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 21:05

• Investigating The Investigators
  Investigating The Investigators

  Authored by Techno Fog via The Reactionary,

  With House Republicans having decided on the Speaker, one of their next items of business is one that is well overdue: the formation of a new subcommittee on the “Weaponization of the Federal Government,” which would conduct a thorough investigation of abuses by federal law enforcement and national security agencies.  

  

  According to a recent interview with Rep. Chip Roy, Speaker Kevin McCarthy has “committed to giving the subcommittee at least as much funding and staffing as the House special committee in the last Congress that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.”

  It’s about time.

  Of course, the very name of the subcommittee – the “Weaponization of the Federal Government” – suggests a wide-ranging inquiry that could look into the actions of a number of federal agencies – the FBI/DOJ, Department of Homeland Security, the CIA and NSA, etc. It would include efforts by the Biden Administration and FDA/CDC to eliminate unapproved speech about COVID-19 and how the FBI made sure social media companies, including Twitter, took down alleged misinformation about the 2020 election and had a part in the suppression of the Hunter Biden story.

  And that’s just the more recent history of governmental abuses. What else is out there, still waiting to be uncovered? There is sure to be more. We just haven’t heard of it yet.

  Then there are the federal abuses of their investigative powers, starting with the Russiagate fiasco. Yet even with Russiagate there’s much we don’t know. It’s either hidden under layers of classifications or kept secret as part of federal investigative steps. Or the evidence remains with the DNC and Crowdstrike, assuming it hasn’t been destroyed.

  But if we could suggest areas of Russiagate-related focus for Congressional investigators – a long list that we’ve had to narrow down to things we’re personally most curious about – here’s where we would start. 1

  1. The DNC “Hack”

  Topping the list is the holy grail of them all, the purported Russian hack of the DNC servers. Initially leading the investigation and response to the hack was no other than Michael Sussmann, the DNC/Hillary Campaign lawyer who would later draw charges from Special Counsel John Durham for lying to the FBI about other Russian information: the Alfa Bank/Trump connections.

  As has been documented here and elsewhere, the investigation into the DNC hack was bungled from the start. The FBI never took possession of the DNC servers, instead relying on conclusions formed by DNC contractor Crowdstrike (which, by the way, was hired by Michael Sussmann on behalf of his clients). The FBI never obtained the complete reports from Crowdstrike. And even Crowdstrike had no direct evidence of exfiltration. As explained by Aaron Mate, the manner in which the Russian attribution is described by US intelligence officials signals that they “lacked concrete evidence for their Russian hacking claim.”

  Part of the DNC hack inquiry would be further documentation of who at the FBI raised red flags about the investigation’s scope and seemingly pre-determined outcome. It would also get into who made the decisions. That gets us to the next topic.

  2. Corrupted Leadership of the FBI and DOJ

  This is an admittedly broad category, covering years of investigative and prosecutorial decision. But its importance is underscored by what we have learned about how the dubious investigations they decided to pursue (like how they targeted Flynn) and how that leadership’s killed necessary investigative into witnesses damning to their “collusion” narrative.

  With respect to the FBI, the Michael Sussmann trial revealed how FBI headquarters ordered there to be a “full field investigation” opened into the Trump-Alfa Bank allegations. This decision was made by the FBI’s 7th floor, including Director James Comey. And it was a significant step according to one FBI Special Agent: “In order to open a full field investigation, we would need specific and articulable facts that a threat to U.S. national security has occurred or there’s been a violation of federal law.” Based on what information did Comey possess to make that order?

  The Sussmann trial also demonstrated that FBI Headquarters disapproved the request from FBI agents investigating the Alfa Bank allegations to interview the source of the information. Which FBI leader denied that request?

  3. Corruption of Special Counsel Mueller

  Regarding the Mueller Special Counsel, one former FBI Intelligence Analyst testified that members of the Mueller Special Counsel took the position “to not investigate Mr. [Charles] Dolan.” (If you recall, Dolan was a Clinton ally who ended up being a source for the Steele reports.) This former FBI Intelligence Analyst explained:

  “We had been instructed at SCO not to take further action on the matter involving Mr. Dolan and Mr. Danchenko’s relationship.”

  By that time, the Mueller Special Counsel was aware the connection between Dolan and Danchenko and there were suspicions, if not direct knowledge, that Dolan had informed the Steele reports. The FBI asked Danchenko about Dolan on June 15, 2017 – before Mueller asked for the 4th FISA warrant on Carter Page, which was submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on June 29, 2017.

  Later on, the Mueller Special Counsel would prevent the FBI agents under its supervision from investigating Dolan. One FBI Agent compiled a comprehensive report on Dolan and corroborated Dolan’s involvement in the Steele reports. She submitted that report to the Mueller Special Counsel and requested further investigation of Dolan. She was told that investigation “was not going to be opened.”  

  It’s hard to overstate the importance of this inquiry. The instructions by Team Mueller to not investigate the Dolan-Danchenko relationship, and to shut down the investigation of Dolan himself, are informed by Team Mueller’s understanding of the consequences of those investigative steps: blowing up the Carter Page FISA warrants, exposing the deception to the FISA court, and the accountability from the FBI/DOJ/Mueller that would come from revealing the truth.

  That’s just scratching the surface. Other matters that deserve inquiry include the wiping of Special Counsel phones (a potentially criminal act).

  4. The DARPA Connection

  As documented by our friends Undead and Margot Cleveland, “The U.S. Department of Defense and private individuals pumping the Alfa Bank hoax also assisted former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Donald Trump for supposed collusion with Russia.”

  But there’s more to it than that, as provided by Cleveland in this must-read. There’s the allegation that these researchers helped assist with the “DNC attack attribution.” This raised a question from a member of Special Counsel John Durham’s team:

  “Do you believe that DARPA should be instructing you to investigate the origins of a hacker (Guccifer_2.0) that hacked a political entity (DNC)?”

  5. The FBI’s 2018 deceptive letter to the FISA Court

  In this letter, the FBI assured the FISA court that they found Danchenko to be “truthful and cooperative.” This was written after the FBI knew that Danchenko had lied to them, with his deception starting in January 2017.

  That letter was purportedly reviewed by the FBI, which “confirmed its factual accuracy.” It still must be determined who at the FBI reviewed that letter and who vouched for the accuracy of Danchenko. Hopefully we can be provided answers.

  6. The CIA Collecting Information on President-Elect Trump

  As we detailed in this article, in February 2017 the CIA received manipulated information and data from Michael Sussmann that purported to show that Trump, or Trump associates, “had suspicious interactions with internet protocol (IP) addresses affiliated with a Russian mobile phone provider.”

  Currently, we don’t know what the CIA did with that information. Maybe they analyzed the data. Maybe that simply passed it on to the FBI. But, at a minimum, we should ask why the CIA was so willing to accept a meeting and take possession of information from a DNC lawyer that was allegedly damning to the President-elect. And there’s another important question: what else did they collect on American soil?

  7. Current Conflicts within the Office of Attorney General Garland

  As we’ve reported, Jake Sullivan is a witness in the Durham inquiry, being there for the Clinton Campaign’s Fusion GPS misconduct. He was mentioned during the Michael Sussmann trial as one of the campaign staffers who received updates on the Fusion GPS “opposition research.”

  Sullivan’s wife is Margaret Goodlander, who servers as counsel to AG Garland. We have strong reason to believe that Goodlander is keeping tabs on the Durham investigation. There’s a serious concern that she’s being provided non-public information on what happens in the Durham investigation. Totally improper for a government official who happens to be the spouse of a witness.

  8. Release the materials, the unredacted reports and 302s.

  Let the public see what happened for themselves.

  9. Finally, and this one is unrelated to Trump/Russia – but how about House Republicans demand all CIA and FBI documents on Jeffrey Epstein?

  We know they’re out there.

  *  *  *

  1. We’re limited on space and couldn’t include everything that should be investigated. We also note that Special Counsel Durham is looking into some of these very same issues. His report, whenever its submitted, may answer many of these questions.

  Subscribe here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 21:00

• Seattle Schools Sue Big Tech Over Youth Mental Health Crisis
  Seattle Schools Sue Big Tech Over Youth Mental Health Crisis

  The Seattle city school district has sued several social media giants, which they blame for causing a mental health crisis.

  

  According to the lawsuit – filed late Friday in Seattle federal court against Alphabet, Meta, Snap and TikTok owner ByteDance – students have been suffering from anxiety, depression and other psychological troubles stemming from their use of social media.

  The district serves around 50,000 children across more than 100 schools.

  The suit appears to be the first of its kind in the US brought by a school district, following similar claims filed last year by scores of families, including more than a dozen blaming the tech companies for suicides.

  The idea that social media companies shoulder responsibility for the potential damage their products cause to young people came to the fore late in 2021 when former Meta employee Frances Haugen revealed documents about its internal operations. Among Haugen’s allegations was a claim that the company was knowingly preying on vulnerable young people to boost profits. Congress held hearings and some state attorneys general launched investigations. –Bloomberg

  In Friday’s lawsuit, Seattle School District #1 is asking a judge to find that big tech has created a nuisance, and seeks remedies which include monetary damages, as well as funding to prevent and treat the excessive use of social media. The district cites a spike in suicides and ER mental health visits, as well as President Joe Biden’s 2022 State of the Union speech in which he called to “hold social media platforms accountable for the national experiment they’re conducting on our children for profit.”

  “Seattle School District No. 1 brings this action to do just that,” reads the complaint. “Youth in plaintiff’s community are experiencing the same mental health crisis observed nationally.”

  No word on whether Seattle schools will also sue the US government and the media over life-altering lockdowns and three years of pandemic hysteria, which also affected the mental health of young Americans.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 20:40

• The GOP Is The Unlettered Party, And That’s A Good Thing
  The GOP Is The Unlettered Party, And That’s A Good Thing

  Authored by Karl Zinsmeister via RealClear Wire,

  Over the coming weeks, a new band of Republicans will announce themselves as candidates in the next presidential race. The frontrunners will be scrappy populists. Today’s most successful center-right politicians are not only champions of the common man but energetic opponents of the idea that our society needs reordering by credentialed authorities.

  

  Ron DeSantis grew up in a blue-collar family, worked his way into Yale with his brains and baseball talent, then went home and built a political career on the idea that “people are able to make decisions on their own.” Florida’s navigation of the COVID crisis, says the governor, established “a blueprint for governance” that rebukes “the entrenched elites” who so often dominate modern society. “Florida is proof positive that we, the people, are not powerless in the face of these elites.”

  South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott was raised in poverty, went to college on a football scholarship while his brother became a sergeant major in the U.S. Army, then entered politics to fend off the idea that ordinary people can only improve their station through the interventions of a federal patriciate.

  Greg Abbott, who lost his father early in life and then was disabled and confined to a wheelchair, gained national prominence as Texas’ governor battling the notion that problems should be solved by mandates from erudite Feds.

  Glenn Youngkin, Virginia’s chief executive, left a finance career and dove into politics to defend everyday parents from fouls and interference by officials claiming they know better what children need.

  The most striking change in modern American politics is a flipping of the class loyalties of the two major parties. For decades, Democrats were seen as defenders of the little guy, and the GOP as home for pillars of the establishment. But country-club Republicans have been displaced by country-music Republicans, while our socio-economic gentry of lawyers, Wall Streeters, professors, Hollywood moguls, tech millionaires, media influencers, and others from the beau monde have flooded into the “D’s” column.

  It wasn’t just Donald Trump who made the GOP the party of the common man. Political scientist Everett Carll Ladd noted way back in 1976 that the class lines of our political parties were turning “upside down.” John F. Kennedy had been elected by the “regular guy” – among college-educated, high-income voters, he lost 2-1. From that point forward, though, campus-trained and highly compensated elites surged to the Democrat side, while working-class men and women shifted toward Republicans.

  This political inversion of elite and non-elite Americans reached its tipping point in 2012. That year, for the first time, our richest citizens voted primarily in favor of Democrats. The flow of the nation’s anointed into the Democratic camp, while the hoi polloi gravitated to the GOP, has accelerated since. In the 2022 midterms, among electors lacking a bachelor’s degree, only 39% voted for a Democratic Party congressional candidate.

  It’s easy to forget that college graduates are still the fortunate few. Among Americans 25 and older, just 38% currently wield a bachelor’s or higher diploma. And Democrats are much further from the mainstream on this than Republicans: Half of the Democrats’ voters hold a bachelor’s degree, and roughly a quarter possess a graduate degree.

  Rather than exploring political orientation as a function of edu-economic privilege, most contemporary journalists explain party alignment using racial and ethnic markers. This is why they were so surprised when Trump won two-thirds of working-class counties in 2020, and 26% of all non-white votes. They were flabbergasted two months ago when DeSantis attracted an overwhelming majority of blue-collar ballots, along with 58% of all Hispanic votes.

  Americans of varying complexions and backgrounds are now expressing a bold populism. They complain that in schools, corporations, government agencies, media, and other institutions, entrenched elites are seeking to force-feed them a strange new agenda. Many articles of progressive faith presented by elites as enlightened, non-negotiable truth strike average Americans as patent nonsense – and are being resisted. It is almost exclusively center-right leaders who are supporting these declarations of independence.

  This populist backlash has been aggressively characterized by the ruling establishment as hate, ignorance, and animus. Many residents of the high-income hipster towns sprinkled from San Francisco to Brooklyn see the typical American Joe as a scary mix of dumb and dangerous. Progressives use their many professional platforms, and the approved press and online salons that project their crotchets across the country with 10-foot-long shadows, to paint every peasant revolt as an insurrection led by fascists or white supremacists.

  A few traditional economic-minded progressives look at the status of humble Americans and see legitimate beefs. Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich warned after Donald Trump’s election that “what has happened in America should not be seen as a victory of hatefulness over decency.” It “is more accurately seen as a repudiation of … major media … corporations … lobbyists … Wall Street … and their lackeys in Washington,” an outcry from a large mass of workaday citizens “who feel powerless and disenfranchised, and who have been left out of our politics and left behind in our economy.”

  Data demonstrate starkly that the vast proportion of our nation’s income gains in recent decades have been captured by America’s Brahmin class, with middle- and working-class families clinging to small and shrinking slices. Blue-collar communities are being ravaged by poverty and social breakdown. Meanwhile, telecommuting towns inhabited by our professional, finance, and tech aristocracies glisten.

  The social and political concerns of average workers have been shoved aside even more flagrantly than their economic interests. Elites don’t just ignore the perspectives of flyover America on topics like family, sex, race, religion, childrearing, patriotism, and culture – they actively delegitimize them.

  Journalism was once a bastion of local, man-on-the-street perspectives. It has been transformed into a highly paid insider’s profession packed with Ivy Leaguers and centered in D.C. and Manhattan. Reporters, writers, and related interpreters of culture now sit right at the heart of our controlling class, and most of these pundits view “Rule by the Smartest” as a good thing. Their media portraits paint it as both healthy and normal.

  Historically, however, our country has been the opposite of a land run by edu-economic nobles. From our beginning, America’s gospel creed has been that every person’s judgment is as worthy as the next. No peons. No lords.

  George Washington noted that the privates in his army overflowed with a proud, self-governing spirit and would not be dictated to, but had to be led. This obstreperousness was leveraged by smart commanders to produce powerful results – as when Col. Isaac Shelby defeated a larger force of regimented soldiers at the Battle of King’s Mountain by telling his men, “When we encounter the enemy, don’t wait for the word of command. Let each of you be your own officer.”

  The most perspicacious chronicler of America’s emergence, Alexis de Tocqueville, was simultaneously “struck by the innumerable multitude of little undertakings” accomplished by humble people, and the utter lack of great projects directed by any commissariat. He recorded his “daily astonishment at the immense works carried through … by a nation which, one may say, has no rich men.”

  The European pattern of royal and rustic, cupbearer and kulak, was fiercely rejected on this side of the Atlantic. There were no quiet sheep here willing to be herded by omniscient shepherds. Jefferson captured the American ethos in graphic imagery: “The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred … to ride them.”

  Resistance to being overseen by even a highly accomplished upper strata is in many ways the distinguishing characteristic of our national system, the deepest quirk that separates us from other states and people. New Englanders refused early on to let rulers from Old England impose codes upon their independent communities. By 1776 Americans were registering primal screams against “a long train of abuses and usurpations” that decreed, taxed, quartered, and mandated without popular consent. Even the Progressive movement of the 20^th century began as a cry against the impositions of haughty monopolies – railroads, political bosses, unresponsive agencies, and corporations. Historically, America has been hostile to any centralized capture of decision-making. Populism is in our blood.

  So that was the olden days. What about now? Is it smart for a political party to pursue a populist approach, given the present climate of demagoguery and blood-sport politics? Do Republicans really want to cast their loyalties with the great unwashed?

  There is actually a strong argument to be made that our national success, stability, and virtue have been built much more on popular energy, decency, and wisdom than on the astuteness of American elites.

  It’s true that a republic centered on the common man will often exhibit a scratchy and brawling political dynamic. Ours always has. Jefferson characterized rule by everyday people as a “boisterous sea” – yet much to be preferred to “the calm of despotism.”

  We saw that messy dynamic in action on the House floor last week. But while it can at times be indecorous, American populism has never produced anything close to despotism. Quite the opposite.

  A few decades after Tocqueville commented on the constructive genius of normal citizens in America, perceptive foreign observers like Englishman George Ruxton and Pole Henryk Sienkiewicz likewise wandered our land and discovered deep reserves of insight and fair play among our untutored residents. The unassuming farmers, trappers, soldiers, and traders they interrogated impressed them with their judicious acumen and moral goodness. They were less taken with the residents they met in upper-class salons.

  Our long national experience with successful populism seems to be invisible to the journalist/techie/lawyer/professor mandarins who currently exhibit such suspicion toward mass opinion. Superior thinkers and would-be culture shapers complain of our lumbering government and the yokels who prevent it from being recast by intellectuals, data-barons, science doyens, and ethical innovators.

  That attitude inadvertently reveals great ignorance of U.S. history. Our national code was written by founders whose careful study of human autocracy over the ages left them keenly chastened. America’s architects created a prudent, intensely hedged, fail-safe republic that aimed specifically to empower the unexceptional citizenry – not to ease life for the smart and aggressive experts who always swarm halls of power hoping to apply brisk instruments of government to reshape society in their own image.

  James Madison explained it this way: “The difference between our government and others was happily this: that here the government had an anxious and difficult task … while the people stood at ease – not pressed upon, not driven.” In contrast, he noted, wherever ambitious and willful cliques are able to grab power, “government has an easy time, and the people have to bear and do everything.”

  Popular governments will sometimes embarrass, but they rarely morph into the most egregious errors or tyrannies. After listing numerous examples from World War II where intellectuals were “more wrong about the progress of the war than the common people,” George Orwell concluded that expert analysis is regularly inferior to popular wisdom. There are many absurd ideas that “one has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe,” he wrote, because “no ordinary man could be such a fool.”

  Males can become females. … Trillions may be spent by government without causing inflation. … Releasing criminals from lawful sentences won’t affect predation. … Both of his parents are Stanford professors, so that nice cryptocurrency pioneer must be right.

  The gravest existential dangers to America at present are being fomented by our nobility, not our yahoos: a discarding of rowdy free speech in favor of ecclesia-approved dogma. Rewriting history. Toxic labeling by gatekeepers to signal that an argument or individual should be shunned. Using academic guilds to suppress heterodox research. Blandly invoking “science,” racial appropriation, or “unsafe feelings” to shut down debate. Reducing all opposing arguments to “hate.” Forcing into official discourse and law exotic claims promulgated among elites that have never been embraced by the public.

  Yes, an extreme rabble can sometimes imperil a society. But the best way to preclude festering among commoners who feel wounded is to listen to them and then treat their afflictions. Ignoring, slighting, or degrading citizens of modest condition is both wrong and impolitic. And arguing that the American Cossacks who periodically gallop their pickup trucks through D.C. and N.Y. are an insurrectionary horde on the brink of seizing the nation’s levers of power is: (a) laughable as social diagnosis; and (b) insulting as political strategy.

  Far more plausible than a rube ruination of our society is the opposite nightmare: an educated, wealthy, powerful aristocracy – grown self-important, overbearing, and intolerant – losing all sympathy for middle America. In corridors of power right now, concern for working-class “Deplorables” is at a new low. We are allowed to call them rednecks, reactionaries, and racists, because such creatures deserve only to be bullied and lorded over. That scorn is our era’s most unexamined, unchecked, un-American civic breach.

  It’s not demagogic to champion what H.L. Mencken’s heirs deprecate as the “booboisie.” Nor it is anti-intellectual to be skeptical of expertise, and chary of those claiming political power in its name. From Francis Galton to Friedrich Hayek, one of history’s most time-proven realities is the superiority of plain empirical experience over brilliant theorizing.

  Ordinary citizens possess forms of knowledge, intuition, and moral sense that make them, as a body, better arbiters of many fundamental issues than any clutch of educated specialists. That’s been called the wisdom of crowds, group intelligence, symbiotic assessment, decentralized problem-solving, dispersed judgment, crowdsourcing – and it is undeniably powerful.

  “Wisdom is often nearer when we stoop than when we soar,” concluded William Wordsworth. That ancient insight is the secret of American success. Political leaders who defend it today will earn both results and repute.

  Karl Zinsmeister, author of many works about U.S. civil society, was chief domestic policy adviser in the White House from 2006 to 2009.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 20:20

• Where The World's Ultra-Wealthy Live
  Where The World’s Ultra-Wealthy Live

  How many millionaires, centimillionaires, and billionaires live in the world’s wealthiest cities?

  While such metrics are not all encompassing, these measurements of private wealth do help put the financial health and economic activity of some of the world’s wealthiest cities in perspective.

  Visual Capitalist’s Raul Amoros and Nick Routley created the infographic below, using information from the Henley Global Citizens Report, in partnership with New World Wealth, to rank the world’s wealthiest cities. It leverages a comprehensive data set that tracks the movements and spending habits of high-net-worth individuals in over 150 cities around the world.

  Which cities and regions have the biggest concentrations of millionaires around the world, each with a net worth greater than $1 million (USD)?

  

  Millionaires and Billionaires in the Wealthiest Cities

  In the latest edition of the ranking, North America has a strong showing with seven of the wealthiest cities, by number of millionaires.

  In particular, the United States claims five of the cities in the top 10, including the very top spot with New York City.

  

  Asia is the region with the second most millionaires with six cities in the mix. Not surprisingly, China is home to three of these cities, including Hong Kong (SAR).

  Europe comes in third with five cities, though only London makes into the top 10 portion of the ranking. Finally, Oceania has two cities on the list, both located in Australia.

  How Top Cities Stack Up

  Let’s take a closer look at some of the top-ranking cities making the list.

  #1: New York

  New York is the wealthiest city in the world⁠—home to 345,600 millionaires with a total private wealth that exceeds $3 trillion.

  New York is home to many Fortune 500 companies and is the financial heart of the United States, with the New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ located in the Big Apple. Additionally, the city’s real estate market is known for being expensive, with sky-high property values and rents.

  #2: Tokyo

  Tokyo is the economic hub of Japan and is one of the most important cities in the world for business and finance. It is home to 304,900 resident millionaires, making it the city with the second most millionaires in the world.

  Japan’s largest city is home to the Tokyo Stock Exchange, which is one of the largest stock exchanges in Asia by market capitalization. Tokyo is also a major center for banking and insurance, and is home to many multinational companies like Honda and Sony.

  #3: San Francisco Bay Area

  The San Francisco Bay Area boasts 276,400 millionaires. It’s known as the mecca of tech innovation, and as a result, the region has a high concentration of wealthy individuals. San Francisco also has the highest median household income in the country.

  The number of millionaires has been growing steadily over the last 10 years, and if the trends of recent years hold, San Francisco could become the number one millionaire hub by 2040.

  #4: London

  London has been the world’s wealthiest city for years, but over the past decade there has been an outflow of millionaires.

  Today, with 272,400 millionaires, the city holds a more humble position. London is known for its financial and business sectors, and it attracts a significant number of high-earning professionals who contribute to its reputation as a hub of wealth and luxury.

  #5: Singapore

  Singapore is home to 249,800 millionaires making it the second richest city in Asia after Tokyo.

  Singapore has one of the highest densities of millionaire households in Asia, with over 5% of households having at least $1 million USD in net financial assets. This is due in part to the country’s strong economic growth and favorable business environment, which has attracted many wealthy individuals and families to the country. In addition, Singapore’s political stability, low crime rate, and high standard of living have also contributed to its appeal as a place to live and work.

  Fastest Growing Cities for the Rich

  The cities shown in our visualization are already well-established locations for high-net-worth individuals. Some of them have topped the rankings for decades, while some others are less well-known. But what are the fastest growing cities for the rich?

  In 2022, cities with strong oil and gas industries like Riyadh, Sharjah, Dubai, Luanda, Abu Dhabi, Doha, and Lagos grew exceptionally. Cities in the UAE became millionaire magnets, attracting over 4,000 millionaires in 2022. In the U.S., a few tax-friendly states like Texas and Florida became home to American companies moving their head offices there.

  Looking to the future, companies and high-net-worth individuals will inevitably move where they are treated best. Countries that want to attract wealthy individuals will have to apply tax-friendly policies along with other factors such as quality of life, safety, education, and access to amenities that ultra-wealthy residents value.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 20:00

• Set For A Supreme Showdown? Fifth Circuit Rejects Bump Stock Ban In Contrast To Other Circuits
  Set For A Supreme Showdown? Fifth Circuit Rejects Bump Stock Ban In Contrast To Other Circuits

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has handed down a major opinion in Cargill v. Garland, No. 20-51016, ruling 13-3 that the ATF ban on bump stocks is unlawful. The en banc decision found that a bump stock may be many things but it is not a machine gun.

  

  On December 18, 2018, the ATF issued a rule that bump stock would now be considered unlawful as machine guns and gave bump stock owners 90 days to surrender the devices. After that deadline, possession would be treated as a federal crime. The specific statement read, in part:

  The Department of Justice is amending the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to clarify that bump-stock-type devices — meaning “bump fire” stocks, slide-fire devices, and devices with certain similar characteristics — are “machineguns” as defined by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.

  On January 6, 2023, the Fifth Circuit handed down its decision rejecting the rule. It explained the technical aspects for the case as well as the clear shift in interpretation by the ATF:

  “A bump stock is a firearm attachment that allows a shooter to harness the natural recoil of a semi-automatic weapon to quickly re-engage the trigger after firing, enabling him to shoot at an increased rate of speed. When ATF first considered the type of bump stocks at issue here, it understood that they were not machineguns. ATF maintained this position for over a decade, issuing many interpretation letters to that effect to members of the public.”

  Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod wrote in her majority opinion that “[p]ublic pressure to ban bump stocks was tremendous” after the mass shooting in Las Vegas on October 1, 2017. However, “[a] plain reading of the statutory language, paired with close consideration of the mechanics of a semi-automatic firearm, reveals that a bump stock is excluded from the technical definition of ‘machinegun’ set forth in the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act.”

  The majority further explained:

  The Government’s regulation violates these principles. As an initial matter, it purports to allow ATF—rather than Congress—to set forth the scope of criminal prohibitions. Indeed, the Government would outlaw bump stocks by administrative fiat even though the very same agency routinely interpreted the ban on machineguns as not applying to the type of bump stocks at issue here. Nor can we say that the statutory definition unambiguously supports the Government’s interpretation. As noted above, we conclude that it unambiguously does not. But even if we are wrong, the statute is at least ambiguous in this regard. And if the statute is ambiguous, Congress must cure that ambiguity, not the federal courts.

  The holding was supported by a rule of lenity that “penal laws are to be construed strictly.” She noted that, as in United States v. Wiltberger, the Court had long followed the rule which Chief Justice Marshall described as “founded on the tenderness of the law for the rights of individuals; and on the plain principle that the power of punishment is vested in the legislative, not in the judicial department. It is the legislature, not the Court, which is to define a crime, and ordain its punishment.”

  Thirteen judges agreed with the conclusion though twelve (Chief Judge Richman and Judges Jones, Smith, Stewart, Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt, and Wilson) reversed on lenity grounds while eight members (Judges Jones, Smith, Elrod, Willett, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham, and Wilson) reversed on the ground that federal law unambiguously fails to cover non-mechanical bump stocks.

  Judge Stephen Higginson, joined by Judges Dennis and Graves, dissented, including a rejection of the lenity argument:

  the Supreme Court lets us deploy lenity to narrow laws only as a last resort when, having tried to make sense of a statute using every other tool, we face an unbreakable tie between different interpretations.

  Contrary to this authority, the majority opinion and the lead concurrence apply the rule of lenity to garden-variety ambiguity. In doing so, today’s ruling usurps Congress’s power to define what conduct is subject to criminal sanction and creates grave ambiguity about the scope of federal criminal law….

  The ATF is likely to find the ruling far less than “tender” but it is well-reasoned.  It also stands in contrast to other circuits which reached opposing results. That creates an optimal status for Supreme Court review with a split in the circuits. The D.C. Circuit in Guedes, the Sixth Circuit in Gun Owners of America, and the Tenth Circuit in Aposhian came to opposing conclusions. These are well-reasoned opinions on a difficult question.

  There is another reason why Cargill may be appealing to some on the Court. The majority specifically rejected affording the ATF Chevron deference. The reason is that the agency had not relied upon Chevron and seven of the judges rejected Chevron deference when the statute imposes criminal penalties.

  First, Chevron does not apply for the simple reason that the Government does not ask us to apply it. Indeed, the Government affirmatively argued in the district court that Chevron deference is unwarranted. As other jurists have recognized in this context, that means that the Chevron argument has been waived—not merely forfeited. . . .

  That would seem to be the end of the inquiry, but we recognize that one of our sister circuits has held that Chevron cannot be waived. Guedes, 920 F.3d at 21–23; see also Gun Owners of America, 19 F.4th at 899 n.5 (White, J., in support of affirmance). To be sure, we have never held in a published case that Chevron must be raised by the Government in order to apply. . . . But the conclusion is obvious, and flows from well-settled waiver principles. After all, that a court should defer to the Government’s expressed interpretation is just a legal argument, and a party waives a legal argument if it fails to raise the argument when presented with the opportunity. . . .

  If ordinary waiver principles were not enough, we note also that it would contradict Chevron‘s central justification to defer to the Government’s interpretation without its urging us to do so. The justification is that “‘policy choices’ should be left to executive branch officials ‘directly accountable to the people.’” Guedes, 140 S. Ct. at 790 (Gorsuch, J., statement respecting denial of certiorari) (quoting Epic Systems v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612, 1630 (2018) and Chevron, 467 U.S. at 865)). Here, the Government made a clear policy choice by declining to seek Chevron deference. The very interest underlying Chevron demands that we respect the Government’s choice and interpret the statute according to traditional principles of statutory interpretation. . . .

  The Chevron framework does not apply for a second, independent reason: the statute which the Final Rule interprets imposes criminal penalties. As noted above, the primary reason for Chevron is that it allows the executive branch to make policy decisions through the accrued expertise of administrative agencies. But in exchange, Chevron deference shifts the responsibility for lawmaking from the Congress to the Executive, at least in part. That tradeoff cannot be justified for criminal statutes, in which the public’s entitlement to clarity in the law is at its highest. . . .

  Finally, we note a third reason why Chevron deference does not apply in these circumstances: that ATF has adopted an interpretive position that is inconsistent with its prior position. To apply Chevron here would contravene one of the rule’s central purposes: “to promote fair notice to those subject to criminal laws.” . . .

  This is one of the most interesting opinions in the gun-rights area. However, under cases like Bruen or those moving back toward the Court, the underlying issue is the interpretation of the Second Amendment. This case is purely a statutory interpretation case. While it raises constitutional questions in issues like the Separation of Powers, it can be decided without expanding or limiting the Second Amendment jurisprudence.

  On the face of the opinion, it (and the prior ATF interpretation) makes obvious sense from both mechanical and legal perspectives. Congress may have a different view but this is a major change to the law by agency fiat. (The change came under the Trump Administration).

  The case is so compelling not just on its logic but the basis for a Supreme Court review that I am tempted to assign it as part of my Supreme Court class. Hopefully, the Court can resolve my dilemma by accepting the case and placing it on the docket. If any justices are reading this, I would appreciate the academic accommodation.

  The underlying issue is likely something that Congress would examine. Here is a video showing how the bump stock can be used to simulate a machine gun’s rate of fire:

  Here is the opinion: Cargill v. Garland

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 19:40

• Iran To Execute More Young Men Arrested In Protests As West Weighs Diplomatic Expulsions
  Iran To Execute More Young Men Arrested In Protests As West Weighs Diplomatic Expulsions

  Since the start of the September ‘anti-hijab’ protests triggered by the death in police custody of Mahsa Aimini, Iran has launched a major crackdown which has included the arrests of many thousands, but more recently has involved unprecedented protest-related executions.

  Four Iranian citizens have been executed so far for what state authorities have dubbed ‘terrorist’ acts. There are widespread reports that two more detainees are about to be executed at a prison in the suburbs of Tehran, after hasty trials.

  “Protesters gathered outside a prison near the Iranian capital on Sunday night in an attempt to prevent the rumored imminent execution of two young detainees found guilty of running over a police officer in a car during protests in November,” The Guardian reports Monday.

  

  Family members of one of the men, 22-year-old Mohammad Ghobadlou, have reportedly joined protests outside the prison. He along with the other prisoner, Mohammad Boroughani, were reportedly transferred to solitary confinement which has sparked fears of their imminent execution, given this is typical treatment of death row inmates just prior to execution.

  This comes after two men were executed only two days ago on Saturday, with The New York Times describing that they were hanged:

  Iran on Saturday hanged two men, a 22-year-old national karate champion and a 39-year-old poultry worker, who participated in antigovernment demonstrations and whose executions were condemned as a ploy by the government to use violence and sow fear to crush the protests.

  The men, Mohammad Mehdi Karami, the karate champion, and Sayed Mohammad Hosseini, the factory worker, were hanged at dawn on Saturday in the city of Karaj near the capital, Tehran, after hasty trials on charges that they participated in the killing of a member of the Basij paramilitary group in November, according to the judiciary.

  Various Western countries have reportedly summoned the respective Iranian ambassadors in their capitals, demanding explanation. For example, France condemned the “appalling” Saturday executions and ongoing severe crackdown on ‘anti-hijab’ protesters.

  Human rights groups have called it “open murder” and claimed that inmates are not receiving fair trials and face trumped-up charges. Iran’s foreign ministry has remain staunchly entrenched in defending the nation’s judicial process: “Remarks of self-styled defenders of human rights are replete with racist thoughts,” a statement posted to the foreign ministry’s website said.

  Iranians are so upset about #MohammadBroghani and #MohammadGhobadlou being in danger of imminent execution that video is coming in after 3:00 AM in #Iran where they are protesting outside Rajai-Shahr Prison. #StopExecutionsInIran pic.twitter.com/q4U0TQK6X4

  — Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) January 8, 2023

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

  Meanwhile, some countries like Canada are going so far as to mull expelling Iranian diplomats, saying that Islamic Republic ambassadors don’t truly represent their people. There have been growing calls in Germany to do the same.

  Detained Iranian demonstrators have continued to receive harsh sentences, including years in prison, sometimes for what the rest of the world would deem mere exercise of free speech. But this has not yet served to stamp out the protests, but has in many cases only enraged people in the streets.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 19:20

• Classified Documents Found At President Biden's Think Tank
  Classified Documents Found At President Biden’s Think Tank

  Classified documents from Joe Biden’s tenure as Vice President were found in early November at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, CBS News reports, citing two sources with knowledge of an inquiry launched by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

  

  The investigation into the roughly 10 documents will be conducted by the US Attorney in Chicago (shocking!), according to the sources.

  The classified material was identified by personal attorneys for Mr. Biden on Nov. 2, the day before the midterm elections, Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president confirmed. The documents were discovered when Mr. Biden’s personal attorneys “were packing files housed in a locked closet to prepare to vacate office space at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, D.C.,” Sauber said in a statement to CBS News. The documents were contained in a folder that was in a box with other unclassified papers, the sources said. The sources revealed neither what the classified documents contain nor their level of classification. A source familiar told CBS News the documents did not contain nuclear secrets. -CBS News

  Remember when the DOJ raided former President Trump and made a huge deal about classified documents having been commingled with not-classified documents? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

  According to Sauber, the White House counsel’s office notified the National Archives on the same day the material was discovered, after which the Archives took possession the next morning.

  “The discovery of these documents was made by the President’s attorneys,” said Sauber. “The documents were not the subject of any previous request or inquiry by the Archives. Since that discovery, the President’s personal attorneys have cooperated with the Archives and the Department of Justice in a process to ensure that any Obama-Biden Administration records are appropriately in the possession of the Archives.”

  In charge of the investigation is John Lausch, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, who will seek to determine how the classified material ended up at the Penn Biden Center (which received $54.6 million in Chinese donations after the Biden Center was announced in 2016).

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 19:00

• US NatGas Prices Bounce After Monthlong Selloff; Some Forecasters See Possible Cold Flip End Of Month
  US NatGas Prices Bounce After Monthlong Selloff; Some Forecasters See Possible Cold Flip End Of Month

  US natural gas futures surged from an 18-month low and major support level. Energy prices as a whole rose on the prospects China’s move to reopen would boost imports and outweigh global recession fears. Long-term weather models indicate the possibility of a return to winter for the Lower 48 later this month into next, while near-term outlooks still show mild temperatures. There’s no concrete evidence yet of a flip from mild to colder temperatures for the US that would boost heating demand. 

  Front-month NatGas futures for February delivery jumped more than 10% to above $4 per million British thermal units (mmBtu). The snap higher in price (possibly a short squeeze) occurred just above the 76.4% Fibonacci retracement on the 2020 run-up from $1.43 to $10 in August. Since late last summer, prices have slid nearly 65% on abundant supply, mild winter, and LNG export troubles due to Freeport delays. 

  

  Comparing NOAA’s latest 6-10 day weather outlook versus the 8-14 day outlook, there are signs cold weather could be ahead for the West Coast and Rocky Mountains while the eastern half of the US stays above average. 

  

  There’s some chatter on social media about longer-term outlooks pointing to much colder weather for the Lower 48 later this month into next (remember, we pointed out some of these forecasts last week). 

  #EURODAY15 #natgas pic.twitter.com/d11QqlmgLV

  — Gas Vegas (@GasVegasBaby) January 9, 2023

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

  The pattern across N. America continues to lean to the warmer side as the Pacific pattern has been unfavorable for sustained cold since the end of December…but are things changing in the 11-15 day?

  Clients can read our latest HDD update here: https://t.co/0PGRH6N2h0#natgas pic.twitter.com/k10oBKOoWR

  — Atmospheric G2 (@Atmospheric_G2) January 9, 2023

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

  Weekend weather data maintains awful/red/bearish pattern next 2-weeks w/very light national demand. However, nat gas markets relieved to see the GFS, ECMWF, and CFS tease a colder pattern Jan 24-31. #natgas #oilandgas pic.twitter.com/cyfhj0YcKt

  — NatGasWeather.com (@NatGasWeather) January 9, 2023

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

  It may lock in, with help from the Stratosphere. Between the forcing from the tropics and the stratospheric changes, I’m very optimistic about a reversal of fortunes in the Eastern US. Be patient winter lovers. It’s coming. #wxtwitter https://t.co/dfWowrHJzF

  — Mark Margavage (@MeteoMark) January 9, 2023

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

  10mb Stratospheric Warming Events, even minor ones, have preceded 2 of the most significant arctic air outbreaks these past 2 months. The forecast remains for a stratospheric warming event unlike anything we’ve seen so far this fall and winter. Winter is just getting started. pic.twitter.com/7fhlpfNyQH

  — Mark Margavage (@MeteoMark) January 8, 2023

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

  The current polar cyclone is compared to last year ( right Jan 1, 2022) much stronger. This is why it is currently so mild over continents as the polar cyclone is the engine of air movements over the Northern hemisphere, accumulating lots of warm air from oceans.#natgas pic.twitter.com/eyrJJO58Fu

  — Heinrich Leopold (@LeopoldHeinrich) January 9, 2023

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

  However, Houston-based energy firm Criterion Research said warmer trends would persist across the Lower 48 for the next two weeks. They also said there’s a possibility of a weather event at the end of the month of early February.

  With the current warmer weather for January and the 10yr normals beyond that point, we are forecasting a robust March ’23 EOS storage level – ping us at info@criterionrsch.com for details #natgas #ongt

  — Criterion Research (@PipelineFlows) January 9, 2023

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

  As for Freeport’s restart, it’s anyone’s guess, but here’s some commentary around the latest aerial drone photos of the LNG export facility and what one trader thinks the reopening timeframe could be in early March. 

  This is my key (Not Skylar’s). When the Valve that is under wrap is installed here. I estimate it is 6 weeks to restart away (pending they are smooth with regulators). That puts me smack at March 1st given work is happening now. #LNG #FreeportLNG #NatGas pic.twitter.com/GE77poEsbE

  — NATGAS (@USAEnergyNatGas) January 9, 2023

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

  Hard to pinpoint precisely why NatGas jumped today. Maybe a combination of China reopening, a short squeeze, and or the idea winter isn’t over. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 18:40

• US Alarmed As Erdogan Hints At Assad Meeting Amid Moscow Reconciliation Talks
  US Alarmed As Erdogan Hints At Assad Meeting Amid Moscow Reconciliation Talks

  Via The Cradle,

  During a speech in Ankara last Thursday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan hinted that a meeting with his Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad may soon take place, “as part of efforts for peace.” He added that a tripartite meeting between the foreign ministers of Turkiye, Russia and Syria is scheduled to be held in the near future for the first time since 2011.

  Erdogan said, “As Russia-Turkey-Syria, we have launched a process through the meeting of our intelligence chiefs and defense ministers in Moscow. Then, God willing, we will bring our foreign ministers together trilaterally. Then, depending on the developments, we will come together as leaders.”

  

  The upcoming meeting aims to enhance communication after Russian-sponsored talks between the Turkish and Syrian defense ministers were held in Moscow on 28 December. The meeting was the highest-level of official meetings between Ankara and Damascus since the start of the Syrian war.

  In a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on 5 January, Erdogan called on the Syrian government to ‘take the steps to achieve a tangible solution concerning the case of Syria.”

  The US sis seeking to establish a middle ground between Ankara and the SDF in order to prevent Turkish-Syrian reconciliation.

  The Syrian-Turkish rapprochement via declared Russian mediation was paralleled by Emirati-Syrian rapprochement – the latest of which was a “brotherly” meeting aimed at strengthening cooperation and restoring historical relations between Assad and Foreign Minister of the UAE Abdallah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, according to SANA.

  Saudi newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat reported that the UAE seeks “to join Russia in sponsoring Syrian-Turkish relations at a high level,” noting that the Emirati foreign minister’s visit to Damascus sought to arrange Turkiye’s participation in the tripartite meeting of Syrian-Turkish-Russian foreign ministers, making it a quadripartite meeting.

  The meeting is meant to pave the way for a presidential meeting between Erdogan and Assad in the presence of Putin. Reportedly, the UAE has offered to host this summit, with a possibility of a high-level UAE official being present at the meeting if it will be held in Moscow.

  Asharq Al-Awsat added that Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu plans to visit Washington on 16-17 January to brief US officials on the developments of Turkish-Syrian normalization, his meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Faysal Mikdad, and the “roadmap” sponsored by Moscow in the context of security, military, political and economic fields – as agreed upon by the defense ministers as well as the intelligence chiefs in Syria, Turkiye and Russia over the past weeks.

  

  As Turkey has been launching successive operations against Kurdish groups both on the Turkish-Syrian border as well as within Syria itself under ‘Operation Claw Sword,’ a Western official informed Asharq Al-Awsat that a high-ranking US official will be visiting Ankara in the coming hours as part of efforts to mediate between Turkiye and the SDF in northeastern Syria.

  Ankara has demanded that Moscow and Washington commit to the implementation of the bilateral military agreements signed at the end of 2019. The agreements stipulate the withdrawal of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to beyond 30 kilometers from the Turkish border, and from the areas of Manbij and Tal Rifaat, in addition to the withdrawal of all heavy weaponry.

  The SDF says that it has fulfilled its obligations, and will not withdraw its police force – known as the Asayish – nor dismantle its local councils, despite Turkiye’s insistence on dissolving all Kurdish military and civil institutions in the area.

  Meanwhile, Cavusoglu told media on 29 December that Ankara is willing to withdraw from the territory it occupies in northern Syria and hand it over to Damascus in the event that “political stability” is reached – after cooperation in “neutralizing ISIS members, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the YPG.”

  The Saudi newspaper’s report stated that US mediation seeks to reach a “compromise” between the Kurdish groups and Ankara without a new Turkish incursion taking place ahead of the Turkish presidential and parliamentary elections in mid-2023. This mediation seems to be an attempt at circumventing the imminent Syrian-Turkish reconciliation.

  Another official source disclosed that Ankara was “uncomfortable with the leaks following the meeting of the Syrian, Turkish and Russian defense ministers in Moscow, and that it had agreed to a full withdrawal.” However, the source confirmed that, “it is true that Ankara and Damascus consider the PKK a common threat, and will work against any separatist agenda, because it is an existential threat to both countries,” adding that the two countries will “work to open the Aleppo-Latakia Highway.”

  Following the UAE’s visit to Damascus, which came after the US called on its allies and international partners to refrain from normalizing ties with Syria, Asharq Al-Awsat quoted an official as saying that the US has been the only western country to issue a statement against normalization, and is working alongside Paris, Berlin, and London to assume a united stance against normalization with Syria.

  Communication is currently underway for a meeting between the representatives of Paris, Berlin, London, and Washington and UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pederson in Geneva on 23 January. This meeting will take place before Pedersen’s visit to Damascus to meet with the Syrian foreign minister to “confirm the position against normalization, and support the provision of funding for electricity projects within the timeline of early recovery,” stipulated by a resolution for international aid that will be extended before 10 January.

  Asharq Al-Awsat said that the UAE has proposed to contribute to the funding of economic and electrical projects in Syria – within the confines of the Caesar Act.

  A poll indicates that there is strong support across all Turkish political parties for Erdogan to meet with Assad.

  Overall 59% for, 28.9% against.

  Via @OmarKadkoy: pic.twitter.com/HJCZ36kD63

  — Aron Lund (@aronlund) January 8, 2023

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

  Simultaneously, Jordan, who was the first to open high-level channels of communication with Damascus, is leading efforts alongside other Arab countries to reach a “united Arab position that defines Arab demands in order to make normalization possible.”

  The newspaper quoted another western official as saying that Jordan is calling for coordination to put pressure on Damascus to provide political and geopolitical steps for the coming phase in southern Syria, as Amman confirmed that there has been an increase in the smuggling of Captagon, weapons and ammunition across the Syrian border following the start of the normalization process. Additionally, Amman has said that the Iranian presence in southern Syria near the Jordanian border has not diminished, and that there has been an expansion of ISIS activity in the area, according to the official.

  Syria’s Arab League membership was suspended in November of 2011 following the start of the Syrian war, and it has been excluded ever since.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 18:20

• Ron Paul: Trump's Tax Returns Show Evil Of The Income Tax
  Ron Paul: Trump’s Tax Returns Show Evil Of The Income Tax

  Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

  The final act of the Democrat majority on the House Ways and Means Committee was to make public several years of Donald Trump’s tax returns, which the Committee obtained after a prolonged legal battle. The tax returns confirmed that, despite being one of the richest people in America, Donald Trump paid very little in federal income tax. In fact, in at least one year he paid under a thousand dollars.

  

  Trump’s success in minimizing his tax liability without ever being audited is surprising only to those who think IRS audits are mainly used to catch rich “tax cheats.” According to data released by the Syracuse University Transactional Records Clearinghouse, in 2022 lower-income taxpayers were five and half times more likely than millionaires and billionaires to be audited! This is because low-income taxpayers cannot afford to hire top-notch tax attorneys and accountants to help fight the IRS, so they are more likely to give in to the agency’s demands.

  Despite claims of the Biden Administration and its Congressional allies, the $80 million in additional funds provided to the agency as a part of the misnamed “Inflation Reduction Act” will likely increase the tax agency’s targeting of low- and middle-income Americans.

  Proponents of a flat tax or national sales tax argue that such a system would ensure millionaires and billionaires paid their “fair share” of taxes. Saying we must all pay our “fair share” of taxes assumes we have a moral obligation to the government that can only be fulfilled by turning over as much of our income as our so-called “public servants” demand. This is not the case. Individuals have a moral duty to support their families, and to support private charities if they wish. They do not have a moral duty to support the government.

  Tax reform proponents also complain that the current tax code contains too many loopholes that cause economic distortions and inefficiencies. It is true that the current tax system promotes inefficiency, but this is caused by the income tax itself, not the loopholes. Conversely, loopholes actually promote economic efficiency by giving taxpayers the ability to spend more of their money the way they prefer, rather than allowing politicians to spend it. As economist Thomas DiLorenzo put it, “private individuals always spend their own money more efficiently than government bureaucrats do.”

  Some have expressed concerns that the use of President Trump’s tax records as part of the Democrat and Deep State effort to discredit him sets a dangerous precedent that will lead to increased use of tax information as a political weapon. The sad fact is that ever since its creation, politicians have used the IRS as a tool for punishing political opponents. As an IRS agent told the head of conservative organization who was being audited after calling for the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton, “What do you expect when you target the President?”

  The major problem with the income tax, and the reason it must be eliminated, not merely “reformed,” is that it is rooted in the idea that the government has first claim on our income. This idea is incompatible with a free society. Furthermore, the income tax must also be repealed because the force of the IRS, along with the fraud of the Federal Reserve, is one of the two foundations of the welfare-warfare state that erodes our liberty and prosperity. The only way to avoid 1984 is to repeal 1913.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/09/2023 – 17:40