Dec 15

Today’s News 15th December 2022

  • 'A Dark Alliance': Musk's Twitter Files Exposed The Fifth Estate
    ‘A Dark Alliance’: Musk’s Twitter Files Exposed The Fifth Estate

    Authored by Mike Solana via PirateWires.com,

    Dangerous alliance. In 1787, Edmund Burke said there were “Three Estates in Parliament; but, in the Reporters’ Gallery yonder, there [sits] a Fourth Estate more important than they all.” The notion of some vital power beyond our government was imported to the New World, and today constitutes a core belief of the American liberal: there is no free people, we’re often told, without a free press independent of congress, the courts, and our president. But throughout the 20th Century thousands of media outlets gradually consolidated, and by the dawn of our internet era only a few giants remained. These giants largely shared a single perspective, and in rough agreement with the ruling class the Fourth Estate naturally came to serve, rather than critique, power. This relationship metastasized into something very close to authoritarianism during the Covid-19 pandemic, when a single state narrative was written by the press, and ruthlessly enforced by a fifth and final fount of power in the newly-dominant technology industry.

    It was a dark alliance of estates, accurate descriptions of which were for years derided as delusional, paranoid, even dangerous. But today, on account of a single shitposting billionaire, the existence of the One Party’s decentralized censorship apparatus is now beyond doubt.

    A couple weeks back, alleging proof Twitter acted with gross political bias, and in a manner that influenced U.S. elections (!), Elon Musk opened his new company’s internal communications to a small handful of journalists. They set immediately to breaking a series of major stories that have rewritten the history of Trump-era tech. Long story short, Twitter leadership lied to the public, relentlessly, for years, and everything the most paranoid among us ever said about the platform was true. “Trust and safety” is a euphemism for political censorship, with “expert” teams comprised almost exclusively of the most radical, joyless grievance studies majors you ever met in college. Their goal is to reshape American politics by dominating the bounds of what the public is permitted to consider American politics. In these efforts, they have mostly been succeeding.

    On December 2nd, Matt Taibbi shared conversations from the company’s “trust and safety” team that led to Twitter’s suppression of the New York Post’s infamous Hunter Biden laptop story. While interesting, Taibbi’s most notable revelation came almost as a side: both major political parties, as well as the White House, maintained direct lines of communication with Twitter, which they used to formally request content be removed from the platform. The company responded enthusiastically to many of these requests, and the examples we have (for now) come from the Democratic Party. Critics have been quick to point out Trump was in the White House at the time, though less interested, for some reason, in what — if anything — he removed from the site.

    On December 6th, Bari Weiss and her colleagues reported out proof of Twitter’s secret blacklists, in which both specific topics and, more problematically, people were de-amplified by the “trust and safety” team. The blacklisting was done for a nebulous host of reasons that generally amounted to something like ‘this feels dangerous.’ Danger was, of course, defined by partisan operatives, and exclusively targeted right-coded positions. Skepticism of radical gender ideology, distrust of public Covid policy, and almost anything having to do with the integrity of our last election were at the top of the list.

    Separate from any opinion concerning whether such topics, or the purveyors of such topics, should have been “shadow banned,” the revelation that they were is immensely important on account of Twitter’s censors, with their many supporters in the press, have denied the existence of these tools for years.

    Finally, over the last few days, Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, and Bari have all reported out pieces of Donald Trump’s deplatforming, which is easily the most famous digital unpersoning in history. It is also the least compelling story in the series. While it’s good to finally know exactly what happened, it really just was what everyone assumed: Trump was not banned for violating policy. Trump was banned because Twitter employees, who donated literally 99% of their political contributions to the Democratic Party, demanded it be done regardless of their own rules.

    Altogether, the Twitter Files — an ongoing story — paint a portrait of clear and inevitable partisan bias at one of the most dominant speech platforms in history. A small handful of very left-wing executives, who naturally perceived most opinion right of center as dangerous, worked tirelessly to limit those opinions from view. Empowered to censor “unsafe” content, and protected by a team of people who shared their political orientation, the executives produced, in a legal and decentralized manner, a key component of our defacto state censorship apparatus. While we don’t know for sure this is also happening at Google, Meta, or TikTok (which is for some reason still allowed to operate in this country), I think it’s a safe bet we’re looking at an industry-wide affliction.  

    But I do have questions.

    Where is the full list of shadow-banned accounts? Which political campaigns, specifically, communicated with Twitter, and what specifically was taken down? What about requests from foreign governments? What about requests from our own government? We need to know which of our government agencies, if any, had content removed from the platform, and we need to know the nature of this content. Taibbi alluded to Trump’s White House — did someone from the Trump administration request a takedown? Who made the request? Who received the request? Was it answered? What, if anything, was removed?

    The Trump line of questioning is, in particular, something you might assume attractive to the media, which has waged all-out war on the populist clown king for the last seven years. Alas, the press seems broadly disinterested. Is this because they don’t believe the former president ever made such requests, or is their lack of interest rather stemming from a fear of validating a major story most of them are currently trying to frame — for their own obvious political reasons — as not worth reading?

    A brief selection of positions from our cherished Fourth Estate: This entire story is a “dud” (The Washington Post) — no bombshells here! (Forbes). The Twitter Files, in which a handful of committed partisans enthusiastically censor large swaths of the conservative base, including a former president, actually prove the company was not politically biased. It is, however, now biased against Democrats (New York Magazine). Elon’s exposé is a flop that doesn’t matter. It has also placed multiple “trust and safety experts” in mortal danger (The Verge, predictably). Then, my favorite: it is good to finally see the blacklist tools I have been curious about for many years, which we have by the way always known existed, and therefore don’t matter (The Atlantic).

    The charge of shadow banning evoked uniquely loud jeering from the press, including Charlie Warzel in particular, a man formerly of the position “Twitter isn’t shadow banning Republicans.” Now, in the face of evidence the company absolutely shadow banned Republicans, the official position is we are using the term “shadow ban” incorrectly.

    It’s a game of semantics, in which the public is dragged through the exhausting, useless question of how much invisible speech suppression, precisely, constitutes a “real” shadow ban, rather than the glaringly important questions of both ethics and, frankly, safety. In the first place, is it right to run a decentralized censorship apparatus, and to make your rules invisible? In the second, what happens to a free country when the bounds of acceptable speech are set by a small cabal of unelected partisan cops? Because my sense is the answer isn’t “freedom.”

    There have been a few notable, if cautiously dissenting opinions from prominent voices in media. Buzzfeed’s Katie Notopoulos, the Los Angeles Times’ Jeff Bercovici, and the New York Times’ Mike Isaac all took somewhat risky positions in favor of transparency, apparently no longer in vogue among journalists, with Jeff explicitly acknowledging the important nature of the revelations. But I’ve only seen one actual piece, drafted and published by a reasonably mainstream media entity, embrace any aspect of the Twitter Files.

    Anthony Fisher, an opinion editor at the Daily Beast, danced around the subject, and awkwardly tried to obscure his overall agreement the story mattered behind many paragraphs demonstrating his conservative-hating bonafides. But in addressing Twitter’s censorship he did include the following important line:

    And that lesson is “Don’t trust (or demand) billionaire tech bros to be the arbiters of truth and news.”

    It was a flashback to the position most journalists and activists shared in the days before Donald Trump. Unfortunately, it wasn’t long before they realized they had a political ally in tech industry hall monitors, and set about a national power grab. In any case, if you were to strip the above position from all its obnoxious tribal language, it would really just be: no few people should control the bounds of acceptable discourse. I agree. But narrowly focused on the “tech bro,” the point not only betrays a bias, but misses a defining aspect of technology.

    The Fifth Estate is a fundamentally different kind of power. It’s more difficult to consolidate than media, and more difficult to control than even our government divided by design. Its impact is also far more difficult to predict. This is because technology is above all things defined in terms of newness, which not only makes it disruptive of pre-existing power, but destructive of itself — a sort of anti-power that only guarantees change. The true failsafe. Our ultimate reset. Tremendously empowering of tyranny in times of stagnation, technology is also our most powerful weapon against tyranny in times of innovation.

    While many tech giants have gone the way of media in consolidating power, centralizing, and aligning with the state, the future of technology is always change. From encrypted chats and blockchain to artificially intelligent search, every tech giant that amassed power over the last two decades will be facing existential threats in the years to come — not only from the government, but from the industry.   

    In terms of Twitter, Elon is already leveraging Fifth Estate properties, and not by employing current tools to amplify his own opinions (an emerging conspiracy). He is iterating product more rapidly than we’ve seen from any major, consumer-facing tech company in years. The trial and error here has largely been ridiculed by people who have never built a technology company. But while detractors are obsessed with his censorship abilities, Elon’s platform experiments are the things actually capable of root-changing the national discourse. The medium is the message, and the medium is evolving. Whatever works on Twitter will be cloned. The bounds of acceptable discourse will change, and none of this will have anything to do with Elon’s spicy tweets.

    But about those spicy tweets — 

    As the former lords of Twitter descend into hysterics with outlandish comments declaring Elon a Nazi, or a proponent of the QAnon conspiracy, or whatever other bit of unhinged loser bullshit, he faces two significant threats. First, he’s clearly made an enemy of every other major fount of power, including in particular the Fourth Estate. This will impact all of Elon’s companies, as they all require support from the government and public, and the opinions of our government and public are still shaped, to a large extent, by the media. It’s no coincidence most powerful tech executives, from Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos to Jack Dorsey, share a carefully-crafted language of neutrality. This air of neutrality is how a king behaves, because the air of neutrality is how a king survives. In flaunting his power, rather than obscuring it, Elon is asking to be attacked, and his enemies are happy to oblige, even while more dominant platforms go unbothered.

    Something like 80 million Americans are using TikTok, a company hopelessly compromised by the Chinese Communist Party. Do you even know the name of its CEO?

    For a man who controls the bounds of acceptable speech for a third of the country’s adults, he sure doesn’t seem especially interested in speaking.

    Elon’s second danger is the far more formidable danger of himself. What the Twitter Files prove beyond doubt is censorship in the age of social media is power — a real and dangerous power that corrupts.

    Last year, Dorsey appeared before Congress, and declared neither he nor anyone else, and certainly not anyone in government, should be allowed to set the bounds of acceptable speech for the entire country. But with no viable alternative, someone does need to bear the ring. In leaked texts from the recent Twitter legal saga, it’s clear Jack believed Elon a worthy steward of this tremendous power, and, for what it’s worth, I agree. But provided the nation remains free, the rules of the Fifth Estate are immutable. Power comes in dramatic upward swings, and resets the status quo. It will not — it can not — last forever. So change the world, but be mindful of temptation, and make good use of your god mode powers while you have them. Because they never last forever.   

    *  *  *

    Long story short, Pirate Wires exists because people subscribe. If you’re into what we’re doing here, drag your friends on board for a free sub, and if you haven’t yet already: Subscribe, or die.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 23:40

  • Salt Lake City Faces Toxic Dust Storms Amid Declining Water Levels
    Salt Lake City Faces Toxic Dust Storms Amid Declining Water Levels

    Salt Lake City, Utah, was already in trouble. Between vast open-pit mining operations in the surrounding areas, oil refineries, and a unique mountain range that traps pollution in a winter ‘inversion layer,’ the cities surrounding the Great Salt Lake have grappled with air quality issues for years.

    “We have 2.5 million residents along the edges of the lake,” said Kevin Perry, a University of Utah atmospheric scientist researching the Great Salt Lake dust. “These dust plumes come off and make the air unhealthy regardless of what’s in it.“

    Now, as NBC News reports, declining water levels in the Great Salt Lake have created new challenges as dust laden with toxic metals threaten the region.

    Dust researcher Kevin Perry poses with his fat bike and a PI-SWERL machine, which can measure wind erosion and dust emission.Evan Bush / NBC News

    Since Mormon pioneers settled the valley in the mid-1800s, the lake’s volume is down 67% – thanks to a combination of irrigation projects, which account for roughly 75% of the loss, and the ongoing megadrought, which accounts for the remainder of the drop, according to research from Utah State University.

    This isn’t an issue caused by climate change, according to the report. Residents are simply consuming too much water for agriculture, residential use and industry, from overtaxed rivers that feed the terminal lake. Humans diverting water has reduced the Great Salt Lake by around 11 feet – while increased evaporation has added to the problem by around half-a-foot.

    During dust storms, host spots on the lake will pop and emit swirls of dust, collecting particles less than a fraction of the width of a human hair, darkening the sky and propelling them into communities nearby. The smallest particles can remain airborne for weeks at a time. 

    The lake bed contains pollutants like arsenic, distributed widely across the surface, which could be an indication that some of it occurs naturally, Perry said.  

    The lake has long been a catchment for industrial pollution. Each area of the lake has its own recipe of toxic metals and other substances, fed by different polluting industries nearby. Researchers are concerned that what’s been stored in the lake will soon be carried on the wind into Salt Lake City and other neighboring communities. -NBC News

    And as time goes on, the situation is set to get worse.

    In 2018, roughly 9% of the lakebed was a source of dust – with a protective crust covering much of the rest. But wind and weathering is breaking that down.

    “The longer the lake bed is exposed, we expect that to increase. It could increase to 24% to 25% of the lakebed,” said Perry.

    Lawmakers are starting to take notice – but in typical fashion, it’s too little, too late. They have passed a series of bills designed to revamp how Utah uses its water. In November, Gov. Spencer Cox closed the basin to new water appropriations. A step in the right direction after years of neglect.

    “The entire state has an unhealthy relationship with water,” said Perry. “We need to start living like we live in the desert.“

    Water levels on the Great Salt Lake have retreated away from what was once the shoreline, leaving acres of exposed playa. The crusty lake bed surface, seen here from Antelope Island, is breaking down in some areas and blowing away. The playa is a source of dust that could worsen air pollution.Evan Bush / NBC News

    Researchers looking into the toxic dust have been examining exactly where it goes – including whether it’s easily absorbed into people’s bodies, and what risks it may present.

    In 2018, scientists with the US Geological Survey placed 18 dust traps throughout the Salt Lake City area – where they trapped dust from the lake, local construction, and local deserts, for a period of several months.

    What they found was concerning. At every site, arsenic concentrations exceeded EPA levels of concern for residential soil. One site had a concentration 35x higher.

    “We’ve got some bells going off,” said USGS hydrologist, Annie Putman, who led the study. “The pieces are there to think we should be concerned.”

    The Salt Lake City area has long had a reputation for pollution gong back decades. Out of 888 US metro areas, the EPA ranked it the ninth-worst on a 2020 risk screening model that ranks health risks from toxic chemical releases. Last year it ranked 20th for short-term particle pollution by the American Lung Association.

    Highway vehicles traffic travel past a poor air quality sign in Salt Lake City, on Jan. 23, 2013.Rick Bowmer / AP file

    “If you look at Salt Lake, it’s essentially a bowl and the dense emissions are in the lower elevations,” said John Lin, an atmospheric research professor at the University of Utah, who noted that pollutants such as black carbon, nitrogen dioxide and other particulate matter “tend to be higher in lower-income neighborhoods.”

    Residents in the lower portion of the ‘bowl’ are inundated in a pea soup of refinery emissions, car exhaust and other pollutants.

    The researchers suspect that urban, diverse neighborhoods are receiving much of their dust and the toxic metals within that dust from local sources — nearby polluters or construction projects. It’s also possible that dust from the Great Salt Lake and other nearby playas picks up local pollutants from nearby mines, refineries and pesticides as dust travels into the city. 

    Meanwhile, researchers found the highest levels of dust — and metals — in suburbs outside urban Salt Lake City. Researchers suspect communities north of the city, including areas such as Syracuse, Ogden and Bountiful could be receiving the majority of the dust that blows off the lake. In early October, less than a mile from what was once lakeshore, workers were hammering away to frame new housing. -NBC News

    “It irritates the eyes and gives me sinus infections,” said 58-year-old George Casillas, who’s lived on the west side for 15 years. “It’s hard to be trapped in the valley.”

    “There’s so much sediment and so much trapped for so long. It’s pulling up stuff that’s been trapped for 100 years,” he continued. “Are there carcinogens or other health risks? That’s what I’m worried about.“

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 23:20

  • Musk Unexpectedly Sells $3.6 Billion In Tesla Stock In Last 3 Days
    Musk Unexpectedly Sells $3.6 Billion In Tesla Stock In Last 3 Days

    There had been a quiet at first, and then increasingly louder chorus of disapproval among Tesla bulls at the relentless decline in the TSLA stock price, which someone was aggressively selling in recent days and slashing nearly a quarter of its value since the start of the month (and more than 60% from its all time high just over a year ago).

    It turns out that at least one of the whale sellers was none other than Elon Musk himself who – just days after losing the world’s richest man rank to French luxury titan Bernard Arnault – late on Wednesday filed a Form 4 showing he sold nearly 22 million shares, or some $3.6 billion worth, of TSLA stock between Nov 12 and Nov 14.

    The sales, which took place at a price between $176.702 and $156.14, brought Musk’s total TSLA holdings down from 445.617 million to 423.622 million, a decline of 21.995 million shares.

    The week’s sale, which follows a similar dump one month ago when during a 4 day period from November 4-8, Elon Musk sold 19.5 million shares or roughly $4 billion in TSLA stock, means that the Tesla – and now Twitter – chief executive has sold more than $39 billion in Tesla shares since the company’s stock peaked in November 2021. Tesla, still the world’s largest auto maker by value, has lost more than $700 billion in market value since that all-time high.

    It wasn’t clear what prompted Musk to sell additional Tesla stock, and the company didn’t respond to a request for comment from the WSJ, but on Tuesday, in what may have been a foreshadowing of what’s to come, Musk tweeted, “At risk of stating obvious, beware of debt in turbulent macroeconomic conditions, especially when Fed keeps raising rates.”

    Musk, of course, has lots of debt from his completed acquisition of Twitter in October. While Musk provided $33.5 billion in equity financing to pay for the deal, Twitter also took on around $13 billion in debt as part of the takeover, in which the company went private. According to reports from Bloomberg, the banks which are stuck with the debt and unable to syndicate it to willing buyers, offered to lower the interest on some of the more expensive tranches if Musk is willing to exchange the Twitter debt with a personal margin loan (backed by far more valuable Twitter stock).

    Musk tried for months to get out of the Twitter deal but failed. To raise enough cash for the purchase, he offloaded more than $15 billion in Tesla shares — about $8.5 billion in April, then another $6.9 billion in August. In November, after vowing he was done selling, he unloaded another $3.95 billion of his stake.

    Besides Musk’s sales, TSLA stock has been hit by concerns that rising interest rates will make the cars more expensive for consumers while demand issues in China, Tesla’s largest market after the US, have reportedly depressed local production.

    Twitter now faces annual interest payments approaching $1.2 billion, which could get even more expensive given that the interest rates on about half of that debt aren’t locked in and will rise with the market. To cut costs, Twitter not only fired more than half of its employees, but according to the NYT has not paid rent for its San Francisco headquarters or any of its global offices for weeks; Twitter has also refused to pay a $197,725 bill for private charter flights made the week of Musk’s takeover, and has also discussed the consequences of denying severance payments to thousands of people who have been laid off since the takeover.

    Musk’s recent sales will bring his stake in the company to roughly 13%; he remains the company’s largest shareholder by a wide margin. Musk’s net worth was $160.9 billion as of Wednesday’s close, ranking No. 2 on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index after France’s Bernard Arnault. His fortune has dropped by $109.4 billion this year.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 23:01

  • LA's New Mayor Declares 'State Of Emergency' Over Homelessness
    LA’s New Mayor Declares ‘State Of Emergency’ Over Homelessness

    After making it a central part of her campaign, Los Angeles’ new mayor Karen Bass declared homelessness a ‘state of emergency’ in the city.

    The declaration “will recognize the severity of Los Angeles’ crisis and break new ground to maximize the ability to urgently move people inside,” according to a statement from Bass’ office, on the same day she visited the city’s Emergency Operations Center, ABC News reports.

    According to a three-day study conducted earlier this year, just under 42,000 people experienced homelessness in the city of LA, according to the Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA).

    At least 69,144 people experienced homelessness in the same-named county – a 4.1% increase over 2020, and a 1.7% rise in the city itself.

    Local COVID-era policies like eviction moratoriums and rentals assistance, as well as federal assistance have helped people stay housed throughout the pandemic, according to LAHSA.

    However, many of those policies have since ended or are about to end, and it’s left unhoused and people facing housing insecurity without a safety net, LAHSA reports. -ABC News

    As a House representative, Bass was instrumental in funding millions for long-term shelter solutions for homeless residents, job training and career development programs. She also backed substance abuse programs.

    “These investments to combat homelessness, improve community safety and assist families with the increasing costs of living in our congressional district are coming at a crucial time,” she said in a March statement. “Now that we have these new allocated funds on the federal level, we have to ensure that they reach our communities as soon as possible.”

    During her campaign, Bass vowed to “House 15,000 people by the end of year one, dramatically reduce street homelessness, end street encampments,” and “lead on mental health and substance abuse treatment.”

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 22:40

  • Ron Paul: Mother Of All Economic Crisis Will Lead To "Social Unrest & Violence"
    Ron Paul: Mother Of All Economic Crisis Will Lead To “Social Unrest & Violence”

    Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

    Nouriel Roubini, a former advisor to the International Monetary Fund and member of President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisors, was one of the few “mainstream” economists to predict the collapse of the housing bubble. Now Roubini is warning that the staggering amounts of debt held by individuals, businesses, and the government will soon lead to the “mother of all economic crises.”

    Roubini properly blames the creation of a debt-based economy on the near-or-at-zero interest rate and quantitative easing policies pursued by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. The inevitable result of the zero-interest and quantitative easing policies is price inflation wreaking havoc on the American people.

    The Fed has been trying to eliminate price inflation with a series of interest rate increases. So far, these rate increases have not significantly reduced price inflation. This is because rates remain at historic lows. Yet the rate increases have had negative economic effects, including a decline in the demand for new homes. Increasing interest rates make it impossible for many middle- and working-class Americans to afford a monthly mortgage payment for even a relatively inexpensive home.

    The main reason the Fed cannot raise rates to anywhere near what they would be in a free market is the effect it would have on the federal government’s ability to manage its debt. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), interest on the national debt is already on track to consume 40 percent of the federal budget by 2052 and will surpass defense spending by 2029! A small interest rate increase can raise yearly federal debt interest rate payments by many billions of dollars, increasing the amount of the federal budget devoted solely to servicing the debt.

    The federal government’s fiscal picture is made worse by the fact that the Social Security “Trust Fund” will begin to run deficits by 2035 while the Medicare Trust Fund will run deficits by 2028. The looming bankruptcy of the two major entitlement programs, combined with the unwillingness of most in Congress to reduce either welfare or warfare spending, puts the Fed in a bind. If it raises rates to the levels needed to really combat price inflation, the increase in interest payments will impose hardships on individuals and businesses, as well as raise federal interest payments to unsustainable levels. This will cause a major economic crisis including a government default on its debt causing a rejection of the dollar’s world reserve currency status. Also, if the Fed continues to facilitate federal deficits by monetizing the debt, the result will be an economic crisis caused by a collapse in the dollar’s value and rejection of the dollar’s world reserve status.

    The crisis will lead to social unrest and violence, as well as increased popularity of authoritarian movements on both the left and the right. This will lead to government crackdowns on civil liberties and increased government control of our economy. The only bright spot is this crisis will also fuel interest in the ideas of liberty and could even help bring about a return to limited, constitutional government, free markets, individual liberty, and a foreign policy of peaceful trade with all. Those of us who know the truth have two responsibilities. The first is to make the necessary plans to ensure our families can survive the forthcoming turmoil. The second is to do all we can to introduce as many people as possible to the ideas of liberty.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 22:35

  • Epstein Island: Newly Unsealed Evidence Of Abuse
    Epstein Island: Newly Unsealed Evidence Of Abuse

    Authored by Techno Fog via The Reactionary,

    We have newly unsealed documents – including the depositions of Ghislaine Maxwell and one of her victims – revealing new details on the extent of the abuse and victimization that took place by Jeffrey Epstein. Those filings come from Giuffre v. Maxwell, a civil case filed against Maxwell in 2015 in the New York Southern District.

    Some of the broader allegations have already been made public. Sarah Ransome, who accused Epstein and Maxwell of abuse that took place during her early 20s, settled a civil lawsuit against them in 2018. Ransome has publicly described some of the abuse. And there have been reports on what transpired at Little St. James, often referred to as Epstein Island.

    Let’s get to the new details, starting with the testimony of Ransome, available here. She actually lived one of Epstein’s apartments in 2006 with a few other girls. During that time, she worked for what she described as an “agency” which arranged paid dinners with wealthy clients: “I was paid to spend dinner with a gentleman.” Whatever happened after dinner with the client was done on her “own accord” and “after that time period had finished.”

    Ransome was introduced to Epstein by a female associate of his (her name is still redacted), who described Epstein as a wealthy “philanthropist” who “really cares about people” and “really wants to help them.” She was open to meeting Epstein because she was struggling financially. Soon after meeting Epstein, Ransome was invited to travel on Epstein’s plane to Epstein Island. She was told it “was going to be a girls’ week” and they would have “so much fun”:

    Q. How did the flight meeting become arranged, if you know?

    A. So it was pretty a last-minute thing. phoned me up and said that Jeffrey Epstein would very much like to have me go to his island. It was going to be so much fun, it was going to be a girls’ week, there were lots of other girls going, we were going to have so much fun, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

    What happened on the flight – her first flight with Epstein – must have been shocking to Ransome. She described what happened after they took off:

    “The rest of the passengers in the — I think it’s towards the front of the plane where all the seats are — we all — all the guests were — fell asleep. I pretended to be asleep.

    Jeffrey then went – Jeffrey went to his — was in his bed on the plane, having open sex with for everyone to see, on display.”

    Ransome would eventually give massages to Epstein at the Island. She had been told that Epstein “loves women, loves getting massages” and that this “was a nice way to make extra cash.” At first, the massages were relatively normal. Then then escalated to the type of “massage” Epstein is now notorious for – much of which was done without Ransome’s consent.

    She described her experiences at Epstein’s Island as being constantly surrounded by “beautiful young people” and that there “were always girls” there to visit “Jeffrey and Ghislaine.” Ransome also gave a description of the Island as having multiple buildings – a main house and then various buildings around the Island for Epstein and his guests:

    “like little shelter things where him and his guests used to have sex with the girls, like beds set up for instant sexual entertainment.”

    There was a “constant influx of girls” at this Island. It was a type of brothel. According to Ransome:

    “It’s like, I’m sure if you go into a hooker’s brothel and see how they run their business, I mean, it’s just general conversation about who’s going to have sex with who and, you know — what do you talk about when all do you is have sex every day on rotation? I mean, what is there to talk about?”

    She testified that all those girls “appeared to be teenagers.” They “looked young.” One girl in particular “looked well under 18.” This girl told Ransome that “they abused her on the island.” Another girl ran out of Epstein’s room crying and saying she was “forced to have sex with Jeffrey Epstein.”

    Unsealed photographs of Epstein at Epstein Island, 2006.

    Ransome would meet Ghislaine Maxwell on a later trip to Epstein Island. She was told that Maxwell was “a very dangerous character and has connections,” and “to do everything she told me to do.” The girls would report to Maxwell. Ransome and other girls were in fact intimidated by and scared of Maxwell:

    “I met a lot of girls who we all had the same opinion of Ghislaine; we were all frightened of her. She had a very odd relationship with Jeffrey and — yeah, she’s not a nice — I’m sorry, I know she’s your client, but she’s not — she’s not a friendly, warm person.”

    Ransome also described the role of Ghislaine Maxwell at Epstein Island:

    “Ghislaine was Jeffrey’s right-hand woman, so, you know, whatever Jeffrey wanted went through Ghislaine and then filtered through.”

    “So there was — everyone was afraid of Ghislaine. All the girls were afraid of her…”

    “And we were told by Jeffrey Epstein to listen to Ghislaine. So Ghislaine was the main right-hand woman of Jeffrey Epstein. We were told by Jeffrey Epstein to listen to Ghislaine.”

    Maxwell would actually assist Epstein with managing his sexual “rotation” on the Island:

    Q. And when you say you were on rotation, you mean you were having sex with Jeffrey multiple times per day?

    A. No. As in when I was finished, another girl was called by Ghislaine. And when they had finished, another girl was called.

    Q. How do you know that another girl was called by Ghislaine?

    A. Because I was there, and I saw it and heard it with all my senses. I saw Ghislaine call another girl, and she called me herself, to go give Jeffrey Epstein a sexual massage.

    …

    Q. What do you mean by call? I guess I’m thinking like telephone. That may be my —

    A. No. As in going up to the person and going, Jeffrey wants to see you in his bedroom, which meant it’s your turn to be abused. That kind of thing.

    ++

    Other unsealed parts of the civil case concern the deposition of Rinaldo Rizzo – something we have previously reported on – who said Epstein and Maxwell were with a 15 year-old girl and had taken her passport:

    A. What happens next when Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein and a 15-year-old girl walk into Eva Anderson’s home? . . . “A. She proceeds to tell my wife and I that, and this is not – this is blurting out, not a conversation like I’m having a casual conversation. That quickly, I was on an island, I was on the island and there was Ghislaine, there was Sarah, she said they asked me for sex, I said no.

    And she is just rambling, and I’m like what, and she said — I asked her, I said what? And she says yes, I was on the island, I don’t know how I got from the island to here. Last afternoon or in the afternoon I was on the island and now I’m here. And I said do you have a — this is not making any sense to me, and I said this is nuts, do you have a passport, do you have a phone? And she says no, and she says Ghislaine took my passport. And I said what, and she says Sarah took her passport and her phone and gave it to Ghislaine Maxwell, and at that point she said that she was threatened.”

    There is still more to come. Currently, multiple “John Does” are fighting the unsealing of their names. We expect those names to be unsealed but there is an appeals process we’ll have to wait for.

    Some of the men are only casually referenced in the case. Others were potentially involved in Epstein’s criminal acts. We’ll publish those names once they’re out.

    In the meantime, if you need to catch up on the Epstein/Maxwell details, here are some good places to start:

    Subscribe to The Reactionary here.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 22:20

  • DeSantis Forms Florida Grand Jury To Investigate Misconduct Surrounding Covid Vaccine Rollout
    DeSantis Forms Florida Grand Jury To Investigate Misconduct Surrounding Covid Vaccine Rollout

    Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is establishing a grand jury through the state’s supreme court to investigate malfeasance involving the rollout of the covid mRNA vaccines.  The investigations will include the claims of vaccine safety by pharmaceutical companies and the CDC, along with the rising number of deadly reactions to the jab including Myocarditis.  The announcement was made in a virtual town hall-style meeting and was met with a positive response.

    DeSantis notes the moral bankruptcy of the scientific establishment in the US during the pandemic lockdowns – With the federal government and many scientists admonishing the public for going outside their homes (even though UV light from the sun is a natural sterilizer), while at the same time supporting the BLM protests in which thousands of people congregated on city streets to riot.  Stopping the spread was not important in the case of BLM, but deadly important when it came to people walking on the beach or protesting the lockdowns.

    DeSantis has proven to be a consistent opponent of the lockdowns and mandates, despite Florida’s large population.  This policy helped to provide proof that the lockdowns were pointless.  If Florida (along with other defiant red states) could stay open without any noticeable jump in fatalities compared to blue states, then what was the point of the lockdowns and restrictions?  

    A trend is growing among the American public which runs contrary to the mainstream covid narrative.  People are beginning to question the validity of government policies, the claims of snake oil salesmen like Anthony Fauci and the rules enforced by the CDC.  Most importantly, they are beginning to apply skepticism to the mRNA vaccines, which is something that should have been done before they were ever distributed.  At the very least, the pendulum seems to be swinging back after nearly three years of attempted medical authoritarianism.     

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 22:00

  • Nuclear Fusion 'Breakthrough' Touted By White House, Drawing Praise And Some Skepticism
    Nuclear Fusion ‘Breakthrough’ Touted By White House, Drawing Praise And Some Skepticism

    Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    It was 1:03 a.m. on Dec. 5 that experimental physicist Alex Zylstra first spotted it: for the first time, a target yielded more energy from a fusion reaction than a laser put into it—though that’s not counting the much greater input energy that was needed to power the laser in the first place.

    “One of the first things I did was call one of the diagnostic experts to double-check the data,” he said during a Dec. 13 press conference with his colleagues from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

    Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm briefs reporters at the White House in Washington on May 11, 2021. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

    Zylstra was running a test with the world’s most energetic laser—Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility (NIF).

    By blasting a capsule of hydrogen atoms with that laser until the atoms heat into plasma and combine, he and his colleagues were hoping to achieve nuclear fusion through an approach known as inertial confinement.

    The other main approach to fusion, magnetic confinement fusion, uses devices such as tokamaks to contain plasmas using powerful magnetic fields.

    NIF physicist Tammy Ma said that “tears were running down [her] face” when she learned about the result.

    “I want to emphasize that each experiment we do is building on 60 years of work in this field, and more than a decade on NIF itself,” Zylstra said.

    His team’s latest work comes as the latest in a recent series of fusion-related achievements from that facility, where fusion research is pursued under the National Nuclear Security Administration’s “Stockpile Stewardship” program, as an alternative to the underground nuclear testing that ended during the early 1990s.

    The most important of those achievements may have occurred in August 2021, when NIF researchers first briefly achieved ignition according to one set of criteria—namely, when the forces cooling plasma down aren’t strong enough to swamp the forces heating it up. (The Dec. 5 result has also been called “ignition,” as it marks scientific energy breakeven.)

    “The NIF result in August 2021 changed everything, but this result changes nothing,” said Daniel Jassby, a former research physicist with Princeton University’s plasma laboratory, in a Dec. 13 interview with The Epoch Times.

    At the Dec. 13 press conference, Lawerence Livermore director Kim Budil said that about 300 megajoules of energy drove the experiment as a whole. The target produced about 3.15 megajoules of energy from 2.05 megajoules of energy, according to a press release.

    The latest result and press conference coincides with Congress negotiating a last-minute spending bill. Republican senators have called for their colleagues to wait until after their party takes the House of Representatives in January to finalize the package.

    Jassby did not rule out the possibility that the latest announcement’s timing has something to do with the ongoing spending debate.

    “That could be—that’s standard political activity,” he said.

    The reported breakthrough also coincides with increasing tension between the United States and its nuclear-armed geopolitical rival, Russia, in the midst of the Ukraine war. Lawrence Livermore’s Mark Hermann noted how NIF’s fusion research aided the United States’ nuclear deterrent capabilities.

    The scientists, bureaucrats, and administration officials who spoke on Dec. 13 said the results vindicate decades of earlier researchers who have sought energy breakeven.

    “They never lost sight of this goal,” said White House office of science and technology policy director Arati Prabhakar.

    Yet, an apparent discrepancy emerged as to a plausible timeline for commercial fusion power.

    Budil, of Lawrence Livermore, stated that commercialization could be achieved in “probably decades,” though perhaps not 50 or 60 years.

    “With concerted effort and investment, a few decades of research on the underlying technologies could put us in a position to build a power plant,” she said.

    Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, by contrast, appealed to President Joe Biden’s “decadal vision to get to a commercial fusion reactor within 10 years.”

    She said the latest result “shows that it can be done.”

    When Granholm was asked about that gap by a reporter, Budil jumped in to say that magnetic fusion was more advanced than inertial confinement fusion. However, she did not state that either approach could be realistically commercialized within a decade.

    “With real investment and real focus, that timescale can move closer,” she said.

    Praise and Skepticism

    Some fusion insiders have stressed what they see as the significance of NIF’s contribution.

    A spokesperson for a major international magnetic fusion collaboration called the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) said the results were “a shot of adrenaline for the global fusion R&D enterprise.”

    Tokamaks—the technology at the center of ITER’s work—are still “the closest to commercial deployment,” added ITER spokesperson Laban Coblentz.

    Andrew Holland, the CEO of the Washington-based Fusion Industry Association, said that the announcement on the finding “shows the world that fusion is not science fiction: it will soon be a viable source of energy.”

    He also called for regulation of the emerging fusion sector, adding that the NIF experiment “will give governments around the world further incentive to support the development of commercial fusion energy.”

    Yet other experts who spoke with The Epoch Times sounded more skeptical, particularly with regard to the idea of fusion energy reaching commercialization within a decade.

    “It will take half a century to develop the presently non-existent technologies required for a power reactor based on [inertial confinement fusion], including a practical laser or ion beam,” Jassby said in an email to The Epoch Times.

    In his view, tokamaks remain “highly speculative.”

    “Anyone who predicts commercial fusion before 2050 has a far greater imagination than I do,” said Rod Adams, a Navy nuclear veteran who is a partner with the Nucleation Capital venture fund, in a Dec. 13 email to The Epoch Times.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 21:40

  • Zelensky Aide Accuses Musk Of Censoring Ukraine War On Twitter
    Zelensky Aide Accuses Musk Of Censoring Ukraine War On Twitter

    A senior adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has accused Elon Musk of hiding reporting on the Ukraine war from Twitter trends.

    Spokesman Mikhail Podoliak blasted the billionaire Twitter CEO for censoring vital Ukraine information. “‘War in Ukraine’ disappearance from Twitter trends. Radical curtailment of tweets mentioning ru-aggression coverage. Users aren’t allowed to register or log into accounts with Ukrainian phone number,” Podoliak wrote Tuesday on Twitter, tagging Musk.

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

    The Ukrainian presidency’s office spokesman additionally took a swipe at the ongoing “Twitter files” release, saying he doesn’t expect the issue he’s raising to be covered there. “Elon Musk, I wonder if we will ever see ‘Twitter Files’ about Fall/Winter 2022?” Podoliak questioned. 

    The suggestion was that Musk is seeking to tilt coverage in terms of content that appears on Twitter against anything highlighting “ru-“(Russian)”aggression” – as he wrote in the tweet.

    Some recent local Ukrainian media reports have claimed that users within the country or anyone possessing a Ukrainian phone number can no longer register or log in to Twitter.

    Based on prior official Twitter statements, but not directly addressing the Ukrainian charge, its trending topics are “determined by an algorithm and, by default, are tailored for you based on who you follow, your interests, and your location.” This “identifies topics that are popular now, rather than topics that have been popular for a while or on a daily basis,” according to Twitter.

    Ukrainian leadership has been angered at Musk ever since he grew bolder in criticizing the open-ended US military and financial support to the Ukrainian government, expressing fears of stumbling into a nuclear-armed WWIII scenario. This despite his previously providing Starlink to the war-ravaged country.

    He sparked outrage among Ukraine-supporters with his early October “Russia-Ukraine Peace” Twitter poll and related threads wherein he called out Washington and its rush to confront Russia in Ukraine.

    At that time, Zelensky had even weighed in, condemning Musk. Musk had also engaged some of his irate followers who pointed out that he risked angering many Ukrainians. Musk responded, “You are assuming that I wish to be popular. I don’t care. I do care that millions of people may die needlessly for an essentially identical outcome” – in reference the potential for nuclear war between superpowers over Ukraine. He has since also pledged to clean up the bot accounts, which each side in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has said artificially tilts what gets presented to users.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 21:20

  • China Sees $10 Billion In LNG Tanker Orders In 2022
    China Sees $10 Billion In LNG Tanker Orders In 2022

    By Julianne Geiger of OilPrice.com,

    Three of China’s shipyards won almost a third of this year’s orders to make new LNG carriers, Reuters said on Monday.

    China’s shipyards—only one of which has experience building new LNG tankers—are getting a significant piece of the pie for new LNG carriers, which hit a record this year at 163 orders. The orders that China’s shipyards are seeing tripled this year, to 45, and some of China’s shipmakers that only recently became certified to build the LNG tankers, are even seeing foreign orders for the first time ever.

    China’s LNG tanker orders this year are valued at nearly $10 billion—about five times the order value of last year, Clarksons Research showed, cited by Reuters.

    South Korean shipyards usually get a large share of the LNG tanker orders, but they are already at capacity as they try to service Qatar’s North Field expansion. This has created a backlog for South Korean shipyards, and has increased costs to build LNG tankers. The end result is that even foreign buyers who look favorably on South Korea’s ability to design and build LNG tankers free from problems are now giving a serious look at China—even for companies that have zero experience with the intricacies of LNG shipbuilding. 

    “As more Chinese gas traders engage local shipyards, they will be forced to climb the learning curve and eventually grow the whole industry,” Li Yao, founder of Beijing-based consultancy SIA Energy, told Reuters.

    As of late November, Chinese shipyards had orders for 66 LNG tankers, bringing its total to 21% of all global LNG tanker orders, worth some $60 billion.

    LNG tankers are notoriously difficult to build, and typically take more than two years to complete.

    The LNG boom comes as 20 million tonnes of gas per year is set to ship from the United States. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 21:00

  • Airlines Lobbying Congress To Allow Just One Pilot In The Cockpit
    Airlines Lobbying Congress To Allow Just One Pilot In The Cockpit

    Airlines, in their infinite mission to balance costs, profits, and keeping planes full of passengers alive between two points, might be going a little too far in their latest attempt to cut back.

    According to CBS News, the industry has been quietly lobbing Congress to allow them to use just one pilot in the cockpit instead of two, as is currently required by part 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.

    The airlines claim it would quickly solve staffing issues caused by the ongoing pilot shortage, and say that technology has improved to the point where it would be perfectly safe to do so.

    There’s language in a new bill now introduced in Congress — the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill — asking the Federal Aviation Administration to reconsider part 121 and to allow the use of a single pilot operation, first in cargo aircraft. 

    Not surprisingly, airline pilots are loudly protesting this idea, claiming that it would diminish a safety discipline and culture that has been responsible for the safest 25 years in commercial aviation in the history of aviation. Pilots unions argue it’s all about the airlines saving money and could compromise safety. -CBS News

     Unions have pointed to several examples of emergency situations in which two pilots were necessary – such as the “Miracle on the Hudson,” when pilots Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger and Jeffrey Skiles worked together to glide a US Airways flight down to New York’s Hudson river after it hit a flock of Canadian geese on takeoff, saving all 150 passengers and crew.

    Meanwhile, 10 days ago an American Eagle flight from Chicago to Columbus had an emergency when one of the two pilots became incapacitated. The co-pilot was able to gain control of the plane, declare an emergency, and safely land back in O’Hare.

    The pilot later died at the hospital.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 20:40

  • Musk Taking Legal Action Against Kid Who Tracks His Plane After "Crazy Stalker" Attack
    Musk Taking Legal Action Against Kid Who Tracks His Plane After “Crazy Stalker” Attack

    Update (2025ET):

    We finally know why the @ElonJet Twitter account was suspended. Musk tweeted:

    “Last night, car carrying lil X in LA was followed by crazy stalker (thinking it was me), who later blocked car from moving & climbed onto hood.”

    Musk then said, “legal action is being taken against Sweeney [the kid who runs @ElonJet] & organizations who supported harm to my family.” 

    Musk also said, “any account doxxing real-time location info of anyone will be suspended, as it is a physical safety violation. This includes posting links to sites with real-time location info,” adding “posting locations someone traveled to on a slightly delayed basis isn’t a safety problem, so is ok.” 

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

    * * * 

    The college kid who created the @ElonJet Twitter account before Elon Musk bought the social media platform has had the account “suspended.” 

    Last Friday, Jack Sweeney pointed out @ElonJet was “search banned,” though he mentioned the account had been “search banned for months before Elon’s takeover. “

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

    But now it appears the account that shared publicly-available information about Musk’s private jet locations and had over half a million followers has been “suspended.” 

    On Wednesday morning, Twitter users are chatting away about the suspension. Here’s what some had to say:

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

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

    Nearly a year ago, we told readers about Sweeney and how Musk requested the college kid to take down the account because of security risks. 

    At the time, Sweeney told Musk the price to take down @ElonJet would be a “Model 3.” Musk rejected the offer and told the kid: “I don’t love the idea of being shot by a nutcase.” 

    As we’ve told readers, tracking the private jets of CEOs is nothing new in the hedge fund industry. There are services that some traders pay upwards of $100k to retrieve flight data of the movements of deal-makers. 

    We also said Sweeney would have better luck selling his technology to a hedge fund or even Quandl, a flight-tracking company, rather than letting it stay on Twitter. Now the account has been nuked. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 20:25

  • A Cryptocurrency Victim Turns Journalist To Uncover Scandals
    A Cryptocurrency Victim Turns Journalist To Uncover Scandals

    Authored by Lisa Cosgrove via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    After graduating from the University of Southern California in 2017, Tiffany Fong started several e-commerce businesses, earning passive income while traveling the world. She recently spoke with The Epoch Times about how she lost a lot of money investing in cryptocurrencies, which prompted her to become involved in exposing scandals in the crypto sector such as the FTX debacle.

    Investor and independent journalist Tiffany Fong. (Courtesy of Tiffany Fong)

    Fong’s introduction to cryptos began early on, when a family member gifted her several Bitcoins in 2011. Still in high school at the time, Fong did not think much of the gift.

    By the end of 2011, Bitcoin was worth a mere $4.25. Fong still owns some of the tokens today. The price of Bitcoin peaked at over $68,000 in November last year. Since then, it has fallen dramatically, and is now trading at a little more than $17,000.

    During the crypto bull market of 2017, Fong became more interested in the asset class and its underlying philosophy: freedom from state-issued currencies and the ability to transact with whomever one chooses. After a couple years of crypto-hiatus, Fong began investing more heavily during the bull run of 2021.

    Expanding on her initial Bitcoin holdings, Fong became interested in the decentralized lending platform Celsius. The project’s founder, Alex Mashinsky, would frequently make the rounds on financial media to tout the returns that Celsius users were earning, promising annual returns as high as 18 percent.

    These returns were achievable for a time, but nothing lasts forever.

    Rising interest rates and a crypto bear market quickly exposed the Celsius network as insolvent, forcing a withdrawal freeze in June and bankruptcy filing in July. Fong personally lost $250,000 she had stored on the platform, she said.

    Motivated by her loss, Fong embarked on a mission to uncover what happened. With only a couple hundred followers at the time, she took to YouTube and Twitter to share her investigations.

    After seeing her work on social media, several Celsius employees sent her confidential recordings of Mashinsky speaking at internal meetings. Fong then secured a notable milestone in her journalistic career by publishing the leaked recordings with The New York Times.

    Bankman-Fried

    Fong’s entry into crypto reporting caught the attention of then-FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, who began following her work to stay updated on the Celsius situation. The two messaged on Twitter and occasionally kept in touch, according to Fong.

    This relationship would prove fortuitous for Fong’s continued coverage of the crypto space.

    In early November, as FTX underwent a Celsius-like series of events, freezing customer assets and filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Fong reached out to Bankman-Fried. His reputation tarnished and his company in ruins, she did not expect a response from the fallen founder.

    Nevertheless, he granted Fong an interview that would reveal numerous unknowns about the collapsed exchange and provide an interesting look into Bankman-Fried’s character. During their conversation, the FTX founder claimed that he donated equal amounts to both political parties and confessed to lying about Bahamian regulators’ involvement in key FTX decisions.

    Fong told The Epoch Times that she was uncertain whether she could trust the answers provided by Bankman-Fried. “There were some questions I asked him where I did feel he was very clearly being evasive,” she said, later adding that his elusive behavior was intriguing in itself.

    During their November conversation, Fong asked Bankman-Fried about the alleged “back door,” which would have allowed client funds to be siphoned from FTX to its sister company, Alameda Research. He claimed that he is not well-versed in computer programming and, therefore, could not create such a tool, which Fong said she found to be an intentionally imprecise answer.

    At the time of the interview, Fong believed the founder was genuinely remorseful, but mentioned her faith has faded over time. “My views have changed the more he’s talked,” she said, referring to Bankman-Fried’s subsequent appearances in mainstream media, including the New York Times’s DealBook Summit, his sit-down with Good Morning America, and his numerous discussions on Twitter Spaces.

    “On our last call, he did mention that he would be ramping up communication soon, but I did not expect it to this degree,” Fong said, surprised by the scope of Bankman-Fried’s public relations campaign.

    “It was fun being the first stop on [Bankman-Fried’s] apology tour,” Fong jokingly wrote in a tweet on Dec. 7.

    Independent Journalist

    Fong’s success as an independent reporter and brief experience working with legacy media has given her insights into the advantages of the former over the latter.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 20:20

  • Florida Subpoenas Nearly Two Dozen Organizations Pushing Hormones, Transgender Surgeries For Children
    Florida Subpoenas Nearly Two Dozen Organizations Pushing Hormones, Transgender Surgeries For Children

    The state of Florida has subpoenaed almost two dozen medical and academic organizations which are pushing transgender sex change treatments for children, the Daily Caller reports, citing an ongoing lawsuit against a new Medicaid rule.

    The subpoenas, issued by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA), and which seek information about internal decision-making processes and leadership structures for pushing hormone treatments and transgender surgeries on minors, went out in November to 20 organizations.

    The organizations signed onto a lawsuit against the state, which implemented a new rule in August to no longer cover “gender-affirming” care with Medicaid.

    “Gender-affirming” care is a euphemism for treatments and procedures that facilitate sex changes, like hormone treatments or sex change surgeries. -Daily Caller

    A preliminary injunction was filed against the Florida law, however federal judge Robert Hinkle denied it in October, ruling that the issue was not Constitutional, rather, applied to the Medicaid statute.

    Subpoena recipients include;  the American Pediatric Association, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, Pediatric Endocrine Society, Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine and Yale University, according to the Caller, which notes that Yale is included despite not being a medical organization because Yale professors have been involved in pushing against the new rule.

    All 20 organizations have either promoted or employ individuals who promote “gender-affirming” care for minors. The request includes documents pertaining to deliberations involving gender dysphoria and related care, along with policies which have been adopted, side effects associated with those policies and treatments, and how members voted to support said policies.

    Plaintiffs in the case have argued that the Medicaid rule violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 20:00

  • WaPo Corrects OpEd Conflating Lack Of Black Argentinian Footballers With "History Of Black Erasure"
    WaPo Corrects OpEd Conflating Lack Of Black Argentinian Footballers With “History Of Black Erasure”

    Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

    The Washington Post has been forced to issue a correction to an op-ed that asked ‘Why doesn’t Argentina have more black players in their World Cup lineup?’ after Argentinian people pointed out that the country is overwhelmingly white and not obsessed with virtue signalling about race.

    The piece claimed that it is a ‘myth’ that Argentina is a white nation, with the author Erika Denise Edwards, an associate professor at the University of Texas at El Paso, suggesting her rantings uncover a “history of Black erasure in Argentina.”

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

    In the piece Edwards argues that in the 18th century, a third of Argentina’s population was black and that since then there has been an agenda to ‘whiten’ the country.

    “They believed that to join the ranks of Germany, France and England, Argentina had to displace its black population — both physically and culturally,” she further asserts.

    She also points to census figures from 2010, claiming they prove that “roughly one percent” of Argentina’s population of 46 million is black.

    After people pointed out that this is just not true, The Washington Post issued a correction noting that the actual number was “far less than” one percent.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Others noted that real life isn’t a Disney movie where each character is a different race:

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

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

    Translation: “The stupid note from [Washington Post] about the lack of blacks in the Argentine team left me disgusted. The United States is obsessed with race, Argentina is not. The United States chose to keep them separate, Argentina mixed them. But they insist on exporting their neuroses.”

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

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

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

    The obsession with diversity and race in national sports is purely an American and British phenomenon. People in other countries are not concerned with obsessing about skin colour over skill and talent.

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

    *  *  *

    Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

    In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 19:40

  • Chinese Hunker Down Despite Zero-Covid Policy Ending Amid Virus Wave
    Chinese Hunker Down Despite Zero-Covid Policy Ending Amid Virus Wave

    China faces a surge in Covid-19 infections as Beijing dismantles strict pandemic controls and embraces a faster reopening of the economy. The abrupt shift in policy is very problematic because not everyone is celebrating the easing of zero Covid rules, as many are hunkering down amid the winter Covid wave. 

    The sudden move away from zero Covid rules after nearly three years of Beijing following a stringent playbook used to eliminate the virus has yet to translate into economic success. People are staying home, avoiding stores and restaurants, and other public areas as they panic hoard staple items to survive the Covid wave, which could impact an estimated 80 to 90% of the Chinese population, according to a new projection by Feng Zijian, a former deputy chief at China’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

    WSJ explained that people in large cities such as Shanghai and Guangzhou stay home despite the shift in government policy. They spoke with one Beijing resident, Qian Yingqin, who said her family hadn’t left their home since Sunday. 

    “I’ve never seen fewer people on the streets and more people wearing masks outside in the past three years,” Yingqin said, who recently postponed a trip to Dali, a tourism hot spot in southwestern China. She warned: “It’s simply impossible to fend off the virus anymore.”

    Bloomberg Intelligence’s chief pharmaceutical analyst Sam Fazeli said in a television interview on Tuesday that Beijing’s mindset since pivoting away from the zero-tolerance policy is “there’s not so much we can do, we’ve done the best we can. We’ve got the blueprint for what the West did and what happened, so let’s just let it rip – which is what I think is going on.” 

    “As China enters its first winter with Omicron, things could get worse before getting better,” Citigroup analysts told clients last month. 

    Bloomberg’s Fazeli said the reopening could result in some 5 million people hospitalized and up to 700,000 deaths. 

    Economists and analysts have been widely optimistic about the current path of reopening, but others warn it’s going to be a bumpy ride:

    “There is a problem with people thinking the pullback of Covid-zero measures is equivalent to the economy reopening, which it is not,” said Leland Miller, chief executive officer of China Beige Book, a research firm that conducts surveys.

    Even though Morgan Stanley economists upgraded China’s 2023 GDP growth target due to reopening, they admitted economic growth would suffer some near-term pain due to the Covid infection wave that might disrupt production and consumption. 

    WSJ pointed out high-frequency data, such as mobility and internet search trends, that don’t signal an imminent rebound in economic growth but rather one that will be muted, at least for the winter season, until infections wane.

    Some recent data on mobility patterns show increases in traffic and subway usage in some cities, though the numbers remain depressed compared with 2021, when China was largely free of Covid cases. Sales of cars and properties also fared better last week than the previous week, giving a glimpse of what China’s economy could look like more broadly as it works through its Covid cases.

    But behavior in places where Covid is becoming most prevalent—especially Beijing—suggest a rocky stretch in the near term. Searches for the words “fever” and “rapid antigen test” on Baidu, China’s dominant search engine, saw the highest surges over the past week in Beijing, according to economists from Nomura.

    Li Jianxing, the co-founder of InstaShake, a milkshake chain in Shanghai, warned:

    “There’s no sign of a strong recovery just yet, because people are still afraid of getting the virus.” 

    Logic doesn’t seem to apply to Beijing’s grand reopening of its economy during winter when spring would’ve been a much better time. Or perhaps the government wants to infect as many people as possible to get the Covid wave over with? 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 19:20

  • Latin America's Slow Descent Into Interventionism
    Latin America’s Slow Descent Into Interventionism

    Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

    The latest estimates from consensus for the main Latin American economies show a continent facing a lost decade. The region GDP growth has been downgraded yet again to a modest 1.1% for 2023, with rising inflation and weakening gross fixed investment. Considering that the region was already recovering at a slower pace than other emerging markets, the outlook is exceedingly worrying.

    The poor growth and high inflation expectations are even worse when we consider that consensus estimates still consider a tailwind coming from rising commodity prices and more exports due to the China re-opening.

    How can a region with such high potential as Latin America be condemned to stagflation? The answer is simple. The rise of populist governments in Colombia, Chile and Brazil have increased the concerns about investor security, property rights and monetary discipline.

    Argentina is expected to post a modest 0.2% GDP growth in 2023 with 95% inflation and a debt to GDP of 72%. Years of monetary and fiscal excess have destroyed the purchasing power of the local currency and dilapidated the prospect of real growth. In Argentina, poverty has escalated to 36.5% of the population and the government policies double down on interventionism, price controls and higher taxes with the expected negative result. Despite the tailwind of high demand for soja and cereals globally, Argentina dives deeper into Venezuela territory, where consensus expects another year of weak 3% bounce after destroying 80% of the output in a decade, with enormous inflation, 132%.

    The problem? The new governments in Chile and Colombia are announcing policies that resemble those of the “Peronist left” in Argentina and the Fernandez government in Argentina is looking more like Maduro’s Venezuela each day.

    Chile is expected to post no growth in 2023 despite an estimated higher copper price, and 15% inflation. Colombia, which showed the strongest recovery from the covid-19 crisis until 2022, in which consensus expects a 7% growth, is feared to stop on its tracks and deliver a poor 1.6% GDP growth with elevated inflation, close to 7%.

    In Brazil, consensus expects a poor 0.9% growth with 5% inflation. It does not look as bad as Argentina, but the first major announcement of newly elected president Lula has already triggered all alarm bells. Lula stated that he wanted to change the constitution to lift the spending limit and increase government spending even more. The Brazil currency and 10-year bond reacted aggressively to this risk because everyone can remember that Lula’s “economic miracle” a decade ago came from massively high oil prices and, when the commodity bonanza ended, his successor Rousseff sent the country to a deep crisis where spending soared and growth stagnated.

    You may say that the rise of populism in Latin America is the consequence of the failed classic liberal policies implemented before, but that would be a grave mistake. Most of these countries have not seen open and liberal economies but crony states. Statism failed and more statism fails even faster.

    Global investors see the enormous potential of Latin America. However, when governments start to impose interventionist policies, put at risk property rights with expropriation threats and at the same time massively increase monetary imbalances printing currencies with no real global and diminishing local demand, the combination is destructive.

    Why do citizens vote for politicians that implement confiscatory and extractive policies? In many economic debates in Latin American media one can hear the word “redistribution” repeated incessantly. Many believe that wealth is like a pied that can be cut and distributed at will, but ignore that wealth is either created or destroyed, it does not stay flat.

    Interventionist policies destroy wealth in three ways: First, attacking independent institutions and introducing political random decisions in legal and investor security which erodes growth potential, investment, and employment. Second, by increasing taxes on the productive sector to pay for massive subsidies paid in a constantly depreciated currency, which creates a double negative of lower growth, weaker local businesses and a dependent subclass that rarely emerges. The productive sector ends forced to operate in the underground economy to avoid confiscatory taxes. Third, interventionism destroys the purchasing power of the local currency by breaking all the rules of prudent monetary policy and financing an ever-increasing government size printing a constantly devalued currency. The combination of these three factors means poverty and stagnation.

    Why do interventionist governments do this when they know -and they do- it does not work?

    Monetary destruction is the easiest and most effective way of nationalization of an economy. Printing currency is a form of expropriation of wealth, as money creation is never neutral, it benefits the government and hurts real wages and savers.

    Why would “populist” governments impose policies that perpetuate poverty and hurt the people? Interventionism does not aim to increase prosperity but take full control of a nation. The three mentioned policies are aimed at grasping full control of a country and make the population dependent, not deliver growth and improve social conditions.

    Extractive and confiscatory policies are not social measures, they are profoundly anti-social. The worst is that once implemented, it becomes difficult to unwind. We should learn the lesson everywhere because it is coming to your country soon.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 19:00

  • Russia Reaching Out To North Korea, Iran As It Burns Through 40-Year-Old Ammo: Pentagon
    Russia Reaching Out To North Korea, Iran As It Burns Through 40-Year-Old Ammo: Pentagon

    The Pentagon this week is suggesting that Russia is growing increasingly desperate in maintaining steady ammo supplies, with senior officials describing 40-year old Soviet-era ammo being used, claiming Moscow is turning to countries like North Korea, and relying increasingly on Iran. 

    “They [Moscow] have drawn from ageing ammunition stockpiles, which does indicate that they are willing to use older ammunition, some of which was originally produced more than 40 years ago,” a senior Pentagon official told a press briefing.

    This makes it potentially faulty, unreliable, and even dangerous for the Russian troops operating the heavy guns, the official described: “In other words, you load the ammunition and you cross your fingers and hope it’s going to fire or when it lands that it’s going to explode.”

    AFP/Getty Images

    The official went on the predict that Russia could deplete its up-to-date ammunition stocks by early 2023 if it didn’t seek to tap both foreign suppliers and older ammo. Further the official alleged the chief foreign suppliers are likely to be Iran and the North Koreans.

    “Russia, has been seeking to get additional capabilities from Iran,” the official said. “And you know, the [National Security Council] put out a fair amount of information on this last week. You know, in a lot of ways, given this current state of Russia’s munitions stockpile, it’s not surprising that they continue to look at opportunities to work with countries like Iran and with – and North Korea to try to gain additional capability.”

    When pressed for evidence of the assertions, the Pentagon official cited that the Ukrainian army is increasingly finding duds and unexploded Russian ordinance littering the battlefield, which is a sign of reliance on older, undependable munitions: 

    “And so, ultimately, broadly speaking, our assessment is that Russia — the Russian military will very likely struggle to replenish its reserve of fully-serviceable artillery and rocket ammunition through foreign suppliers, increased domestic production and refurbishment.

    So, again, this is why it’s not surprising that they’re reaching out to countries like Iran and North Korea to try to obtain some more dependable ammunition.”

    The US spokesman continued, “we do assess that they have used quite a bit of their stockpile and that their numbers – the numbers available to them have really diminished their ability to sustain their current rate of fire when it comes to PGMs [precision-guided munitions].”

    This latest assessment also echoed the prior words of Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, who said in early December as the war entered its tenth month that Russia is “quite quickly” burning through its military stockpiles.

    “It’s really pretty extraordinary,” Haines said. “Our own sense is that they are not capable of indigenously producing what they are expending at this stage. That’s why you see them going to other countries effectively to try to get ammunition.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 18:40

  • The Slow Strangulation Of The World Economy
    The Slow Strangulation Of The World Economy

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

    I was visiting with a friend recently and she was recounting her early panic over COVID. She has kids and loves them. As a mom, she believed her first duty was to protect them from the bad virus that was floating around. She went into full freak-out mode, keeping the kids indoors and spacing them out. Her heart never stopped racing.

    One day, she looked out her window and saw that her neighbor’s dog was loose on her front lawn. She ran outside and started screaming at her neighbor to get that dog off her lawn immediately and never allow such an outrage again.

    Why?

    Because she had heard on CNN that dogs carry Covid. She believed that the dog was spreading Covid around and that this would waft through her windows and infect her kids.

    Now, this is a brilliant woman, educated at a prep school that no normal person could afford and attended a top school before becoming a partner in a firm that serves only high-end clients.

    Moreover, she is herself brilliant and stable, and not politically left-wing at all. She is sober and strong. But Covidophobia snagged even her. Simply amazing.

    I had not remembered the weeks during which we were supposed to hate on people’s pets. We can add that to the endless litany of nonsense we’ve been through.

    The Fauci Effect

    Why the attack on pets? Well, the frightening Fauci in August took a day or two to work with his co-author from the National Institutes of Health on an academic article explaining the bigger picture. The problem, they explained, began 12,000 years ago. That’s when humankind started farming, killing land animals, and moving around from place to place.

    That caused disease to spread! So they say. It only got worse once we got to cities. Then everyone started mixing. Icky germs were everywhere. Next thing you know, we spread smallpox and cholera and god knows what else.

    Humankind was dooming itself with its ridiculous ambition to do more than live in a hut by the river and grab fish to eat! We are very, very bad.

    That’s the origin of COVID, they wrote, which is why we need a “new infrastructure of human existence.” This will require emptying out the cities, getting rid of pets, abolishing large events, and forbidding people from meeting in groups in restaurants and things. Only once we massively reduce the population and go back to a state of nature can we fully conquer disease.

    This is their vision. It’s pure insanity. Worse than Marx. Worse than anything even the nuttiest philosopher from the ancient world ever wrote. Worse than the devil himself.

    And yet this was the guy who was practically running the world for the better part of two years. He was not only scripting the pandemic response. He was in charge of social media. He was in charge of economics. He was in charge of technology. He was the totalitarian dictator for the U.S. and really for the whole world by influence.

    Nonstop Wreckage

    It’s truly hard to imagine how it came to be that this pest ended up dismantling the whole of the Trump administration. He was the terrifying guru that even Trump could not swat away. As a result, Trump fell in the polls and lost, taking the House and Senate with him. The economy was wrecked. The Constitution was abolished.

    Now we have terrifying inflation without end. In many parts of the world, people are having to choose between eating and heating. School kids are behind by two years. We’ve lost three years of lifespan just in the U.S. The whole country is utterly bankrupt. Trade is wrecked. Business is demoralized. 5.8 million people are missing from U.S. labor rolls right now.

    What an unspeakable disaster. Even writing this, it sounds like fiction. It’s not. It’s our reality, and it is getting worse by the day.

    Media won’t discuss the fullness of the calamity. Mostly we just pretend as if life is normal. What else can we do? Well, there are substances we can take, and millions take them if only to lessen the pain. They lead to early death. Excess deaths are through the roof right now, as ill-health spreads across the land.

    Oh, but won’t the Fed save us? They are raising interest rates. The 30-year mortgage is at 6%. The demand side of the housing market is in free fall. The supply side is suddenly flat. Prices are still rising. This is what an inflationary recession looks and feels like.

    Faucian Economics

    I’ve never been one for conspiracy theory but one would have to be stupid not to see that there is something of a plan here. They are attacking cities, enterprise, economic growth, and even procreation too. How? In every conceivable way.

    I’ve given up trust, all trust, in these people, their plans, and even their products. They are dangerous. Their vision of the world is even more so.

    We used to say that socialism cannot work. What does that mean? It means that it will only make people poorer and more miserable. But what if you have an ideology that is actually intended to do that? Can Faucian economics work? Yes, if you mean to reduce the population, spread misery, end progress, abolish all comforts, empty the cities, cause people to freeze to death, and only allow what’s left of the population to live off bugs.

    We need to get real. These people are truly up to no good. They have gotten their way. What’s more, the gang that did this is not subject to the voters, so elections might not make a bit of difference, even if they turn out well.

    The Root of the Problem

    The real problem is much more fundamental. It is structural. It is philosophical. It can be defeated but not through the usual ways. In the meantime, we really need to wake up, all of us, and recognize that nothing is normal anymore.

    Surviving this period in history will require cleverness and courageous action. We simply cannot ignore the trends all around us and expect to survive.

    It’s bad enough to realize the utter stupidity of the policies that are wrecking the world. It’s worse suddenly to realize that they are not stupid at all but rather the product of a diabolical mission to ruin civilization itself.

    But in truth, it is all deliberate, I’m sorry to say. The people who run the world today have no interest in a thriving social order and civilization.

    The means to survive them is to outsmart them.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 14

Today’s News 14th December 2022

  • If They Get The Opportunity, They Will Transform Our Society Into A Dystopian Hellscape
    If They Get The Opportunity, They Will Transform Our Society Into A Dystopian Hellscape

    Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

    If the elite get their way, our world will eventually look far more bizarre than any science fiction author ever imagined.  If you haven’t figured it out by now, the elite are control freaks, and they are envisioning a future in which they are in control of all of our lives from birth to death.  Instead of being born and raised the traditional way, humans will be mass produced in “birthing pods”.  Those that are genetically superior will be permitted to live, while those that are genetically inferior will be “harvested” and any spare parts that are not of value for scientific research will be discarded.  As children grow, education will be a top priority, but only material specifically approved by the elite will be permitted.  In fact, “free thought” and “free speech” will be a thing of the past if the elite get total control.  Everyone will think the same way, because no other alternative will be allowed.  And anyone that shows signs of rebellion will quickly have their digital currency privileges revoked.  I know that all of this may sound quite strange to many of you, but this is what our society will look like if the wildest hopes and dreams of the elite actually come to fruition.

    This week, an incredibly creepy concept video that was created by a German molecular biologist named Hashem Al-Ghaili is making headlines all over the globe.

    In this video, children are grown in a huge facility that contains hundreds of transparent “birthing pods”…

    A new concept video takes viewers on tour through The EctoLife Artificial Womb Facility, where hundreds of fetuses sit in transparent pods that are temperature controlled and feature an umbilical cord to receive oxygen and nutrients.

    If you have not seen the video yet, you can view it right here.

    I have to admit, that is one of the creepiest things that I have seen in a long time.

    We are being told that one of the big selling points of such a system would be the ability to create “designer babies” that are genetically superior to humans that are born the normal way…

    “And if you want your baby to stand out and have a brighter future, our Elite Package offers you the opportunity to genetically engineer the embryo before implanting it into the artificial womb. Thanks to CRISPR-Cas 9 gene editing tool, you can edit any trait of your baby through a wide range of over 300 genes. By genetically engineering a set of genes, the Elite Package allows you to customize your baby’s eye color, hair color, skin tone, physical strength, height, and level of intelligence. It also allows you to fix any inherited genetic diseases that are part of your family history so that your baby and their offspring will live a healthy comfortable life free of genetic diseases.”

    So what about the embryos that are genetically inferior or that are simply not wanted for one reason or another?

    Well, they would either be used for other purposes or they would be discarded in the trash.

    In addition to getting “perfect babies” every time, there would also no longer be any need for the pain of childbirth in such a system…

    While the video is focused on improving birth rates, it also notes that the birthing farm is for women who fear pregnancy because of the pain and recovery needed after going into labor.

    ‘Say goodbye to the pain of childbirth and muscle contractions,’ the video narrator says.

    Of course the elite would not want such “perfect children” to be ruined by “misinformation” as they grow older, and so everything that they would be exposed to would be strictly monitored and controlled.

    Sadly, such a system of thought control has already been rapidly developing all around us.

    We already knew that big tech companies were colluding with the government on a very deep level to suppress free speech, but the “Twitter Files” have demonstrated that things were actually far worse than any of us imagined.

    Government officials systematically targeted specific individuals and specific viewpoints for censorship, and in many cases big tech companies were more than eager to do what they were being asked to do.

    It is NOT okay for the government to suppress free speech as long as they can get private companies to do the dirty work for them.

    Our most basic constitutional rights have been trampled on over and over again, and those that were involved need to be held accountable.

    And if we don’t stand up now, they will just keep on doing it.

    Because this is what the elite desperately want.

    They want a future in which the flow of information is tightly controlled by them.

    If you are a rebel that insists on putting out “misinformation”, the elite envision a system in which such miscreants are dealt with quickly and efficiently.

    Today, the elite do not have direct control over our finances.

    But in a future where cash is banned and we are all forced to use their digital currencies, that would all change.

    Everything that we buy and sell would be tracked, and our “currency privileges” could be revoked at any time if our social credit scores drop too low.

    Of course government-controlled digital currencies are not ready for widespread use yet, but they are coming.

    In fact, just this week we learned that the Bank of England “has begun consultations on implementing a Central Bank Digital Currency”…

    The de facto head of His Majesty’s Treasury announced this week that the Bank of England has begun consultations on implementing a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) that could usher in the globalist vision of a cashless society in which all transactions are traceable by the government.

    Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt revealed that, as a part of his ‘Edinburgh Reforms’ of Britain’s financial services, the Bank of England will begin consultations on the design of a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) which would act as a digital version of the pound sterling.

    Meanwhile, the EU has also been working on a new “digital euro”.

    And the Federal Reserve is now testing a new “digital dollar” for the United States.

    Do you think that it is just a coincidence that all of these digital currencies are being developed simultaneously?

    The truth is that the elite are actively trying to create the dystopian version of the future that they envision for all of us.

    Unfortunately, most people still do not understand what they are trying to do, and so it is imperative for all of us to try to wake up as many as we can while there is still time.

    *  *  *

    It is finally here! Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/14/2022 – 00:05

  • China Air Travel Demand Soars As Zero Covid Eases
    China Air Travel Demand Soars As Zero Covid Eases

    Beijing’s abrupt end to zero Covid policies that shuttered factories and cities and crushed economic growth in the world’s second-largest economy has produced at least one of the first signs of green shoots: Air travel rebound.

    Chinese aviation data company VariFlight reported domestic flight activity soared to 65% of pre-pandemic levels Monday, from only 22% on Nov. 29, according to Bloomberg. Thousands of flights are returning to the skies as air travel demand rebounds ahead of Lunar New Year next month. 

    Surging air travel demand is expected to increase airfare prices for top travel spots such as major cities from Beijing to Shanghai and the resort island of Hainan. Dialing back strict pandemic control measures that will boost air travel comes ahead Lunar New Year, which before Covid, was the world’s biggest mass migration event.

    “If you look at around the world, air ticket prices are materially higher than in 2019.

    “But when you look at China’s domestic air tickets, even into the third quarter of 2022, it’s about 15% lower than that of 2019,” Parash Jain, head of transport research for Asia Pacific at HSBC Holdings Plc., said in an interview with Bloomberg Television on Monday. 

    Guo Lechun, an analyst with the online travel website Qunar, expects Lunar New Year bookings to reach the highest levels in three years or about 80% of pre-pandemic levels. 

    “Ctrip.com said air travel searches jumped 900% on Dec. 7, the day the government announced the dismantling of most Covid restrictions, including mass testing and snap lockdowns,” Bloomberg said, adding searches on travel websites exploded hours after Beijing eased zero Covid policies. 

    But with the easing of zero Covid, there has been a sharp increase in China’s Covid infections. There are risks that at least one million Chinese people are at risk of dying from Covid this winter, according to Financial Times.  

    S&P Global Commodity Insights expects jet fuel demand to rise as domestic travel flourishes. Reopening China will certainly involve increased crude and refined imports in the coming months (remember what Goldman said …), perhaps putting a floor in energy prices unless the global economy slides into recession in 2023.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 23:45

  • Rep. Lauren Boebert Wins Reelection, Recount Confirms
    Rep. Lauren Boebert Wins Reelection, Recount Confirms

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

    Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) will serve another term in Congress after a recount showed she triumphed in her reelection bid, Colorado officials confirmed late Dec. 12.

    Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Dallas at the Hilton Anatole in Dallas, Texas, on Aug. 6, 2022. (Bobby Sanchez for The Epoch Times)

    The mandatory recount, triggered because the margin between Boebert and her challenger was within 0.5 percent, “reconfirmed that Representative Lauren Boebert is the winner of the race,” the office of Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold said.

    Boebert represents Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District.

    A recount of a Colorado House race also showed that Marine veteran Robert Marshall, a Democrat, won.

    “The mandatory recount for U.S. Congressional District 3 and permissive recount of House District 43 are complete and have confirmed the results of the races,” Griswold said in a statement.

    “Colorado’s elections are safe, secure, and accurate,” she added. “I commend the election workers from across the state and my office for conducting these recounts and for their continued work to make Colorado the best place to cast a ballot.”

    Boebert, 35, has not commented on the development, but shared posts on social media noting Griswold’s announcement.

    Boebert said over the weekend that the recount confirmed her win.

    “I am happy to report all the counties in Colorado’s 3rd District have completed their recounts. We’ve won this election, as expected, and I’m headed back to represent you in Washington, D.C.,” she said in a video.

    Recount Change

    Before the recount, Boebert led by 550 votes over Adam Frisch, the Democrat who was seeking to unseat her, out of about 327,000 cast.

    The recount ended with Boebert losing three votes and Frisch gaining one.

    The final count was 163,839 votes for Boebert and 163,293 votes for Frisch.

    State Rep. Kurt Huffman, a Republican, and Marshall, who left the Republican Party in 2017 over disenchantment with former President Donald Trump, each lost a single vote.

    “1 vote deducted from both opponent & me. W/smaller base total & same vote margin, % win margin increased VERY slightly 4 us. LoL,” Marshall wrote on Twitter.

    Frisch had already conceded and had asked supporters not to donate to him, noting that the recount was unlikely to change many votes.

    “The CO Secretary of State just certified our election. Just as we expected, the vote total didn’t shift by more than a few votes,” Frisch said. [delete]

    He claimed a “moral victory” because of how close the race was and said that he was confident “the coalition of Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters we built throughout this campaign to reject hate and extremism in Southern and Western Colorado will grow into the future.”

    Huffman had already conceded in November.

    “The final election results are in and although the outcome isn’t what we had hoped for, I am proud of our team and our campaign. Representative Marshall, I wish you well,” he said at the time.

    Republican Majority

    Boebert’s race is the final call for the midterm elections. The win means Republicans will have 222 seats when the new Congress is seated in January 2023. Democrats will have 212.

    That’s a mirror image of the start of the 117th Congress, when Democrats had 222 seats and Republicans had 212.

    Republicans flipped control of the lower chamber with key wins in multiple states, including California, Florida, and New York.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 23:25

  • Cybersecurity Incident Report At California Finance Department
    Cybersecurity Incident Report At California Finance Department

    Ransomware is one of the most significant cybersecurity issues at all levels of government. The latest hack was reported Monday by the California Cybersecurity Integration Center (Cal-CSIC) that a cybersecurity incident involved the California Department of Finance.

    A statement published by Cal-CSIC described the threat as an “intrusion” that was “identified through coordination with state and federal security partners.”

    “While we cannot comment on specifics of the ongoing investigation, we can share that no state funds have been compromised, and the Department of Finance is continuing its work to prepare the Governor’s Budget that will be released next month,” Cal-CSIC said. 

    According to Bloomberg, the Russia-affiliated hacking group “LockBit” claimed on their blog that they swiped as much as 76GB of data, including IT, financial documents, confidential data, and “sexual proceedings in court.” 

    Cybernews reported LockBit threatened to leak data if unspecified demands were not met by Christmas Eve. Cybersecurity experts say such demands usually involve cryptocurrency. 

    Governor Gavin Newsom must unveil his budget for the next fiscal year by Jan. 10. Bloomberg added as of Monday afternoon, “the state’s website for past and current budgets remained inaccessible.” 

     

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 23:05

  • Former CNN Producer Pleads Guilty In Pedo Scandal
    Former CNN Producer Pleads Guilty In Pedo Scandal

    Former CNN producer John Griffin, who worked ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with Chris Cuomo, pleaded guilty on Monday in federal court to using interstate commerce to entice and coerce a 9-year-old girl to engage in sexual activity as his Vermont ski house.

    This is a different CNN pedophile than Jake Tapper’s former producer, Rick Saleeby, who resigned after it emerged that he solicited sexually explicit photos of an underage girl.

    Griffin admitted to meeting the girl’s mother on a website during the summer of 2020, after which he persuaded her to bring the 9-year-old child to his Ludlow, Vermont ski home for illegal sexual activity, AP reports.

    According to the Daily Mail, Griffin ‘used Google Hangouts and Kik to convince the mothers that a “woman is a woman regardless of her age,” and that “women should be sexually subservient and inferior to men,” according to the indictment.

    In June of 2020, Griffin advised a mother of 9- and 13-year-old daughters that the mother’s responsibility was to see that her older daughter was “trained properly.”  Griffin later transferred over $3,000 to the mother for plane tickets so the mother and her 9-year-old daughter could fly from Nevada to Boston’s Logan airport.  The mother and child flew to Boston in July of 2020, where Griffin picked them up in his Tesla and drove them to his Ludlow house.  At the house, the daughter was directed to engage in, and did engage in, unlawful sexual activity.  

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

    Griffin, who originally pleaded not guilty to three counts, was arrested on Dec. 10, 2021, a day after he was indicted by a grand jury. He worked for CNN for around eight years, and was fired following his arrest.

    Griffin also allegedly attempted to entice two other children over the internet to engage in sexual activity – proposing a “virtual training session” in a video chat in April 2020 which would involve instructing a mother and her 14-year-old daughter to get naked and touch each other at his direction. 

    In June 2020, Griffin proposed to the purported mother of a 16-year-old that she take a “little mother-daughter trip” to his ski house for sexual training involving the minor.

    Griffin faces 10 years to life in prison when he’s sentenced on March 20, 2023, and must pay full restitution to the victims – an amount which is yet-to-be determined by the court. He also faces a $250,000 fine and other fees, and has agreed to forfeit his Tesla, electronics, and donate half the proceeds from his home in Vermont – and a Mercedes Benz, into the court registry.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 22:25

  • Which Countries Are Most Influenced By China?
    Which Countries Are Most Influenced By China?

    Authored by RFE/RL Staff via OilPrice.com,

    • A new index measures China’s influence around the world.

    • The China Index ranks Pakistan atop a list of 82 countries.

    • Germany is the highest-ranked European country at 19th and the United States leads North America in 21st position.

    Pakistan is the country in the world that is the most influenced by China, according to a new study that measures Beijing’s expanding global sway.

    The China Index — a database relaunched on December 8 by DoubleThink Labs, a Taiwan-based research organization — ranks the South Asian country atop a list of 82 other countries around the world, saying that its links to and dependency on Beijing in terms of foreign and domestic policy, technology, and the economy make it particularly susceptible to Chinese influence.

    Behind Pakistan, Southeast Asia features prominently in the rankings, with Cambodia and Singapore listed in second and third, followed by Thailand. The Philippines is seventh and Malaysia is 10th. South Africa is the first African country at No. 5, where it is tied with Peru, the highest-ranked South American country.

    Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, which border China’s western Xinjiang Province, are the Central Asian countries most influenced by Beijing, coming in at eighth and ninth place on the index.

    Meanwhile, Germany is the highest-ranked European country at 19th and the United States leads North America in 21st position.

    “A major goal of [of this database] is to raise awareness around the world about the different aspects of Chinese influence and what that can actually look like,” Min Hsuan-Wu, the co-founder and CEO of Doublethink Labs, told RFE/RL.

    “We’ve taken a much broader and nuanced look at what influence can be, which can tell us more about what Beijing is actually doing and the different ways it can apply pressure.”

    In compiling the China Index, the research team focused on nine categories to track influence around the world that include higher education, domestic politics, economic ties, foreign policy, law enforcement, media, military cooperation, cultural links, and technology.

    Wu says that this type of system leads to a more subtle understanding that challenges some assumptions about the levers of Chinese influence, most crucially around economics and trade.

    “There’s no one clear pattern for how China influences a country, but from the data we compiled, the economy isn’t the determinative one,” he said.

    “You can be economically independent but be tied in other ways, like with the military or a large Chinese diaspora that can be more influential.”

    Spotlight On Pakistan, Central Asia

    Given the diverse factors shaping the ranking system, Pakistan’s leading position is no surprise to longtime observers of the country’s relationship with Beijing, which was forged in the early days of the Cold War.

    The South Asian country is home to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a centerpiece of Beijing’s globe-spanning Belt and Road Initiative in which Chinese entities have funded and built hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of infrastructure projects in the last decade.

    Pakistan’s ties with China, however, have ballooned across nearly every category used to compile its ranking in the index, especially when it comes to areas like military ties, technology, and foreign policy.

    Shahzeb Jillani, a veteran journalist who helped compile research on Pakistan used for the database, says that many Pakistanis may be surprised to see their country ranking so high, but he hopes the findings will lead to greater debate and reflection about Islamabad’s deepening ties with Beijing.

    “One can only hope that this will encourage Pakistanis to debate the pros and cons of the relationship and what it could mean for the future,” he said.

    Central Asia has also seen its relationship with Beijing expand in recent years.

    While trade and investment were an early impetus, Chinese influence now plays a growing role in foreign policy, local media, and increasingly in defense and security. Following Russia’s February invasion of Ukraine, many analysts also see Central Asian countries deepening their China ties as they seek to diversify from Moscow.

    While Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan rank in the top 10, Kazakhstan holds 15th place in the rankings, with Uzbekistan in the 24th spot, and Turkmenistan — which sells a large portion of its natural gas to China but remains geopolitically isolated — in 45th position.

    Measuring Influence

    Though the database includes just 82 countries, DoubleThink Labs plans to expand it in the future, especially across Africa, another area of rising Chinese influence recently, and to Russia, which declared a “no limits” partnership with Beijing in February.

    Wu says he hopes the China Index will be a valuable tool for comparison that can be used by researchers, activists, journalists, and watchdog groups around the world to get a better snapshot of the complex factors affecting their regions and the nuanced ways influence can be exercised.

    For instance, Britain is ranked the second-highest European country, 27th on the index. It is something that Martin Thorley, an independent academic who did research on the United Kingdom for the database, says is the result of local engagement through academia and ties forged between British cities and regions with their Chinese counterparts over the years, rather than at the state level.

    Wu adds that it’s hard to discern exactly how one country gets influenced more than another and that there’s no definitive “playbook” for Chinese influence. Rather, he says the recent research shows that Chinese policymakers tend to target certain countries within a region that have a lower barrier to entry and then branch outwards to neighbors based on the opportunities available.

    “There are some countries in every region that rank high on our index and can be seen as an entry point,” Wu said. “There’s lots of collaboration through one country and then it expands out.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 22:05

  • Are Peru's Exports In Jeopardy As Social Unrest Worsens?
    Are Peru’s Exports In Jeopardy As Social Unrest Worsens?

    Peru’s president was pushed out of power and jailed hours after attempting to close congress and seize extraordinary powers last week. Political chaos spilled over into the streets and sparked social unrest. By Saturday, Peru’s new president, Dina Boluarte, established a moderate cabinet to calm fears, but political and social turmoil spilled over into the new week.

    There are increasing concerns in the South American country that instability could spark trade disruptions at major ports. On Monday, Bloomberg titled a note called “Peru’s Political Unrest Puts Global Fruit Supplies in Jeopardy.” 

    The Peruvian fruit trade with the US has dramatically increased in the last seven years. Fruits such as blueberries and grapes from the South American country end up on supermarket shelves in the US. Any disruption could impact prices or cause shortages. 

    However, Rabobank International’s David Magana spoke with Bloomberg about the Peruvian fruit trade amid all the chaos. He said:

    “The Peruvian fruit industry has become an exporting powerhouse despite political instability.”

    Crowds blocked highways and disrupted transportation networks across several metro areas last week. An escalation of political and social turmoil has gained momentum as anti-government protesters blocked roads and stormed the international airport Monday.

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

    There has been no mention of major marine ports blocked, but one could assume some transportation networks are experiencing bottlenecks due to the chaos. 

    Oh yes, and we almost forgot… 

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 21:45

  • Restricting Gun Rights Won't Prevent Tragedy
    Restricting Gun Rights Won’t Prevent Tragedy

    Submitted by Erich Pratt of Gun Owners of America.,

    As 2022 comes to a close, the Biden Administration has renewed its calls for gun control, including a ban on commonly-owned firearms, millions of which are currently in circulation.

    This isn’t the first time that we at Gun Owners of America have heard calls for shredding the Second Amendment. In fact, we’ve survived worse and come out on top.

    On the eve of the ten-year anniversary of the tragedy at Sandy Hook, it’s good for us to examine why these calls for so-called “assault weapon” bans continue even ten years later, and why they’re just as misguided and ineffective today as they were all those years ago.

    The tragic shooting at Sandy Hook is a testimony to the failure of gun control. 94% of mass shootings occur in Gun Free Zones, as these killers are looking for easy targets and know that it’s unlikely anyone will be armed and able to stop them. This is proven repeatedly, most recently with the Buffalo, NY shooter. He wrote in his manifesto about his decision to carry out his attack in a state like New York which has very strict gun laws, thus making it harder for someone to stop him.

    In the wake of the tragedy at Sandy Hook, there was a massive push for banning firearms that are commonly used for self-defense. But Gun Owners of America took action, and with the help of our members, we were able to stop the proposed gun control. This victory, of course, made the anti-gun lobby furious.

    “Gun Owners of America showed with one email alert that it could help flood the phone lines on Capitol Hill days before the Senate vote,” said National Public Radio after the gun control bill was defeated.

    While anti-gun politicians were frustrated by our members flooding the phone lines, GOA members simply knew the truth — gun control won’t stop these sorts of tragedies.

    But if gun control can’t stop mass shootings, what can?

    Almost 90% of police say that armed citizens are the best way to stop mass shootings and over 80% of police say that teachers should be armed.

    The data backs this up. Armed citizens stopped almost 50% of mass shootings last year.

    Often these cases of armed citizens stopping mass shootings are largely ignored by the mainstream media with their gun control agenda. The corporate media fails to report on the stories of Elisjsha Dicken, Jeanne Assam, Stephen Willeford, and countless others who’ve stopped mass shooters. 

    The corporate media specifically ignores the stories about armed citizens who stop mass shooters because they fail to promote their narrative that more laws will stop criminals who, by definition, do not follow laws.

    Even the Supreme Court, with their recent decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen, agrees that Americans have a right to self-defense against those who would do them harm outside their homes.

    The Biden administration and anti-gun governors nationwide will spend the rest of 2022, 2023, and beyond plotting how to get around the Bruen decision and pushing for so-called assault weapons bans through Congress or by unconstitutional executive fiat (or as Biden calls it, regulatory authority). But Gun Owners of America stands ready to fight these unconstitutional actions in Congress or, if necessary, in the courts.

    * * *

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

    Erich Pratt is the Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, a national grassroots lobby representing more than two million gun owners.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 21:25

  • Bitcoin Stops The Bleeding: A Sound Money System Is The Only Cure For What Ails Our Economy
    Bitcoin Stops The Bleeding: A Sound Money System Is The Only Cure For What Ails Our Economy

    Authored by Conor Chepenik via BitcoinMagazine.com,

    As fiat currencies slowly bleed out in value, they are disincentivizing saving. Bitcoin is a cure for the economic calamities…

    When a doctor operates on a wounded patient, the first thing they do is make sure they can stop the bleeding. No point operating if you can’t get the bleeding under control because the patient will die. Money facilitates mutual exchange and helps market actors coordinate price discovery — it is the literal blood of the economy. As fiat currencies slowly bleed out in value, they incentivize fewer people to save. If you want to stop the bleeding in your financial life, you are going to need to find a way to store your wealth in something else. There are plenty of options, but only one that is programmed to stop all bleeding in 2140.

    As peoples’ money bleeds out, so too does their education, time and, I’d even argue, their mental sanity. Blood isn’t oozing out egregiously, but rather being siphoned off from tiny cuts, so most people do not even realize it’s happening. This is a hard pill to swallow. Most Western societies teach people not to question authority: raise your hand if you want to ask questions, and trust the experts. Breaking out of this mentality is difficult. Watch this clip of the White House press secretary to get an idea of how those at the top will treat people who dare question the narrative.

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

    PAIN IS THE BEST TEACHER

    Narrative is everything when trying to coerce the masses to accept a “Great Reset” (if you have no idea what the Great Reset is, you can read about it here). The scope of this article won’t cover what the Davos elite is attempting to impose on the rest of the world, but rather why Bitcoin stops money from bleeding out. Trying to calculate all of the variables that bring about the emergent, complex behavior of society is futile. Governments stole trillions of dollars via quantitative easing and blamed their theft on COVID-19.

    It should not be a surprise that what followed has been chaos in the form of protests and supply chain issues. The Federal Reserve is following up its quantitative easing with tightening monetary policy at record paces trying to get inflation under control. This demand destruction is wreaking havoc all over the economy but is necessary to weed out unprofitable businesses.

    For better or worse, pain is the best teacher. Hard Money recently reported that Trezor has seen a 300% increase in sales revenue after the FTX debacle. The whole point of Bitcoin is to not trust ,but verify for yourself. Many ignored this because FTX had the stamp of approval from many mainstream news outlets, politicians and celebrities.

    In the wake of its blow, FTX created tons of new Bitcoin maximalists who now understand why not verifying Bitcoin with your own node means that you are trusting potentially-corrupt third parties. The mainstream media is not doing itself any favors with puff pieces like the one below. Articles like this only serve to increase the pain of those who were robbed and convince more people that the mainstream narrative is corrupt:

    Source

    BUT SELF EDUCATION HELPS TOO

    The remedy to most of these problems is a better education. Tools like Saylor.org, Udemy and plenty of others have lowered the barrier tremendously. It just requires a desire to learn.

    For me, I found that desire by going down the Bitcoin rabbit hole. Ironically, answering one question would lead me to more questions and that number of questions grew exponentially. It made me wonder how much people are not taught intentionally during their traditional schooling. There is only so much time in the day and teachers must prioritize their curriculums accordingly. I just don’t understand why taxes, how to vote and basic financial literacy aren’t at the top of most public school curriculums. The reader can come to their own conclusions. What’s important is finding a teacher who speaks your language and a subject that brings out your natural curiosity. Learning becomes one of the most euphoric feelings in the world when those two needs are met.

    The standard way of learning has horrible mental models for teaching people, like memorizing things for a test. Oscar Wilde is quoted as saying, “Experience is merely the name men gave to their mistakes.” People are so focused on learning from the experts that they forget that those who changed the world didn’t ask for permission to do so. They just did it. People want a hero to fix all of their problems but the truth is that no one is coming to save you. I’m not saying one should not find great mentors; it’s super valuable being able to listen to those who have become experts in their fields in order to learn. I’m saying one should not worship people like gods who can’t make mistakes. Just look at Sam Bankman-Friend, who many thought was a hero.

    Source

    Despite all of the educational content out there, the reality is most people will come to understand the difference between paper bitcoin and bitcoin you actually hold the keys for via an expensive lesson. When the majority of Bitcoiners self custody their coins, and stop blindly trusting their heroes, that is when we will see fireworks in regards to bitcoin’s price action. Every person is different and has various forms of risk tolerance. For those who are discouraged by recent events, remember: Rome was not built in a day. Sometimes the only way to get a lesson through someone’s head is for them to suffer the pain of said mistake.

    FTX AND CENTRAL PLANNERS ARE NOT SO DIFFERENT

    What’s interesting about watching FTX fail so rapidly is that the same thing would happen with our traditional financial system if we didn’t have central banks acting as lenders of last resort. FTX violated its own terms of service by using customer funds to make bets, but 99.9% of the world just turns a blind eye when banks do this because their terms of service legally allow fractional reserve banking.

    In his book “Human Action,” Ludwig von Mises writes:

    “The rich, the owners of the already operating plants, have no particular class interest in the maintenance of free competition. They are opposed to confiscation and expropriation of their fortunes, but their vested interests are rather in favor of measures preventing newcomers from challenging their position. Those fighting for free enterprise and free competition do not defend the interests of those rich today. They want a free hand left to unknown men who will be the entrepreneurs of tomorrow and whose ingenuity will make the life of coming generations more agreeable. They want the way left open to further economic improvements. They are the spokesmen of progress.”

    Technology getting better should lead to massive deflation from productivity gains. Regulatory moats and monopolies prevent this. Fractional reserve banking creates an inflationary environment where tons of capital is misallocated. In a free market, most commercial banks would be insolvent.

    FTX tried to create its own fractional reserve monopoly by lobbying Congress and creating a regulatory moat around its business which would’ve made it impossible for competitors to compete in the crypto ecosystem. The world is fortunate FTX’s system blew up before it was able to get its way with D.C.

    Mises was right: It is not the incumbents who will create a more agreeable future, it is entrepreneurs and ideas competing in a free market. Bitcoin has over 10,000 competitors, and that number is growing every day. Many, if not all of these tokens, are Ponzi schemes in my opinion, but the idea that D.C could do a better job deciding this than the free market could is ridiculous.

    I understand regulation is difficult when technology is changing things at such rapid rates. The little piece of glass in our pocket allows us to hail a ride, order food or listen to some of the greatest minds on the planet whenever we want. All of these things would seem magical to someone who lived before the creation of smartphones. There are going to be hiccups along the way as humanity tries to come to grips with these new tools. This is why I keep this Hal Finney quote as my Twitter header:

    Source

    For all of the wonders that technology can do for humanity, it can also drive a whole new level of control. Free markets lead to optimal price discovery. Too much central planning and markets start to break. Price discovery in a free market is like a hash function. It takes inputs of data and spits out an output that only goes one way.

    With a normal hash, the algorithm works so that it is unfeasible to reverse-calculate the data. You can verify a hash by making sure the same output is achieved based on the input, but you can’t take the output and figure out the input. In this same vein, a free market will set the price of a good, but you can’t figure out how all of the labor, work, travel and other variables created the price of the good. The function only goes one way.

    Market actors get upset when the coercion variable is notched up and price increases happen. The blame is typically pushed on to the producers rather than the central planners who are causing such issues. Sound familiar? Like say the U.S. government, which is calling out greedy fossil fuel companies for raising the price of gas while at the same time advocating for the end of fossil fuel use. If price controls are imposed, price discovery completely breaks down, resulting in shortages. Until the creation of money is no longer heavily intermingled with politics these issues will continue to play out.

    BITCOIN IS MORE IMPORTANT NOW THAN EVER

    As central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and digital identities are rolled out, it has never been more important to point out why Bitcoin is the remedy. Bitcoin allows the individual to go down a hero’s journey where they can keep the value of their labor in their head. CBDCs and digital IDs offer governments tools to enact monetary policy at the individual level, be at the center of every transaction and turn off people’s money as they see fit.

    Bitcoin offers a better system, one that no one can cheat if they want to be in consensus with the rest of the network. Preston Pysh said it best: “Bitcoin is like the infinity stone.” It takes a great deal of faith to hold on to an asset that has had multiple 70% to 90% drawdowns before recovering to new all-time highs. Not many can hang on to their bitcoin but those who do over long periods of time are greatly rewarded.

    The network effects of Bitcoin are insane. There is a Bitcoin website paying people 21,000 satoshis to post a sticker that it ships to you around their cities. Think about that. You can earn sats and increase the value of those sats by helping raise awareness. Bitcoin is full of these win-win scenarios. The tech is exciting, but the passion I see from Bitcoiners in real life is unlike anything I’ve ever seen before.

    Bitcoin as a technology, a new form of money and an idea are bringing hope to humans around the world who have been disadvantaged because governments have a monopoly on violence. Bitcoin empowers the individual to fight back like never before. There will be growing pains along the way and more turmoil in the short term for those obsessed with measuring things in fiat. The way to fix that is to orient yourself around the new system.

    The possibilities that will come out of this Bitcoin renaissance are endless. Grappling with what this new form of money means is difficult because the world is full of so many paradoxes. When you learn, you become smarter by ending up with more questions. Monopolies have brought about some of the most prosperous and technologically advanced times in human civilizations while also making George Orwell’s “1984” look like a very plausible path for the future. The internet is connecting people like never before and at the same time, loneliness is increasing. Number go up technology is associated with greed and is what initially attracts people to Bitcoin, yet many stay because they realize Bitcoin is the true effective altruism movement. These paradoxes are a bit mind bending but I do think there is value to be had from chewing on these ideas.

    It can be easy to get bogged down with all of the bleeding going on in the fiat world. Bitcoin is the Band-Aid to fix it. It gives me a lot of confidence knowing my money is secured by open-source software and math rather than 12 individuals who decide when it is okay to steal and when it’s time to practice fiscal austerity.

    I’m glad the Fed has finally decided to do the right thing for the economy but it has manipulated the cost of capital for so long that it now risks destroying the entire system if it keeps tightening. The problem is that the Fed’s only other option is to lower rates again, which causes more bleeding via inflation. Bitcoin offers humanity a way out of this paradox where central planners try to fix the bleeding by siphoning more blood out of the patient. Every time central planners manipulate the cost of capital it becomes more clear that market participants are playing a rigged game. Bitcoin is the fairest game humanity has ever created and the best chance we have of separating money and state.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 20:45

  • Investment-Grade Wine Outshines Stock Market In Tumultuous Year
    Investment-Grade Wine Outshines Stock Market In Tumultuous Year

    This has been an awful year for stocks and bonds as the Federal Reserve wreaks havoc on financial markets to tame the highest inflation in decades. Risks are now increasing that overtightening by the Fed could spark a hard landing in 2023. Most asset classes have been clubbed like a baby seal, while one has escaped the beatdown: investment-grade wine. 

    Investable wine is considered an ‘alternative asset’ by wealthy investors. Fine wine, with age, improves over time because there is only a limited supply of investment wines produced each year, or vintage, which must satisfy a growing global demand. 

    Despite risk parity investors deeply in the red, meme stock traders on Reddit wiped out, and crypto kids decimated, wealthy folks holding fine wine investments are sitting back without stress as they are set to lock in positive returns for the year. 

    The Liv-ex 1000 benchmark recorded a 13.6% increase year-to-date and a 44.6% rise over five years. What is most intriguing about investable wine is how it “acted like a defensive asset this year,” explained Topdown Charts founder Callum Thomas. 

    Thomas continued: “We also saw a similar thing during the dot-com burst bear market, and during the 2008 financial crisis. It goes to show that sometimes you have to be a little bit more creative to find defensive assets (in a year where traditional safe haven assets have disappointed e.g. gold basically flat for the year, and bonds down double-digits).”

    And many people might not be aware, but in economic downturns when lending standards are tightening, wealthy folks use wine collections, expensive artwork, and classic cars as collateral for loans while banks refuse to lend money to everyday folks. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 20:25

  • 'Russian Disinformation' Narrative On Hunter Biden Laptop Story Proved False By Twitter Files, Trump DNI Says
    ‘Russian Disinformation’ Narrative On Hunter Biden Laptop Story Proved False By Twitter Files, Trump DNI Says

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

    The recently publicized internal Twitter communications have proven false the claim that the story around Hunter Biden’s laptop was a part of Russia’s disinformation campaign, former director of national intelligence (DNI) John Ratcliffe said Friday.

    “What I said as the DNI in October 2020 was proven true,” Ratcliffe wrote on Twitter. “The IC had zero intelligence supporting a false narrative that the Biden laptop was Russian disinformation. Nobody in the IC had authority to say otherwise.”

    The Twitter headquarters signage on 10th Street in San Francisco on Nov. 4, 2022. (David Odisho/Getty Images)

    Ratcliffe, who served as the nation’s top intelligence official and the principal intelligence adviser to President Donald Trump from 2020 to 2021, shared part of independent journalist Matt Taibbi’s post series, known as “Twitter Files.”

    In the multi-post thread, Taibbi used screenshots of email exchanges between company executives to illustrate Twitter’s biased content moderation decisions, including the suppression of the New York Post’s report of the link then-presidential candidate Joe Biden allegedly had with dubious foreign business dealings based on emails retrieved from a laptop once belonged to his son, Hunter.

    Twitter’s initial response to the story is to limit its reach, claiming at that time that this was based on the platform’s “Hacked Material Policy” that prohibited users from posting “content obtained through hacking.”

    One of those screenshots, according to Taibbi, shows that Yoel Roth, Twitter’s moderation and safety leader until his recent resignation, had been having a “weekly sync with FBI/DHS/DNI” regarding issues with “election security” in the wake of the laptop story.

    “Hacked Materials exploded. We blocked the NYP story, then we unblocked it (but said the opposite), then said we unblocked it… and now we’re in a messy situation where our policy is in shambles, comms is angry, reporters think we’re idiots, and we’re refactoring an exceedingly complex policy 18 days out from the election,” wrote one executive who is purportedly Roth.

    “Weekly sync with FBI/DHS/DNI re: election security,” the message continued. “The meeting happened about 15 minutes after the aforementioned Hacked Materials implosion; the government declined to share anything useful when asked.”

    Roth’s weekly meetings with law enforcement and intelligence officials may have involved separate meetings, where not all of them showed up, Taibbi reported.

    “I have to miss the FBI and DHS meetings today, unfortunately,” Roth wrote to a Twitter staffer, indicating that officials of the two agencies weren’t scheduled to meet with him together at once.

    None of these messages mentioned anything about Russia, although at that time many commentators, media outlets, and Democrat leaders—notably House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), claimed that the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop was a Russian disinformation plot.

    “We know this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin,” Schiff told CNN in October 2020, claiming that it was in Moscow’s interest to keep Trump in the White House. “Clearly, the origins of this whole smear are from the Kremlin, and the president is only happy to have Kremlin help in trying to amplify it.”

    Such assertion had prompted Ratcliffe to speak out, accusing the Democrats of trying to “politicize the intelligence.”

    “The intelligence community doesn’t believe that because there is no intelligence that supports that. And we have shared no intelligence with Adam Schiff, or any member of Congress,” Ratcliffe said in an interview with Fox Business following Schiff’s comments.

    “It’s funny that some of the people who complain the most about intelligence being politicized are the ones politicizing the intelligence,” he added. “Unfortunately, it is Adam Schiff who said the intelligence community believes the Hunter Biden laptop and emails on it are part of a Russian disinformation campaign.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 20:05

  • "Digital Fentanyl": Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Legislation To Ban TikTok
    “Digital Fentanyl”: Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Legislation To Ban TikTok

    A group of bipartisan lawmakers led by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has introduced legislation that would completely ban the social media app TikTok from operating in the United States.

    “TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, is required by Chinese law to make the app’s data available to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP),” reads a Tuesday statement from Rubio’s office. “From the FBI Director to FCC Commissioners to cybersecurity experts, everyone has made clear the risk of TikTok being used to spy on Americans. “

    Rubio – who introduced the Averting the National Threat of Internet Surveillance, Oppressive Censorship and Influence, and Algorithmic Learning by the Chinese Communist Party Act (ANTI-SOCIAL CCP Act) – is joined by Reps. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL), who introduced companion legislation in the US House of Representatives.

    “TikTok is digital fentanyl that’s addicting Americans, collecting troves of their data, and censoring their news,” said Gallagher. “It’s also an increasingly powerful media company that’s owned by ByteDance, which ultimately reports to the Chinese Communist Party – America’s foremost adversary.”

    Allowing the app to continue to operate in the U.S. would be like allowing the U.S.S.R. to buy up the New York Times, Washington Post, and major broadcast networks during the Cold War. No country with even a passing interest in its own security would allow this to happen, which is why it’s time to ban TikTok and any other CCP-controlled app before it’s too late. -Rep. Mike Gallagher.

    The app has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks, including a lawsuit from the state of Indiana, a ban in South Dakota, calls to ban TikTok ‘everywhere,’ and hitting a major snag in negotiations with the Biden administration over national security concerns.

    One of the primary issues with TikTok – owned by Chinese company ByteDance, is where user data is housed.

    Both ByteDance and US officials struck a preliminary agreement that TikTok data on US users would be hosted by Oracle Corp. TikTok, meanwhile, says it will delete the private data of US users from its own data centers in Virginia and Singapore as it transitions to fully store data with Oracle. The company has also said that access to US data by anyone outside of a newly established division to govern US data security would be limited by, and subject to, its protocols – which would be overseen by Oracle.

    Certain administration officials, however, still aren’t comfortable with the arrangement, and have sought to make any TikTok security agreement stronger in some respects over concerns with the company’s access to consumer data, and its potential use for influence operations.

    “The federal government has yet to take a single meaningful action to protect American users from the threat of TikTok. This isn’t about creative videos — this is about an app that is collecting data on tens of millions of American children and adults every day,” said Rubio on Tuesday. “We know it’s used to manipulate feeds and influence elections. We know it answers to the People’s Republic of China. There is no more time to waste on meaningless negotiations with a CCP-puppet company. It is time to ban Beijing-controlled TikTok for good.”

    Republicans have been pushing to ban the app altogether.

    TikTok claims it doesn’t collect data on search and browsing history outside the app, though it does collect information within the app so that it ‘functions correctly,’ said the spokeswoman. For example, returning relevant search results and ensuring users don’t see the same videos multiple times.

    Former US President Donald Trump sought to ban TikTok unless it was a US-owned entity – which President Biden rescinded shortly after taking office in light of legal challenges.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 19:45

  • Censors Set Their Sights On Musk's Twitter Takeover
    Censors Set Their Sights On Musk’s Twitter Takeover

    Authored by Charlotte Allen via The Epoch Times,

    Not long after Elon Musk acquired Twitter with his promise of ending its censorship regime, a reporter from Reuters covering a White House press conference asked Karine Jean-Pierre, President Joe Biden’s press secretary, whether Twitter might become a “vector of misinformation.” Jean-Pierre’s response at the Nov. 28 press conference was:

    “This is something that we’re certainly keeping an eye on. Look, we have always been very clear that when it comes to social media platforms, it is their responsibility to make sure that when it comes to misinformation, when it comes to the hate that we’re seeing, that they take action, that they continue to take action. … We’re all monitoring what’s currently occurring.”

    That sounded pretty chilling. The idea that the government could be “monitoring” any part of any media for “misinformation” and “hate” speech—both of which are protected by the First Amendment unless they stray into defamation or incitement to imminent crime—ought to raise the hackles of anyone who cares about the Bill of Rights. And why, in particular, should social-media platforms have any legal obligation to “take action” against speech that might offend some people but is neither criminal nor libelous?

    But in fact, that is exactly what the nation’s two wokest states, New York and California, have already decided that social media platforms, a category that can include everything from Facebook to chatrooms and traditional journalism blogs with comments, must henceforth do.

    The New York law came first, in June, and it went into effect on Dec. 3. Realizing that free speech enjoys constitutional protection, New York’s legislators decided to outlaw only what they cagily called “hateful conduct.” But “hateful conduct,” as defined in the New York law, means “the use of a social media network to vilify, humiliate, or incite violence against a group or a class of persons on the basis of race, color, religion, ethnicity, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.” Vilify? Humiliate? That sounds pretty much like … constitutionally protected speech.

    Disturbing as it may be to listen to a rant against Jews, for example, the Al Sharpton of the 1990s and the Kanye West of 2022 weren’t saying anything that could be prosecuted. But the New York law requires social media networks to post “clear and concise policy readily available and accessible on their website and application that includes how such social media network will respond and address the reports of incidents of hateful conduct on their platform.” That forces everyone with a blog to pay lawyers to draft a policy statement acceptable to New York regulators and then spend hours trying to “respond,” for example, to a woman who says she feels “humiliated” that the blogger has described her as overweight.

    ​The California law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September and set to go into effect on Jan. 1, at least has the virtue of exempting service providers with gross revenues of less than $100 million per year. It’s targeted at Bay Area tech giants such as Facebook’s parent company, Meta, and Twitter. But its reporting requirements are even more onerous. Every company that falls under the statute’s purview must submit a twice-a-year report to the California attorney general detailing its moderation policies, not simply for “hate speech” but for such categories as “racism,” “extremism,” “radicalization,” “disinformation or misinformation,” “harassment,” and “foreign political influence.” The company must list every instance that it flagged such content and how it handled it. State Rep. Jesse Gabriel, who introduced the bill that Newsom signed, said the new reporting requirements are designed to deal with “conspiracy theories and other dangerous content” allegedly widespread on social media.

    ​Neither the New York nor the California law explicitly censors disapproved forms of speech or requires social media platforms to do so. But their vague and subjective language (“vilify,” “extremism”) coupled with their threats of sanctions for noncompliance (a $15,000-a-day fine in California, a $1,000-a-day fine plus a possible attorney general’s investigation in New York) are powerful inducements for social media companies to play Big Brother. And in New York, for example, Attorney General Letitia James, responding to the mass shooting in March at a Buffalo supermarket that was briefly livestreamed, has called for even tougher restrictions on internet content, such as criminal and civil penalties for transmitting images that might inspire others to commit violent acts.   ​

    ​On Dec. 1, Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor and founder of the legal-news blog Volokh Conspiracy, together with two social media platforms, Rumble and Locals, filed a lawsuit challenging the New York content-moderation law on First Amendment grounds.

    “New York politicians are slapping a speech-police badge on my chest because I run a blog,” Volokh said.

    As for California, University of Santa Clara law professor Eric Goldman writes: “By prioritizing certain content categories, the bill tells social media platforms that they must make special publication decisions in those categories to please the regulators and enforcers who are watching them. The resulting distortions to the platforms’ editorial decision-making constitutes censorship.”

    ​And as we’ve learned from the Biden-administration press secretary, California and New York aren’t the only government entities whose “regulators and enforcers” are “watching” social media with an eye to cracking down. Musk’s takeover of Twitter and his relaxation of the site’s content-moderation policies that routinely muffled conservatives have outraged political progressives.

    A Nov. 23 report from the liberal Brookings Institution asserted that “hate speech” on Twitter, including derogatory references to Jews and blacks, had increased as much as 500 percent since Musk assumed control of the platform on Oct. 27. The report noted that the bulk of this invective came from about 300 troll accounts, but that didn’t stop Brookings from declaring, “When acquisitions of social media platforms occur, there should be an obligation of the new owner(s) to ensure that hate speech is moderated.”

    That was a broad hint to Congress and the Biden administration. Expect federal regulators to try to force some heavy-handed censorship of Twitter, Bill of Rights or no Bill of Rights.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 19:25

  • Jack Dorsey Admits 'Biggest Mistake' Was Creating Authoritarian Censorship Toolbox
    Jack Dorsey Admits ‘Biggest Mistake’ Was Creating Authoritarian Censorship Toolbox

    Having had his little tête-à-tête with the current boss of Twitter – over Child abuse protection – the former boss of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, took to Twitter tonight to address a number of issues, including his take on The Twitter Files (which he appears to address as if he was an outsider) and his ‘biggest mistake’ as well.

    As a reminder, the current boss of Twitter had this to say recently about Dorsey’s role in the past:

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

    Jack Dorsey titled the blog post ‘A native internet protocol for social media’ (emphasis ours):

    There’s a lot of conversation around the #TwitterFiles. Here’s my take, and thoughts on how to fix the issues identified. 

    I’ll start with the principles I’ve come to believe…based on everything I’ve learned and experienced through my past actions as a Twitter co-founder and lead:

    1. Social media must be resilient to corporate and government control.

    2. Only the original author may remove content they produce.

    3. Moderation is best implemented by algorithmic choice.

    The Twitter when I led it and the Twitter of today do not meet any of these principles. This is my fault alone, as I completely gave up pushing for them when an activist entered our stock in 2020. I no longer had hope of achieving any of it as a public company with no defense mechanisms (lack of dual-class shares being a key one). I planned my exit at that moment knowing I was no longer right for the company.

    The biggest mistake I made was continuing to invest in building tools for us to manage the public conversation, versus building tools for the people using Twitter to easily manage it for themselves.

    This burdened the company with too much power, and opened us to significant outside pressure (such as advertising budgets).

    I generally think companies have become far too powerful, and that became completely clear to me with our suspension of Trump’s account. As I’ve said before, we did the right thing for the public company business at the time, but the wrong thing for the internet and society. Much more about this here:

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

    I continue to believe there was no ill intent or hidden agendas, and everyone acted according to the best information we had at the time. Of course mistakes were made. But if we had focused more on tools for the people using the service rather than tools for us, and moved much faster towards absolute transparency, we probably wouldn’t be in this situation of needing a fresh reset (which I am supportive of). Again, I own all of this and our actions, and all I can do is work to make it right.

    Back to the principles. Of course governments want to shape and control the public conversation, and will use every method at their disposal to do so, including the media. And the power a corporation wields to do the same is only growing. It’s critical that the people have tools to resist this, and that those tools are ultimately owned by the people. Allowing a government or a few corporations to own the public conversation is a path towards centralized control.

    I’m a strong believer that any content produced by someone for the internet should be permanent until the original author chooses to delete it. It should be always available and addressable. Content takedowns and suspensions should not be possible. Doing so complicates important context, learning, and enforcement of illegal activity. There are significant issues with this stance of course, but starting with this principle will allow for far better solutions than we have today. The internet is trending towards a world were storage is “free” and infinite, which places all the actual value on how to discover and see content.

    Which brings me to the last principle: moderation. I don’t believe a centralized system can do content moderation globally. It can only be done through ranking and relevance algorithms, the more localized the better. But instead of a company or government building and controlling these solely, people should be able to build and choose from algorithms that best match their criteria, or not have to use any at all. A “follow” action should always deliver every bit of content from the corresponding account, and the algorithms should be able to comb through everything else through a relevance lens that an individual determines. There’s a default “G-rated” algorithm, and then there’s everything else one can imagine.

    The only way I know of to truly live up to these 3 principles is a free and open protocol for social media, that is not owned by a single company or group of companies, and is resilient to corporate and government influence. The problem today is that we have companies who own both the protocol and discovery of content. Which ultimately puts one person in charge of what’s available and seen, or not. This is by definition a single point of failure, no matter how great the person, and over time will fracture the public conversation, and may lead to more control by governments and corporations around the world. 

    I believe many companies can build a phenomenal business off an open protocol. For proof, look at both the web and email. The biggest problem with these models however is that the discovery mechanisms are far too proprietary and fixed instead of open or extendable. Companies can build many profitable services that complement rather than lock down how we access this massive collection of conversation. There is no need to own or host it themselves.

    Many of you won’t trust this solution just because it’s me stating it. I get it, but that’s exactly the point. Trusting any one individual with this comes with compromises, not to mention being way too heavy a burden for the individual. It has to be something akin to what bitcoin has shown to be possible. If you want proof of this, get out of the US and European bubble of the bitcoin price fluctuations and learn how real people are using it for censorship resistance in Africa and Central/South America.

    I do still wish for Twitter, and every company, to become uncomfortably transparent in all their actions, and I wish I forced more of that years ago. I do believe absolute transparency builds trust. As for the files, I wish they were released Wikileaks-style, with many more eyes and interpretations to consider. And along with that, commitments of transparency for present and future actions. I’m hopeful all of this will happen. There’s nothing to hide…only a lot to learn from. The current attacks on my former colleagues could be dangerous and doesn’t solve anything. If you want to blame, direct it at me and my actions, or lack thereof.

    As far as the free and open social media protocol goes, there are many competing projects: @bluesky is one with the AT Protocol, Mastodon another, Matrix yet another…and there will be many more. One will have a chance at becoming a standard like HTTP or SMTP. This isn’t about a “decentralized Twitter.” This is a focused and urgent push for a foundational core technology standard to make social media a native part of the internet. I believe this is critical both to Twitter’s future, and the public conversation’s ability to truly serve the people, which helps hold governments and corporations accountable. And hopefully makes it all a lot more fun and informative again.

    💸🛠️🌐

    To accelerate open internet and protocol work, I’m going to open a new category of #startsmall grants: “open internet development.” It will start with a focus of giving cash and equity grants to engineering teams working on social media and private communication protocols, bitcoin, and a web-only mobile OS. I’ll make some grants next week, starting with $1mm/yr to Signal. Please let me know other great candidates for this money.

    *  *  *

    As you might imagine, Dorsey’s holier-than-thou views prompted some pushback on social media…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 18:45

  • "You Believe Your Fu**ing Intel Briefers?" Tucker Carlson Went Ballistic Over 'Russian Agent' Accusations
    “You Believe Your Fu**ing Intel Briefers?” Tucker Carlson Went Ballistic Over ‘Russian Agent’ Accusations

    Fox News host Tucker Carlson went off on the US intelligence community during an appearance on former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard’s podcast. He also called Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer an “asshole” while discussing members of congress who are controlled by the intelligence community.

    Carlson recounted an incident where he wanted to interview Russian President Vladimir Putin before the Ukraine war, and reached out through a well-connected friend to do so. Carlson kept Fox and his producers in the dark, yet was given a ‘tap on the shoulder’ by one of his ‘closest friends” who knew a high-up official at the National Security Agency.

    After flying to Washington DC to meet in person, it was conveyed that the high-level NSA employee, who is a ‘secret fan’ of his show, knew that Carlson was “trying to get a Putin interview and go to Russia,” adding “they have your emails and your texts, and they’re going to leak them to the media to discredit you as a Putin lover.”

    Carlson then called a friend who is a US Senator, who told him that the US intelligence community accused him of being a Russian agent.

    “Michael McFaul, who I would say is the leader of the neocons in the House… I got into an argument with him once last year on the phone. He told somebody that I was a Russian agent or something, and I was outraged,” Tucker said, referring to the former US Ambassador to Russia under President Obama.

    Michael McFaul

    “So I called him on the phone, and I used bad language. I was really mad. And he [McFoul] said ‘whoa, whoa, whoa’ – that’s what the intel briefers told me, that you were working for Russia.”

    “That’s what the intel briefers told you? You believe your fucking intel briefers? Like, how old are you son? I’m from DC. My dad was in this world. Like, you’re being manipulated by your intel briefers, DUH! And he’s like ‘well they had, you know, all kinds of corroborating evidence.'”

    Watch:

    (h/t @AMFirebrand)

    Carlson went on to discuss Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) statement that “You take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you, so even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this,” regarding former President Donald Trump.

    “How could he say something like that?” Carlson said, adding “How could you, as the head Democrat in the Senate, accept a system where the people are not in charge? It is not a democracy. Unelected spy agencies are controlling the outcome of domestic politics, like, you’re ok with that?”

    “That’s a dictatorship, asshole,” Carlson added. “Like what do you think that is?“

    “And I couldn’t have less regard for Chuck Schumer and I know him and he’s not stupid, he’s not stupid at all,” Tucker continued. “He’s quite smart. So he’s never thought this through? He’s never thought it through? He has thought it through, and he accepts it as OK, and we should never accept something like that, ever.”

    Watch the entire interview below:

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 18:25

  • China Shipyards Rake In Record LNG Tanker Orders Amid Russia Sanctions
    China Shipyards Rake In Record LNG Tanker Orders Amid Russia Sanctions

    Chalk up another way that China is benefitting from Western sanctions against Russia.

    First we saw China seize the opportunity to buy Russian oil at a steep discount. Now, China’s shipyards are racking up record orders for liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers as world markets adjust to supply disruptions caused by the sanctions regime. 

    In 2022, China has scored 45 LNG tanker orders — quintupling the country’s tally from last year. Having assembled only 9% of the world’s existing LNG tankers, China captured 30% of this year’s orders and now accounts for 21% of global orders on the books, Reuters reports. That’s about $60 billion in business. 

    China’s growing presence in this speciality shipbuilding market represents demand spilling over from South Korea, which has long dominated the LNG tanker category. Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding accounts for 75% of China’s 2022 orders. 

    Membrane LNG tankers don’t have conspicuous ball-shaped tanks on their decks like earlier-generation spherical-tank models (Baird Maritime) 

    South Korean shipbuilders have been deluged with orders for ships that will be used to transport gas from Qatar’s North Field expansion. That will bring huge growth in Qatar’s production capacity — to the extent that QatarEnergy’s CEO in October said his company will, within the next five to ten years, surpass Shell as the world’s largest natural gas trader. In that endeavor, Qatar is itself capitalizing on Europe’s drive to replace Russia’s pipeline gas with shipborne imports.  

    Building modern, membrane LNG tankers is a highly technical process that requires certification by Gaztransport & Technigaz (GTT), a the French company that holds the patents and licenses its designs to shipyards. The need for precision — as hundreds of workers painstakingly laser-weld seams inside 40-meter-tall LNG tanks — translates into build times of up to 30 months.   

    A look inside a GTT-designed LNG membrane tank interior (LTT via Offshore Energy)

    Some of the tanker demand is coming from China itself. SIA Energy’s Li Yao tells Reuters that China will need some 80 LNG tankers to haul 20 million tons of gas a year just from the United States. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 17:45

  • Montana Law That Bars COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates In Health Care Settings Is Unconstitutional: Judge
    Montana Law That Bars COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates In Health Care Settings Is Unconstitutional: Judge

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

    A federal judge in Montana has ruled that parts of the state’s law preventing discrimination against individuals in health care settings based on their COVID-19 vaccination status are unconstitutional.

    A nurse prepares a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. (PA)

    Republican-backed House Bill 702 was passed in 2021 by the Montana Legislature as an anti-discrimination measure and signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte in May of that same year.

    The bill banned employers from mandating that employees get vaccinated or share their vaccine status through an immunity passport.

    In a 41-page ruling on Dec. 9, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy stated that the law was unconstitutional as it applies to employers and employees of health care settings.

    “No party questions the authority of the Montana Legislature and Governor to exercise their respective legislative or executive authority to enact or modify public health and anti-discrimination laws,” the lawsuit states. “Rather, the challenge, in this case, stems from an ostensibly purposed anti-discrimination statute and its incongruent impact on healthcare providers and patients, hospitals, nursing homes, doctor’s offices.”

    Law Fails to Deal Specifically With COVID-19

    State Attorney General Austin Knudsen and Department of Labor Commissioner Laurie Esau were named as defendants in the lawsuit.

    The lawsuit goes on to state that the law passed in 2021 failed to distinguish between vaccines and did not deal specifically with COVID-19, instead encompassing “all vaccines whether for measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, hepatitis, or flu.”

    This, in turn, plaintiffs argue, “caused critical concerns for health care providers whether hospitals, doctor’s offices or other medical facilities by limiting the ability of such providers to know the vaccination status of patients and employees.”

    Plaintiffs also argue that the law “preemptively precludes health care providers and other employers from knowing the vaccination status of employees or patients if the employee or patient refuses to answer any inquiry about vaccination status or immunity passports.”

    “That situation, for any number of reasons, creates untoward problems for healthcare providers of any description in trying to protect the environment where services to patients are rendered and to prevent the spread of diseases,” the lawsuit states.

    The lawsuit argues that the law as it pertains to health care settings violated a string of laws.

    In his ruling on Friday, Molloy said that plaintiffs had successfully argued that the law violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulations.

    Specifically, he said, plaintiffs had successfully argued that the law was preempted by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act which requires employers to consider accommodation to create a safe work environment for workers, including employees who are immunocompromised.

    ‘A Win for All Montanans’

    “Deprived by law of the ability to require vaccination or immunity status of an employee, a health care employer is not able to properly consider possible reasonable accommodations if an employee asks to limit his or her exposure to unvaccinated individuals,” wrote Molloy, a Clinton appointee.

    The judge further noted that HB 702 “removes an essential tool from the health care provider’s toolbox to stop or minimize the risk of spreading vaccine-preventable disease.”

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 17:25

  • US Set To Send Ukraine Patriot Missiles In Major Escalation 
    US Set To Send Ukraine Patriot Missiles In Major Escalation 

    CNN’s chief Pentagon correspondent is reporting the breaking news based on multiple anonymous US defense officials – including a senor Biden administration official – that the White House is currently finalizing plans to send Patriot missile defense systems to Ukraine.

    “The Biden administration is finalizing plans to send the Patriot missile defense system to Ukraine that could be announced as soon as this week, according to two US officials and a senior administration official,” CNN writes. “The three officials told CNN that approval is expected.”

    Patriot missile battery, DoD via AP.

    If approved, this could be a tipping point in the conflict leading to direct confrontation between nuclear-armed powers given transfer of Patriots would mark the longest-range missiles sent to Ukraine thus far.

    Washington has so far been reluctant, despite Kiev officials since nearly the start of the invasion making repeat pleas for the US to help “close the sky” – as President Zelensky many months ago urged Congress.

    As The Guardian reviewed of the dangers involved in sending the Patriot: 

    “Long sought by the Ukrainians, the missiles have a range of up to 300km, but so far the US and its allies, including the UK, have declined to supply them because they could be used to hit targets inside Russia. Supplying them would help “bring the war to an end as soon as possible”, Johnson said.

    Patriots have long been deployed in neighboring Poland, but Ukrainian leaders have been persistent in requesting them on their own soil amid a major uptick in recent Russian aerial attacks. Former UK prime minister Boris Johnson this week urged in a Wall Street Journal op-ed for the West to get serious about supplying Patriots and other anti-air systems, even including military aircraft.

    It’s likely to take some time to deploy the Patriots, given Ukrainians are expected to be trained on operating the sophisticated systems at the US Army base in Grafenwoehr, Germany, per officials cited by CNN. In the meantime Moscow is likely to react fiercely to the news, which could result in more intense and escalatory airstrikes on Ukrainian cities, and command and control bases. Washington, for its part will likely emphasize the purely “defensive” nature of the Patriot systems.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 17:16

  • Blackstone Might Delay New Private Equity Fund After Redemption Panic
    Blackstone Might Delay New Private Equity Fund After Redemption Panic

    Blackstone shares are down 39% year-to-date, as two of its funds, Blackstone Real Estate Income Trust (BREIT) and Blackstone Private Credit Fund (BCRED), enforced redemption limits given challenging macro conditions. 

    With both BREIT and BCRED redemptions capped, we can only envision investment advisors and portfolio managers have become increasingly concerned about whether they can pull money out of the non-tradeable funds. Increased panic by investors to withdraw could weigh on the performance of both funds and or spark liquidity issues. 

    “Redemption limits, rising rates and softening performance are likely to give investors and advisors pause going forward,” Barclays told clients in a recent note. Monthly data shows BREIT’s unfulfilled redemptions erupted in November. 

    Problems for Blackstone are only spreading. According to Financial Times, citing sources, the New York-based investment manager could delay the launch of the Blackstone Private Equity Strategies Fund, or BXPE, due to the unresolved issues surrounding BREIT and BCRED, dismal fundraising conditions, volatile financial markets, and aggressive Federal Reserve tightening monetary conditions to tame inflation. 

    BXPE was designed to invest in corporate buyouts and search for equity-oriented opportunities, including late-stage venture investments, musical royalties, and the purchase of stakes in other private equity firms. 

    Blackstone funds target wealthy investors. The question remains what do these high-net wealth people and their financial advisors know that has caused such a panic with BREIT and BCRED — could it be the understanding of increased risks of a hard economic landing in 2023?

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/13/2022 – 17:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 13

Today’s News 13th December 2022

  • Ancient Apocalypse & Graham Hancock's "Dangerous Ideas"
    Ancient Apocalypse & Graham Hancock’s “Dangerous Ideas”

    Authored by JR Leach via Off-Guardian.org,

    Why has the popular Netflix documentary ignited the ire of the media?

    It never ceases to amaze me what seemingly innocuous ideas the establishment media find ‘dangerous’ or ‘controversial’.

    Netflix recently released an eight-part documentary series titled Ancient Apocalypse, where Graham Hancock (who has a been a household name for “alternative archeology” since the release of his book ‘Fingerprints of the Gods’ in 1995), introduces us to his central theory that human civilisation is considerably older than current archeological orthodoxy believes, but that most evidence for this was wiped out by a colossal natural disaster around 12,000 years ago.

    He supports this theory with physical evidence for such a natural disaster, curious geological anomalies and seemingly ancient megalithic structures.

    He points out that the mainstream view of pre-history insists civilisation did not and had never existed before the year 4000BC, but that recent discoveries such as the Temple at Gobekli Tepe, which dates back to 9600BC call that mainstream view into question.

    He also collates mythic stories and old legends from over around the world that all reference some massive, global catastrophe. (Floods, earthquakes, giant snakes in the sky, strange visitors from across the sea etc.) And then emphasises their many eerie similarities.

    Through the collation of this research, Hancock then asks some questions of the mainstream view of our ancient history and posits a theory of his own – that ‘we are a species with amnesia’, who have forgotten our own past.

    These are not new ideas, solely from Hancock’s imagination. Immanuel Velikovsy said something very similar half a century ago, in fact his last book, published posthumously, was titled “Mankind in Amnesia”, and explored the psychological impact of us, as a species, repressing the memories and forgetting the stories that echo from a distant, traumatised past.

    These questions might sound intriguing to you, or you may be indifferent to them, or you may even vehemently disagree with them, but I bet you didn’t know they were racist, did you?

    That’s right. Racist. Don’t believe me, you conspiracy theorist? Just ask the Guardian.

    Yes, the Graun has spoiled us with not just one hit-piece, but two! All in the space of one week.

    Robin McKie writes his from an archaeological standpoint, while Stuart Heritage speaks as an entertainment critic. However, one is very much like the other. They both agree the Netflix series is wholly unacceptable. All of it. These are ‘dangerous ideas’ that shouldn’t be ‘allowed’.

    McKie alleges Hancock’s claims reinforce ‘white supremacist ideas’, because questioning the age of human civilisation

    …strip[s] indigenous people of their rich heritage and instead gives credit to aliens or white people”

    McKie further explains:

    Then there were the Nazis. Many swore by the idea that a white Nordic superior race – people of “the purest blood” – had come from Atlantis. As a result, Himmler set up an SS unit, the Ahnenerbe – or Bureau of Ancestral Heritage – in 1935 to find out where people from Atlantis had ended up after the deluge had destroyed their homeland.”

    There we have it, you see! Don’t even bother linking to any sources, Robin (which he doesn’t). I hear you, loud and clear. The idea of Atlantis is inherently racist, because the Nazis believed in it.

    The fact Hancock never mentions race, or white people (or aliens) in the series, nor (to the best of my knowledge) in any of his books, makes no difference to this.

    So, what are you going to do now? Keep researching the Atlantis myth?

    Like a Nazi would?

    Of course, going by this logic, we should really do away with Christianity as well. God in general, in fact.  Perhaps we should cancel Volkswagen and Wagner too. Nazis also brushed their teeth and wore shoes, I believe, neither of which shall I be taking part in from this day onwards, just to be sure.

    So, there we have it – Ancient Apocalypse is racist, even though it never mentions race.

    The remainder of their twin critiques are no better argued or supported by reality. Here is a typical example of the intellectual level they work on:

    For a story that was first told 2,300 years ago, the myth of Atlantis has demonstrated a remarkable persistence over the millennia. Originally outlined by Plato, the tale of the rise of a great, ancient civilisation followed by its cataclysmic destruction has since generated myriad interpretations.”

    It was this opening paragraph alone that prompted my response. As it is so uniquely meaningless.

    What does he mean by ‘For a story 2,300 years old it has demonstrated remarkable persistence’? As opposed to what? All those other stories that we don’t know about? How is that measurable, exactly?

    Besides, we have a plethora of stories and mythologies dating back two and half thousand years, and even much further into the past than that. Including all the Greco-Roman myths, plays by Sophocles and Aesop’s Fables. We have detailed legends and lore passed down from Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Old Testament fits the bill as well.

    And of course, Homer’s Iliad, which describes the fabled Trojan War.

    Let us remember that the City of Troy was also believed to have been just a myth until we discovered that it wasn’t. And I’m sure before 1870, when it was first discovered, that there was no shortage of academics decrying the search for Troy as a heretical waste of time.

    What is the essential attraction of the tale? For answers we only have to look at the works of Tolkien, CS Lewis, HP Lovecraft, Conan Doyle, Brecht and a host of science fiction writers who have all found the myth an irresistible inspiration.”

    Simplicity itself! The reason the Atlantis myth is so popular is because it’s so popular!

    Robin then asserts as fact that Plato intended the tale of Atlantis to be little more than an allegory.  There is no way of knowing that, of course, he merely asserts it and then goes into a Gish Gallop.

    “As to the likely site of the original Atlantis, the serious money goes on the destruction of the Greek island of Santorini and its impact on Crete and puts the blame on volcanic eruptions – not errant comets, as Hancock argues”

    Whoa there, Robin. Firstly, Graham Hancock never ‘argues’ that the Greek island of Santorini was struck by an errant comet. That is misleading. He argues that a comet struck somewhere in North America and rising sea levels may have obliterated an island civilisation (that Plato calls Atlantis) in the Atlantic Ocean. It’s only you, Robin, who is conflating this Atlantis myth with Santorini.

    [NB – Robin also fails to mention the physical evidence for just such an impact at the beginning of the Younger Dryas.]

    Secondly, should we not give credit where credit is due, and assume that Plato (and Solon, from whom Plato got the story, and the Dynastic Egyptians, from whom Solon got the story), most likely knew the difference between ‘inside the Mediterranean’ and ‘outside the Mediterranean’?

    If they place Atlantis beyond the Pillars of Hercules, should we not at least consider it possible that this is indeed where “the original Atlantis” was? (I invite readers to listen to Plato’s accounting yourselves and see what you make of it, here is an unabridged and well-produced reading.)

    The history of Santorini’s volcanic eruption was probably, by contrast, relatively well known. Santorini didn’t actually sink, after all, as Atlantis is said to have done. It’s still there. The Ancient Greeks called it ‘Thera’ and they were perfectly well aware of its existence. It shares no cultural, historical or technological similarities to Plato’s description of Atlantis at all, short of ‘being an island’.

    But none of that bothers McKie who at this point, and without ceremony, just sort of stops writing. Job Done. Atlantis debunked. What’s for lunch?

    Moving on to Stuart Heritage’s piece, which is thankfully briefer but in no way less smug. In his subheading he boldly asks:

    “Why has this been allowed?” 

    Allowed?

    I’m not sure which authority he’s calling on here. Netflix execs? Local, national or perhaps global government? Or maybe it’s rhetorical, and he’s beseeching the Lord God himself how such evil could come into the world.

    Beyond this, Stuart seems even less interested in debunking or debating these ‘dangerous ideas’ than McKie was, and far more focused on analysing and ridiculing its (presumed) target audience.

    Fortunately, Stuart, with his view unbiased and his mind wide open, has discerned exactly who that is in the first five minutes – because he saw (or thinks he saw) Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson flash up in the pre-show reel.

    Joe Rogan appears in one quick interview, which is used in the first episode and the last.

    Jordan Peterson does not appear in this documentary at all.

    And I’m really not sure why Stuart thought he did. Perhaps he just didn’t watch closely enough to realise this before rushing his five-hundred words off to be published in one of the largest news outlets in the world.

    More notably when Heritage later amended the change, he just removed the ‘Jordan Peterson’ reference and neither he nor the editors or sub-eds even bothered to correct the syntax:

    “Fortunately, you don’t have to watch for long to find out. In quick succession, during the pre-show sizzle reel, we are treated to a clip of the show’s host Graham Hancock being interviewed by Joe Rogan.”

    The laziness is staggering.

    Just ‘a different person’. It’s not important who anymore. He’s not on the Guardian’s ‘naughty list.’

    Equally strangely, both McKie and Heritage seem to think ‘Ancient Apocalypse’ makes claims of ‘super intelligent beings’ and ‘aliens’, when it simply does not.

    Hancock’s argument – whether you accept it or not –   is that human beings were more advanced than academia admits. Not robots with flying cars, but more advanced than we currently give them credit for, and he cites evidence for this which both Stuart & Robin ignore in favour of critiquing Hancock for things he does not say.

    They cite no sources and debate no actual claims. They use buzzwords and identity politics in place of analysis and between the two of them couldn’t fill one page of A4. It’s as if even they (and their editors) had no faith or interest in what they were doing.

    Although Stuart does rather give the game away in his closing statement.

    “That’s the danger of a show like this. It whispers to the conspiracy theorist in all of us. And Hancock is such a compelling host that he’s bound to create a few more in his wake. Believing that ultra-intelligent creatures helped to build the pyramids is one thing, but where does it end? Believing that election fraud is real? Believing 9/11 was an inside job? Worse?” 

    He’s got me stumped there. Because, for the life of me, I literally can’t think of anything worse than ‘believing in election fraud’, which is obviously as fanciful as believing in the Loch Ness Monster. What next? Believing in tax evasion!?

    Presumably he’s referring to the 2020 US election. Because the Guardian has claimed fraud is very real in some elections. Russia, Syria, Bolivia, Brazil, Libya, Afghanistan, Iran and Venezuela to name a few.

    And they were pretty darn adamant that it was Russian collusion that got Trump into office in 2016.

    Stuart presumably believes election fraud is only a ‘conspiracy theory’ when it happens here, in the UK. Either that or he believes it has literally never happened. Ever. In the whole history of the world.

    Or perhaps he’s simply typing up any old nonsense just to get that word count a little higher. Sense and consistency be damned.

    Who’s to say?

    However, the fragile honesty underlying this is quite telling. He is essentially saying:

    “If people become sceptical of one thing, they may become sceptical of another.”

    Which is to be expected, but what I can’t understand is how anybody could think this is a bad thing.

    People should be sceptical. Scepticism in all things but cynicism in none. People should ask questions, and they should expect answers, especially from those who profess to know them. One should be open-minded and always pursue the truth. And to better decipher what that may be, we need people sharing new ideas, questioning the mainstream view and challenging the established narrative as new evidence presents itself. We need that. Science, progress and discovery all depend on it. Even if the ideas turn out to be false. Prove them false.

    In short: No one should be the gatekeepers of our history. Least of all those who laud their certitude in the face of the unknowable.

    The mystery is exciting. The evidence is compelling. The series is engaging. Even if none of it turns out to be true, the questions are still worth asking.

    These ideas are only ‘dangerous’ if you fear what they question.

    And those who fear questions fear the truth.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 23:40

  • Health Experts Urge Beijing To Accelerate Approval Of Enhanced Covid Jabs Amid 'Winter Wave' Of Deaths
    Health Experts Urge Beijing To Accelerate Approval Of Enhanced Covid Jabs Amid ‘Winter Wave’ Of Deaths

    China’s government dramatically pivoted from its ultra-harsh ‘zero Covid’ policy in the last several weeks, which will likely cause a massive outbreak, as health experts urged Beijing to speed up the approval process of new vaccines to counter Covid-19 variants. 

    Sinovac and Sinopharm Covid jabs have been widely distributed among the majority of the Chinese population to fight the original Covid strain from Wuhan in 2020. But old vaccines might not be enough to fight variants. 

    “We can’t rely on old vaccines which are currently being used nationwide going forward,” a Beijing-based adviser to the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention told Financial Times. 

    The health advisor, who spoke under cover of anonymity, said CDC facilities “are filled with Wuhan virus-based vaccines that aren’t of much use.” 

    Beijing has yet to approve the latest version of the jabs to target more infectious Covid variants, leaving the older generation vulnerable this cold season. 

    According to a new projection by Feng Zijian, a former deputy chief at the CDC, relaxed health restrictions could result in 80 to 90% of the Chinese population being injected with the virus. 

    “It’s going to be inevitable for most of us to get infected once, regardless of how the Covid-fighting measures are adjusted,” Feng said. 

    While China faces a ‘winter wave’ of deaths as the economy reopens, Beijing has yet to import foreign-made messenger RNA vaccines. 

    The CDC adviser said that China needed “locally made mRNA vaccines in our toolbox,” which might not arrive until “next April.” There are seven domestic companies in the late stage of clinical trials. The advisor added clinical trial results for the improved Sinovac and Sinopharm jabs will be announced in March, then “the government may issue an emergency use license.” 

    Jin Dong-yan, a virologist at the University of Hong Kong, said the coming “tsunami” of infections means “China should have an accelerated mechanism for approval to change vaccines based on the circulating strains. There is no need for a full clinical trial.”

    Infections across the country are already moving higher. 

    Covid is rapidly spreading through Chinese households and offices after the country’s pandemic rules were unexpectedly unwound last week, sparking confusion on the ground as ill-prepared hospitals struggle to deal with a surge in cases. -Bloomberg 

    Dong-yan warned that by the time new jabs are approved, Covid variants would be the dominant strain:  

    “The regulatory body needs to show some flexibility. Ba. 5 is already giving way to BQ. 1.1 in the US and XBB in Singapore. He added: “They will never catch up.”

    So the question we have: Why did Beijing ease zero Covid policies when no preparations have been made to meet the coming winter ‘tsunami’ of infections? 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 23:20

  • What's Inside The House-Passed Military Spending Bill
    What’s Inside The House-Passed Military Spending Bill

    Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The House of Representatives just passed the mammoth $858 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), an annual must-pass bill setting out defense spending levels.

    See what’s inside, and what was left out, below.

    The U.S. Capitol building in Washington, on Dec. 20, 2020. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

    Military Vaccine Mandate Repealed

    In a major win for Republicans and critics of President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 policies, this year’s iteration of the NDAA will include a repeal of a vaccine mandate for military service members.

    Biden announced in August 2021 that all federal employees, including military service members, would be required to take the COVID-19 vaccine or lose their job, despite a dearth of long-term testing on the vaccine.

    U.S. President Joe Biden (R) speaks at the White House in Washington on Dec. 8, 2022. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Republicans were opposed to the mandate from the beginning, calling it a violation of the personal liberty of citizens to make their own health decisions.

    Initially, service members who refused the vaccine were liable to face consequences up to and including court martial and dishonorable discharge. A dishonorable discharge, roughly the military equivalent of a felony conviction, can severely impact a service member’s life, as many employers will not even consider hiring someone with a less-than-honorable military discharge.

    Last year, the Senate passed a draft of the NDAA barring the Department of Defense (DOD) from dishonorably discharging service members solely for refusal to take the vaccine.

    However, the mandate remained in effect. Even after Biden boldly declared that “the pandemic is over,” the Pentagon refused to budge on its vaccine requirements.

    But in the past several weeks, efforts to repeal the mandate once and for all ramped up among Republicans.

    After rumors began circulating that the NDAA would undo the mandate, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)—the frontrunner in the race for the speakership of the 118th Congress—vowed during an appearance on Fox Business Network’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that his caucus would not pass the bill unless it ended the vaccine mandate.

    “We will secure lifting that vaccine mandate on our military because what we’re finding is, they’re kicking out men and women that have been serving,” McCarthy said. “That’s the first victory of having a Republican majority, and we’d like to have more of those victories, and we should start moving those now.”

    Democrats yielded on the issue, giving Republicans a major policy win.

    The passage of the bill through the lower chamber came just days after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed his desire to continue imposing the mandate.

    “We lost a million people to this virus,” Austin told reporters, although studies and data have shown the vast majority of people who died from COVID-19 were elderly or have compromised immune systems. “A million people died in the United States of America. We lost hundreds in DOD. So this mandate has kept people healthy.”

    Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin speaks during a news conference at the Pentagon in Washington on Nov. 3, 2022. (Andrew Harnik/AP Photo)

    Following the addition of the amendment ending the mandate, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the most vocal critics of Biden’s diktat, applauded the outcome.

    “This is a big day for our men and women in the military,” Paul said in a tweet. “We won, and the NDAA will be amended to respect medical autonomy and religious freedom.”

    “These young men and women are willing to put their lives on the line, and now we’ve come forward to say they deserve to be treated with respect,” Paul said in a press conference.

    Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), another key proponent of the amendment, also applauded the bill as “a huge victory for our troops.”

    No Reinstatement of Troops

    Though the bill will undo Biden’s mandate, hopes that the bill would reinstate those who were kicked out of the military for refusal to take the vaccine did not come to fruition.

    According to Defense Department data, 3,717 Marines, 1,816 soldiers, and 2,064 sailors have been discharged for refusing to get vaccinated against COVID-19, although a small portion has been allowed to remain in service owing to religious or medical waivers.

    As of Dec. 1, over 11,500 members of the Army, Army National Guard, and Army Reserve have declined to get vaccinated against COVID-19, Axios reported, while 97 percent of the Army’s active personnel received the shot.

    In an exclusive interview with The Epoch Times, Air Force Lt. Col Adam Conrad, who asked that his name be changed to protect him from retaliation by the DOD, said that he had “never seen morale so low” as it got after the imposition of the mandate.

    Various military bodies have been struggling to meet their recruitment goals in part over the vaccine mandate, with the U.S. Army reaching just 75 percent of its recruitment goal of 60,000 for this year, according to Army Secretary Christine Wormuth.

    Still, the NDAA will not reinstate those troops who were removed due to their opposition to taking the experimental vaccine.

    In a statement after the passage of the bill, McCarthy applauded the end of the mandate and suggested that Republicans will continue to work to reinstate discharged service members when they take control of the lower chamber in January.

    President Joe Biden (L) and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in file images. (Getty Images)

    “The end of President Biden’s military COVID vaccine mandate is a victory for our military and for common sense,” McCarthy said. “Last week, I told the president directly: it’s time to end the COVID vaccine mandate and rehire our service members.”

    “While I applaud the end of this onerous mandate—the Biden administration must go further. Unfortunately, the mandate has already had negative consequences for our military,” McCarthy said, citing the difficulties that the military has faced in recruiting.

    “These heroes deserve justice now that the mandate is no more,” he continued. “The Biden administration must correct service records and not stand in the way of re-enlisting any service member discharged simply for not taking the COVID vaccine.

    “Make no mistake: this is a win for our military. But in 28 days the real work begins—the new House Republican majority will work to finally hold the Biden administration accountable and assist the men and women in uniform who were unfairly targeted by this Administration.”

    This may be a difficult promise to keep, however, as Democrats retain the upper chamber and will have substantial leverage over the House GOP majority.

    Another Million-Dollar Dole to Ukraine

    The bill will also grant another $800 million of taxpayer funds to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative as part of the U.S. effort to help Ukraine defend itself against an ongoing Russian invasion.

    The United States has already sent around $68 billion in humanitarian and military assistance to Ukraine in three major packages.

    The first aid package, passed as part of the $1.5 trillion omnibus spending bill for fiscal year (FY) 2022, sent Ukraine $13.6 billion. In May, Congress passed another standalone bill granting Ukraine $40 billion. Again in September, an additional $13.7 billion was sent to Ukraine.

    Though the appropriation is smaller than past handouts, Americans are in the dark as to how exactly Ukraine is using the aid.

    Alarmingly, reports indicate that weapons purchased with taxpayer funds have wound up as far afield as Nigeria, falling into the hands of terror groups.

    President Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria said during a summit of African leaders that “the raging war in Ukraine serve[s] as major sources of weapons and fighters that bolster the ranks of the terrorists in Lake Chad Region.”

    He added, “A substantial proportion of the arms and ammunitions procured to execute the war in Libya, continues to find its way to the Lake Chad Region and other parts of the Sahel. Weapons being used for the war in Ukraine and Russia are equally beginning to filter to the region.”

    Because of this, calls have escalated among Republicans for Ukraine’s use of taxpayer funds to be audited.

    During a Dec. 9 hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a measure proposed by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to audit the Eastern European nation was defeated by Democrats.

    “The American people deserve full transparency and oversight of where their hard earned tax dollars have gone and that’s why we should audit Ukraine,” Greene said in a Twitter post after the vote.

    “An audit isn’t pro or against Ukraine, it’s just the right thing to do.”

    The $800 million figure is far short of the $37.7 billion in additional aid for Ukraine requested by the White House at the end of November.

    Silence on Pentagon Abortion Policy

    The bill does not address a policy recently announced by Defense Secretary Austin that would see taxpayer dollars used to fund travel costs for women in the military to get abortions.

    The policy came in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in which the court overturned Roe v. Wade. As a result of this decision, the right to regulate abortions has been returned to state legislatures for the first time in nearly 50 years.

    Austin argued that because military servicemembers often have to travel for work, they should not be restricted from getting an abortion if they are stationed in a state with more restrictive abortion laws.

    “Our Service members and their families are often required to travel or move to meet our staffing, operational, and training requirements. Such moves should not limit their access to reproductive health care,” Austin wrote in an October memo.

    He contended that the “practical effects of recent changes” would harm military readiness.

    “In my judgment, such effects qualify as unusual, extraordinary, hardship, or emergency circumstances for Service members and their dependents and will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force,” he wrote.

    Republicans were quick to blast the decision.

    Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) called it “outrageous,” and demanded that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) allow a vote on an amendment to prohibit it.

    While the text of the bill does not actively give the green light to this policy, it also does not contain language prohibiting it.

    The Pentagon is given a great deal of latitude on how it uses the funding granted by each year’s iteration of the NDAA. While large chunks of it are appropriated for specific purposes, a large proportion of these taxpayer dollars are left to the discretion of the Pentagon to spend as they will.

    This means that, if the bill passes with no prohibition of the policy, taxpayers will find themselves indirectly footing the bill for abortions in contravention of an existing law known as the Hyde amendment, which restricts the use of federal funds for abortions.

    Klobuchar Media Bill Fails

    An effort by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) to attach a controversial bill rider to the package was rejected.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 23:00

  • 'Just A Few Rogue Actors' Behind Banning Of Trump From Twitter; Nothing To See Here…
    ‘Just A Few Rogue Actors’ Behind Banning Of Trump From Twitter; Nothing To See Here…

    Authored by Sundance via TheConservativeTreehouse.com,

    The fifth installment of the Twitter Files release drops today courtesy of Ms. Bari Weiss [READ HERE]. The focus of Ms Weiss was on the decision to ban President Donald Trump from the platform, and her outline walks through the events leading up to the decision to remove him.

    After a review of internal discussions, slacks and conversations within the social media platform, ultimately the officers within the company decided to protect their view of democracy by removing their biggest ideological opponent.

    The Twitter executives justified their actions by echo-chambering a belief that President Trump was tweeting “coded messages,” the secret transmission of thoughts that can only be received by those wearing red hats, tuned to a specific psychological frequency.  As Weiss notes: “Less than 90 minutes after Twitter employees had determined that Trump’s tweets were not in violation of Twitter policy, Vijaya Gadde—Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust—asked whether it could, in fact, be “coded incitement to further violence.”

    President Trump tweeted the term “American Patriots,” which would be viewed by the Twitter ideologues as something akin to “the leader of a terrorist group responsible for violence/deaths comparable to Christchurch shooter or Hitler and on that basis and on the totality of his Tweets, he should be de-platformed.”

    It did not take long for the narrative to embed as the most senior Twitter regulatory officers assembled. “One hour later, Twitter announces Trump’s permanent suspension “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

    The entirety of Twitter File #5 release surrounds this internal Twitter dynamic, carefully avoiding any discussion or sunlight from outside government actors who may have been in direct contact with the senior Twitter team.

    Indeed, the documents chosen to provide evidence of the debate and decision to remove President Trump are transparently devoid of any inbound government contact to the Twitter organization.

    Thus, at the end of Ms. Weiss carefully written expose’, she concludes with this:

    See, it’s only “a handful of people at a private company“…. Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.

    Apparently, DHS, FBI and CISA officials were involved in direct contact with Twitter through their DHS “trusted partnership” portal to get rid of innocuous rebel voices and influence agents like Dan Bongino, Q conspiracy theorists, and various COVID doctors who were providing information against the interests of the government.

    However, when it came to removing the most powerful voice of President Donald John Trump, there was nothing but static radio silence from the government side of the DHS portal.

    You getting this?

    Do you see how this is presented?  “A handful of people at a private company,” that’s the story and they are sticking to it. Swear.

    Move along folks, move along.  Nothing to see here, just move along.

    That sound you hear in the background is not Ms. Bari Weiss providing an application of spray paint after careful Bondo application.

    Comrades, the social media messaging vehicle known as Twitter is a clean/refreshed information & communication platform as provided by the magnanimity of Mr Elon Musk, unknown financial underwriting notwithstanding.

    Brilliant.

    Now, let’s talk about President DeSantis…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 22:20

  • Japan, Netherlands Agree To US Request To Curb Chinese Chip Exports
    Japan, Netherlands Agree To US Request To Curb Chinese Chip Exports

    In a move that is sure to set Sino-Japanese relations several years back, on Monday morning Japan and the Netherlands agreed “in principle” to join the US in tightening controls over the export of advanced chipmaking machinery to China, Bloomberg reported cited according people familiar with the matter, in what is the latest “potentially debilitating blow to Beijing’s technology ambitions.”

    The news follows a report from Japan’s Kyodo according to which, the US had “asked the Japanese government for cooperation in stymieing China’s efforts to develop high-end semiconductors.” The request, noting that the countries are allies sharing strategies against China, was made by U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo during her phone conversation with Japanese industry minister Yasutoshi Nishimura on Friday, according to the sources.

    The request made to Nishimura was the first ministerial one from the United States on the issue. Washington’s push to create a multilateral regulatory framework comes amid concerns that there will be loopholes in its export controls if Japan and the Netherlands continue to provide China with devices essential to manufacture advanced chips. It comes after the United States unveiled a sweeping set of export controls on certain high-end chips that could be used by Beijing to train artificial intelligence systems and power advanced applications in the military and surveillance fields.

    Last week, Bloomberg News reported that Dutch officials were planning new export controls on China. The Japanese government agreed to similar restrictions in recent weeks since the two countries wanted to act in concert. Japan had to overcome opposition from domestic companies that would prefer not to lose sales into China, sources said. Besides Tokyo Electron, Nikon and Canon are minor players in the market.

    In response to the back-door US pressure, Japan and the Netherlands are likely to announce in the coming weeks that they’ll adopt at least some of the sweeping measures the US rolled out in October to restrict the sale of advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment, according to the people, who asked not to be named because they are not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. The Biden administration has said the measures are aimed at preventing Beijing’s military from obtaining advanced semiconductors.

    The three-country alliance – if it comes to pass – would represent a near-total blockade of China’s ability to buy the equipment necessary to make leading-edge chips, according to Bloomberg. The US rules restricted the supply from American gear suppliers Applied Materials Inc., Lam Research Corp. and KLA Corp. Japan’s Tokyo Electron Ltd. and Dutch lithography specialist ASML Holding NV are the two other critical suppliers that the US needed to make the sanctions effective, making their governments’ adoption of the export curbs a significant milestone.

    “There’s no way China can build a leading-edge industry on their own. No chance,” said Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon.

    The three countries are the world’s top sources of machinery and expertise needed to make advanced semiconductors. ASML shares added to losses in Amsterdam on the news and were down 2.2%, in late Monday trading.

    Senior US National Security Council official Tarun Chhabra and Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security Alan Estevez were in the Netherlands late November to discuss export controls, Bloomberg reported, while Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo talked about the same issues with METI chief Yasutoshi Nishimura via teleconference last week.

    With the move, Dutch and Japanese officials will essentially codify and expand their existing export control measures to further restrict China’s access to cutting-edge chip technologies.  The two governments are planning to impose a ban on the sale of machinery capable of fabricating 14-nanometer or more advanced chips to China, Bloomberg sources said. The measures align with some rules Washington set out in October.

    The 14nm technology is at least three generations behind the latest advances available on the market, but it is already the second-best technology that China’s chipmaking champion Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. owns.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 22:00

  • Grand Jury Indicts Former Loudoun County Superintendent Scott Ziegler, Top Spokesperson
    Grand Jury Indicts Former Loudoun County Superintendent Scott Ziegler, Top Spokesperson

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

    A special grand jury has indicted two Loudoun County officials for making false statements, according to indictments made public on Dec. 12.

    Grand jurors indicted Scott Ziegler, the just-fired county superintendent, on three counts, including false publication, according to copies of the indictments obtained by The Epoch Times.

    That count stemmed from Ziegler “knowingly” transmitting to media outlets on or about June 22, 2021, a “false and untrue statement.” The statement was not identified.

    They also indicted Wayde Byard, a top spokesperson for Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS), on a count of perjury.

    LCPS and Byard did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Ziegler could not be reached.

    “We are beyond pleased that the families who were harmed by the egregious failures of the leadership of Loudoun County Public Schools, exacerbated by its repeated acts of deceit and dishonesty, will receive some measure of justice,” Ian Prior, executive director for the Fight for Schools Group, said in a statement.

    The indictments were released shortly after a report from the special grand jury found that Ziegler lied when he claimed in June 2021 that he was not aware of any assaults occurring in school bathrooms.

    According to emails, Ziegler was, in fact, aware that a 15-year-old girl was assaulted the previous month by a male student inside a bathroom at Stone Bridge High School.

    The principal of the high school told grand jurors that the statement was “not true” and another witness said it was a “bald-faced lie.”

    Ziegler later claimed to misunderstand the question that prompted his false statement.

    Loudoun County school officials did not record instances of sexual assault despite being required to do so.

    The same male assailant, who has been described as “gender fluid,” went on to assault another female student at a different school in October 2021. He was found guilty of both assaults and sentenced to juvenile detention until he is 18.

    Grand jurors said they were largely stonewalled by LCPS and Loudoun County School Board members during the investigation.

    “We expected these public servants to provide clarity, transparency, and a willingness to report truthfully to their constituents. Instead, we were met with obfuscation, deflection, and obvious legal strategies designed to frustrate the special grand jury’s work,” they said.

    The board voted on Dec. 6 to fire Ziegler without cause. Board chair Jeff Morse told reporters that the board was “misled” by Ziegler. Morse declined to say whether any other officials mentioned in the report should be fired.

    The grand jury was convened by Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, a Republican, at the direction of Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, another Republican. Both entered office in January.

    The school board failed in attempts to block the investigation, with the Virginia Supreme Court finding that the board had not offered any convincing arguments for why the investigation infringed on its oversight of schools in the county.

    Other Counts

    The other two counts against Ziegler relate to Erin Brooks, a special education teacher who sued LCPS in June for allegedly failing to protect her against being sexually assaulted and retaliating against her when she spoke out about the matter.

    The suit says Brooks was assaulted dozens of times each day starting in February and that tactics she attempted did not work.

    Brooks messaged and met with school administrators but LCPS personnel who were in positions to intervene “repeatedly dismissed and ignored” her pleas for help, the filing states.

    Brooks was later falsely deemed to have released personally identifiable information and undertook unprofessional conduct and the school board released a statement about her that was defamatory, the suit says. LCPS also decided against renewing her contract, which was allegedly done out of retaliation.

    One of the new indictments says that Ziegler unlawfully fired or took adverse action against Brooks. The other says that he unlawfully used his position to retaliate or threaten to retaliate against Brooks “for expressing views on matters of public concern or for exercising any right that is otherwise protected by law.”

    All three of the counts against Ziegler are misdemeanors.

    Ziegler faces up to 12 months in prison and up to $3,500 in fines if convicted.

    The count against Byard is a felony.

    Byard faces between one and 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $2,500.

    Interim Superintendent Appointed

    The board appointed Daniel Smith as interim superintendent.

    “I accept the challenges that come with my new role. And I look forward to refocusing the efforts of our employees on maintaining and improving a world-class school division,” Smith, who had been chief of staff at LCPS since April, said.

    Morse said he and vice chair Ian Serotkin reached out to Smith for the position because they viewed Smith as “an important stabilization factor” when observing him closely as chief of staff. In addition, Smith wasn’t present during the two sexual assaults in 2021.

    Smith assured the reporters on the night of his appointment, “Absolutely, our kids are safe, and that’ll remain our priority.” He said his priorities would be ensuring that the school division “focused on teaching and learning of our kids.”

    Morse said the board would embark on a nationwide search for a permanent superintendent to have the recruit in place by July 1, 2023, to be ready for the 2023–2024 school year.

    The board has another meeting scheduled for Dec. 13. Agenda items include reviewing and discussing the recommendations outlined in the grand jury report.

    The board will “consider meaningful approaches to address those recommendations,” the agenda states.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 21:40

  • Putin Unexpectedly Cancels Annual Year-End Marathon Press Conference
    Putin Unexpectedly Cancels Annual Year-End Marathon Press Conference

    Likely we are about to witness an avalanche of further Western media speculation as to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s alleged ‘deteriorating health’, given the Kremlin announced Monday he’s decided to cancel his annual end-of-year press conference, which is a first in ten years.

    “As for the big press conference, yes, it won’t happen before the New Year,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters in a regular press briefing. “But we hope that the president will still find an opportunity to talk with [journalists], as he regularly does, including during foreign [visits],” Peskov added.

    No reason was given by Peskov for the break from the long-standing tradition of the Russian leader. Putin has been rare among world leaders for on certain occasions giving very lengthy, sometime multiple hours-long, press conferences and Q&A back-and-forths, for example at annual events like the Valdai Discussion Club.

    His latest Valdai appearance in October included the longest speech yet, given before hundreds of reporters and officials, and clocking in at a record-breaking 3 hours and 40 minutes.

    A typical year-end press conference also goes on for hours, and is widely looked upon as one of the biggest Russian political events of the year, resulting in an array of headlines as Putin tends to address everything from foreign policy, to energy policy, to societal ills of the West such as gender ideology and the ‘woke’ invasion of culture.

    At last year’s 4-hour end of year event, high on the agenda was looming conflict with Ukraine. When asked at the time about the potential for military action, the Russian leader had asserted “This is not our choice, we do not want this.”

    Throughout the now 10-month long ‘special operation’ in Ukraine, there’s been widespread speculation and rumors about Putin’s health, ranging from reports that he has Parkinson’s disease or even cancer. Some reports have gone so far as to suggest the risky Ukraine invasion is related to worsening health in the Russian president impacting his personality and decision-making. However, the Kremlin has batted these theories down at every turn, and as yet there’s no firm evidence pointing to severe health decline.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 21:20

  • 4 Minutes Of Undiluted Truth On Mainstream TV
    4 Minutes Of Undiluted Truth On Mainstream TV

    Authored by Mike Whitney,

    The last thing you’d ever expect to hear on a mainstream news channel, is the truth.

    But – strange as it might seem – that’s exactly what happened on Wednesday night on the Tucker Carlson Show. Carlson interviewed veteran journalist Glenn Greenwald in a 4-minute segment that provided the best ‘easy-to-understand’ summary of the Ukraine War you’ll hear anywhere.

    And what was so shocking about the interview, was how casually both men veered onto topics that are essential to grasping “How we got to where we are today” but which are entirely banned on all the other cable news channels. 

    You are not allowed to know, for example, that Russia was “lured into the conflict in Ukraine”. That does not fit the script that has been passed-along from the Biden State Department to their lapdogs at the cable news stations. You’re also not allowed to know that the US does not fight wars “to spread democracy” or that “the US has no vital interests in Ukraine” or that “Russia is not really our enemy”. All of those topics are verboten. You’re not even allowed to think about these things, which is why– for the most part– they have been completely scrubbed from any-and-all discussion of foreign policy in the corporate media.

    That’s what makes the segment with Greenwald such a stunner, because it’s 4 glorious minutes of pure, unvarnished truth delivered from a platform that typically only produces, lies, disinformation and propaganda. 

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

    That’s why I transcribed the entire interview. Any mistakes are mine. Here it is:

    Tucker Carlson– What bothers me is not so much what Zelensky is doing– there’s a lot of tyranny abound the world (and) I don’t brood on it. But the fact that (a) we are paying for it, and (b) our leaders are defending it. I think every American should be upset about that.

    Glenn Greenwald– “I think in general, Americans should be very skeptical when the government says ‘We’re going to fight wars on the other side of the world and spend tens of billions of dollars in military aid to spread democracy.’ The US government doesn’t actually care about spreading democracy. Many of its closest allies in the world have always been some of the world’s most despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. All the US government cares about is whether these regimes serve US interests. …If you want to believe the fairy tale that the US government goes to war to spread democracy, then Ukraine is not the place for you. You mentioned the argument that ‘Zelensky is in war, he has to curb liberty’, but go back to 2021, a year before Russia invaded and you’ll find articles where he shut down opposition television stations and shut down opposition political parties (which is) the hallmark of what every tyrant or despot does….and that was true even before Russia invaded.”

    Tucker Carlson– I wonder how Republicans can continue to defend this (because) I think you are right; I think our foreign policy is almost always about defending our interests…. But I don’t see our critical interests at stake here, so, what is this about?

    Glenn Greenwald– If the US government was honest… they would get rid of this script that we have to go and defend democracy. That is a fairy tale that tries to get Americans to feel better about the fact that we are involved in many, many countries all over the world. That is not the real reason. The only reason to do it is for ‘vital US interests’. The line in Washington for decades was the US has no vital interests in Ukraine. That was Obama’s view, that was the bipartisan view. Why did that change? The only reason is because we saw an opportunity to trap Russia inside Ukraine all based on the view that Russia is our enemy (which is) something only Democrats should believe because they think Russia is to blame for the 2016 election and Hillary’s defeat. But why would Republicans want confrontation with Russia? What American benefits from that except arms manufacturers? …

    Tucker Carlson– That’s a really good question, and I haven’t unraveled it. (But) It seems pretty clear that the Biden administration baited Russia into this invasion. You had the Vice President (Kamala Harris) in western Europe days before telling Zelensky to join NATO which, of course, they knew was a red line (for Russia) They wanted this invasion, I think that’s very obvious. Do you think this was all about ‘preparing for war with Russia’?

    Glenn Greenwald– If you think Russia is a grave enemy of the United States, then it makes sense to try to lure them into a war that they can’t win, like we got lured into Afghanistan for 20 years or like we lured the Soviet Union into Afghanistan back in the ’70s because it does deplete your enemy. The question is: Why should Russia be seen as our enemy? Both Obama and Trump said there’s no reason to see Russia that way. It has one-fifteenth the size of our military budget. It’s not threatening American borders. Why are we so obsessed with spending tens of billions of dollars to weaken Russia which we could be using here at home to benefit the lives of American citizens when Russia is not doing anything to the United States unless you are a crazy ‘resistance’ person who believes they’re the reason Donald Trump won. But if you don’t believe that, what is the rational for this? There is none.”

    Tucker Carlson– “I know, and as always, they have hijacked the best instincts of the American people, their compassion, and turned it against them. Glenn Greenwald, great to see you tonight”.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 21:00

  • Biden Fires Kinky They/Them Luggage-Stealing Nuke Official
    Biden Fires Kinky They/Them Luggage-Stealing Nuke Official

    Who could have seen this coming?

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

    Having been accused of stealing luggage from airports in two separate incidents, President Biden’s non-binary deputy assistant secretary for spent fuel and waste disposition has left the administration.

    A Department of Energy spokesperson said on Monday evening:

    “Sam Brinton is no longer a DOE employee. By law, the Department of Energy cannot comment further on personnel matters.”

    Brinton, 35, who was appointed in June, faces charges for the incidents at both the Las Vegas and Minneapolis airports and they are due in court in Minnesota on December 19.

    The White House has repeatedly refused to comment on the scandal, claiming it is a non-political issue.

    The Department of Energy has also tried to distance Biden from the issue.

    We are sure the groundswell of the Alphabet-Twitter will be up in arms decrying the Biden administrations decision to fire the klepto as some brazen act of prejudice and bias is some form transphobism?

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 20:40

  • A Tale Of Two Narratives: Twitter Edition
    A Tale Of Two Narratives: Twitter Edition

    Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,

    We’ve done quite a few episodes of commenter TAE Summary’s “Tales of Two Narratives” through time. Let’s add this one, why don’t we. Reading through -especially- Twitter, the past 24 hours or so, it struck me how fitting this is. We’re talking narratives that are so many light years apart, never the twain shall meet.

    Interested in time travel? This is for you.

    On the one hand, lots of people react to the following tweet by Elon Musk, by claiming Fauci saved millions of lives. On the other hand, just as many people (or so it seems) claim Fauci killed millions of people. It’s hard to get a bigger, and more consequential, chasm, than that.

    And apparently this Musk tweet got the most likes in Twitter history. What does that tell us? This chasm is not just on Twitter, this is the entire country plus anywhere else on the planet where people follow this.

    Despite the enormous 24/7 pressure to accept “The Science”, get a shot and a mask, and shut up.

    Of all people, John Brennan tried. The ex-CIA director who was caught lying to the Senate in 2014, and in 2017 to the House Intelligence Committee (Steele Dossier) about Russian interference during the 2016 election, still appears to think he has some form of moral high ground. Which is remarkable in and of itself. But at least Brennan has “class”.

    Elon Musk’s reaction has been loud and clear (note: this tweet is not a direct reaction to Brennan):

    Elon Musk has promised us a “full” record of the decision making process behind the censoring and banning by Twitter’s former staff, of renowned doctors like Peter McCullough, Robert Malone, Pierre Kory, Robert Marik, Richard Urso, and many more. Many of these distinguished scientists have seen their careers and livelihoods hampered, even destroyed by Fauci -and Twitter- over the past -almost- 3 years. And, of course, anyone else who dared question “The Science”.

    This was (is?!) a highly concerted effort. How many people died who could have been saved with ivermectin? Or just Vitamin D3, for that matter? HCQ? So many lives were lost to FDA, Fauci et al banning anything but Pfizer. Many more will perish because they now have mRNA in their bodies, and will never be able to get rid of it anymore.

    The “full record” will be a spectacle. Even if some things still remain hidden. Elon Musk may not be a saint, I very much hope he’s not, saints scare me, but I’d take him over Tony Fauci any day of the week.

    Here’s TAE Summary:

    The Mainstream Narrative

    • As a worldwide ‘public square,’ Twitter should be heavily regulated for misinformation and spamming by hostile interests. Twitter bears a responsibility to take action against disinformation and hate. Content moderation on platforms like Twitter is absolutely necessary to safeguard our democracy. As a private company Twitter is under no legal obligation to protect free speech and everything Twitter has done is within the law. Twitter and other social media platforms were instrumental in combating disinformation about Covid 19, climate change, election integrity and the war in Ukraine.

    • Elon Musk is an arrogant, toxic person. He doesn’t really care about free speech. His goals in purchasing Twitter are political. His takeover of Twitter is the most terrifying development in recent history. His purchase of Twitter will destroy it by driving away advertisers and providing a platform for Neo-Nazis and other hate-speechers. Under Musk, Twitter is a scammer’s paradise. Elon Musk decimated the staff of Twitter (breaking Federal labor laws) while restoring accounts that spread disinformation. Control of Twitter involves national security risks and Musk’s takeover should be investigated by the US Government.

    • The so-called “Twitter Files” are a feast for conspiracy theorists and have re-enlivened the influence of entities like QAnon. Journalists like Matt Taibbi writing about the Twitter Files are selling their souls to do PR work for the richest man in the world. The Twitter Files entries are sloppy, anecdotal and devoid of context. They are a nothing event about nothing event. The hysteria surrounding the Twitter Files is being used by Republicans for political gain.

    • The Hunter Biden laptop story was difficult and the truth was not known early and so caution was justified. There is no evidence in the Twitter Files that the government was involved in the suppression of the Hunter Biden Laptop story. There is nothing on Hunter Biden’s laptop that actually implicates Joe Biden. James Baker took the careful approach and urged Twitter to weigh both sides of the Hunter Biden Laptop story before proceeding.

    • Hate speech has dramatically increased since Must took over Twitter and these hateful tweets will lead to violence against the already marginalized. Right wing accounts such as those of Donald Trump, Project Veritas and the Babylon Bee should continue to be banned.

    The Counter Narrative

    • Twitter management was openly against free speech and used techniques such as “Visibility Filtering” to limit the reach of some posts. Twitter had secret blacklist files to limit the distribution of certain tweets specifically targeting right wing users. Twitter and other social media platforms have been instrumental in distributing disinformation and hiding the truth about Covid 19, climate change, election integrity and the war in Ukraine. Twitter censorship was used by the Democrats for political gain

    • Elon Musk is a hero. He bought Twitter to restore free speech. Twitter, pre-Musk, was a major accomplice and enabler in selling-out America’s future. Twitter was bloated with excess and left wing employees.

    • The Twitter Files show that the DNC and FBI were directly involved in suppressing free speech and prove that the 2020 elections were not free and fair. Twitter was clearly involved in election interference. The government interactions with Twitter were similar to Nazi propaganda methods. Twitter employees and their government contacts should be made to answer for their actions before congress. So-called journalists criticizing Matt Taibbi for his work on the Twitter Files are embarrassing in their uniformity and mindless support of a corrupt system.

    • The files on Hunter Biden’s laptop prove that Joe Biden used his office to make money and Twitter’s suppression of the laptop story was done to help get Joe Biden elected. It is a bigger scandal than Watergate. James Baker was involved in RussiaGate at the FBI and the Hunter Biden Laptop suppression at Twitter. Baker deleted some of the content that should have been in the Twitter Files.

    • The claims that hate speech has increased on Twitter since Musk’s takeover are utterly false. Hate speech is not tolerated on Twitter. Twitter largely ignored child trafficking issues until Musk took over. Lifting the ban on Donald Trump, Project Veritas and the Babylon Bee on Twitter are victories for free speech.

    Red pill or blue pill?

    *  *  *

    We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.

    Support the Automatic Earth in virustime. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 20:20

  • 'Merchant Of Death's Victory Tour: Praises Putin, "Volunteers" For War, & Joins Ultra-Nationalist Party
    ‘Merchant Of Death’s Victory Tour: Praises Putin, “Volunteers” For War, & Joins Ultra-Nationalist Party

    Just two Monday headlines perfectly illustrating the extreme imbalance of the one for one Brittney Griner, Viktor Bout trade last week which Russia is now positively celebrating: 

    The convicted international arms trafficker who was only a week ago still serving out a 25-year sentence in a US federal penitentiary on terror-related charges is wasting no time. Not only has he done public appearances and state media TV interviews, wherein he praised President Vladimir Putin and pledged his full support for the Ukraine invasion, but he could already be on his way to a parliament seat. 

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

    The “Merchant of Death” has joined Russia’s ultra-nationalist Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR), the organization announced Monday, and received his LDPR membership card at a ceremony from party leader Leonid Slutsky.

    Slutsky praised the newly freed arms dealer, saying, “We are the party of patriots! I am sure that Viktor Bout — a strong-willed and courageous person — will take a worthy place in it. Welcome to our ranks!” 

    This after on Saturday in Bout’s first interview since arriving in Moscow to a hero’s welcome he actually “volunteered” to go fight in Ukraine. He declared his willingness to go fight at the front lines if he had to opportunity and “necessary skills.”

    Via Reuters

    He further described that his only complaint is that Putin didn’t launch an attack on Ukraine sooner…

    “Hero of our time,” read a description of the RT interview posted on YouTube. In that interview, Bout was eager to play the role of national martyr. “Everything that happened to me is now happening to our country,” he said, alluding to the international condemnation Russia has experienced since launching the invasion of Ukraine earlier this year.

    “I am proud that I am Russian, and that Putin is our president. I honestly don’t understand why we didn’t do this earlier,” he said of the unprovoked attack on Ukraine.

    Without doubt, Russian media is eager to loudly gloat over the fact that the Kremlin obtained the release of a very high profile prisoner from the US, and all it had to do was hand over a celebrity WNBA player who brought cannabis vape cartridges into the country.

    Fully aware that American officials and the public would be keeping an eye out for his first statements since being released, parts of the RT interview were delivered in English, in order to send a ‘message’. 

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

    Bout spoke about the internal “suicide” of Western civilization as it has lost its values, which is a similar theme Putin himself has emphasized over the last several years. 

    Meanwhile, American media ‘celebrated’ Griner’s first basketball workout after being freed from Russian prison and delivered in safety back home. The aforementioned Axios story unironically began: “WNBA star Brittney Griner did a light basketball workout on Sunday and pulled off a dunk in her first move back after nearly 10 months behind bars in Russia.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 20:00

  • Supreme Court Agrees To Take up Another Challenge Against Biden's Student Debt Program
    Supreme Court Agrees To Take up Another Challenge Against Biden’s Student Debt Program

    Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear President Joe Biden’s appeal of a judge’s ruling that blocked his student debt relief program and found it unlawful, taking up the matter alongside another lawsuit against the policy.

    The Biden administration appealed a recent decision handed down by Texas-based U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman to block the program, siding with an advocacy group. An appeals court also ruled against the relief program and placed it on hold.

    The case the court announced Monday it would take up involves two holders of student loan debt – Alexander Taylor and Myra Brown – who said the federal government did not follow the right procedure in announcing and implementing the plan earlier this year. In an order, the Supreme Court wrote that it would determine whether Taylor or Brown had standing to file their lawsuit and will then hear the merits of it.

    On Dec. 1, the Supreme Court confirmed would hear arguments on the legality of the debt relief program in another case pursued by six mostly Republican-led states. At the same time, the court will keep Biden’s multi-billion-dollar program on hold as it hears arguments next year.

    The forgiveness program, which was announced by Biden in August, included up to $20,000 in loan relief for low- and middle-income debt holders. Some 26 million individuals already applied for relief, according to the Department of Education, which said that about 16 million of those have been approved.

    The Texas lawsuit was filed by two borrowers who were partially or fully ineligible for the loan forgiveness, backed by the Job Creators Network Foundation, a conservative advocacy group founded by Bernie Marcus, a co-founder of Home Depot Inc.

    Pittman, appointed as a judge by former President Donald Trump, ruled that the administration overstepped its authority to order debt cancellation under a 2003 law called the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, which can “waive or modify” student financial assistance during war or national emergency.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit later ruled to allow the judge’s injunction to stay until a final ruling in the case is issued. That prompted the Biden administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Attorneys general in Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina filed a lawsuit against the relief plan several weeks after it was unveiled to the public. Those states had claimed that they have the legal standing to challenge the plan, which they also argued exceeds the federal government’s authority.

    According to the Supreme Court order issued Monday, the Brown case will be “deferred pending oral argument,” which reports say is slated for February of next year, alongside Biden v. Nebraska, the suit that was filed by the six states. No specific date was given.

    Under a separate COVID-19-related order, those with student loan debt currently don’t have to make payments. Last week, the White House pushed back the payment pause until mid-2023 while the lawsuits are resolved.

    President Joe Biden announces student loan relief with Education Secretary Miguel Cardona on Aug. 24, 2022. (Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images)

    Other Challenges

    “The act requires a real connection to a national emergency,” the states’ lawyers wrote in court papers in late November. “But the department’s reliance on the COVID-19 pandemic is a pretext to mask the president’s true goal of fulfilling his campaign promise to erase student-loan debt.”

    Lawyers for the administration, in asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court’s injunction against the program on Nov. 18,  wrote that the injunction should be lifted because it means that millions of people won’t be able to pay back their loans.

    Because the plan won’t be implemented in the immediate future, the injunction “leaves millions of economically vulnerable borrowers in limbo, uncertain about the size of their debt and unable to make financial decisions with an accurate understanding of their future repayment obligations,” argued U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar in favor of the White House.

    Prelogar asserted that the six states do not have the legal standing to file the lawsuit, she said, adding that the federal government acted within its authority to set up a debt-relief program.

    The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated (pdf) that the program could total $400 billion over about 10 years. Because of the hefty price tag, Republicans criticized the program, while they also claimed the Biden administration announced the relief plan to coincide with the Nov. 8 midterm elections.

    “These responsible Americans paid off their student debt, worked their way through college, or chose a career path that did not require student debt—but Biden is now forcing them to pay off other people’s loans,” Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), who recently won her reelection, told The Epoch Times on Oct. 21.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 19:40

  • Ukraine Attacked 'Wagner HQ' Using US-Supplied Rockets: Report
    Ukraine Attacked ‘Wagner HQ’ Using US-Supplied Rockets: Report

    Ukraine says it delivered a huge blow to Russian forces after targeting a hotel in Luhansk province said to have members of Russia’s mercenary Wagner Group based there.

    Luhansk Governor Serhiy Haidai on Sunday touted that Ukrainian forces conducted a strike on a hotel in the city of Kadiivka “just where Wagner headquarters was located.” However, Russia is denying that a ‘Wagner HQ’ was struck, and details or confirmable facts remain murky into Monday. Importantly, the Russian side says the attack was carried out with US-supplied missiles.

    A US Army M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS). Image source: US Air Force

    Russia’s state TASS reported that HIMARS rockets were used, and that “The hit was on a private hotel… in an area in a central market. It did not work.”

    The Ukrainian side has countered that “many” Wagner mercenaries were killed in the ‘successful’ strike, with some officials posting photos of a destroyed hotel building to Telegram.

    On Monday afternoon, The New York Times summarized what it knows of the incident as follows: 

    A Ukrainian rocket attack on a hotel in the east of the country killed members of the Wagner Group, a Russian paramilitary force whose leader has closed ties to President Vladimir V. Putin, regional Ukrainian military authorities have said.

    …The Russian state news agency Tass reported in a Telegram post that a HIMARS rocket had destroyed a hotel close to the central market but did not mention the Wagner Group. Using the old Soviet name for the city, Stakhanov, in the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic, the report cited the office of the mayor and said that rescuers were clearing the rubble. It did not give details of casualties or say who was staying in the hotel.

    But the Times report goes on to acknowledge that little can be verified of the strike, stressing that “There was no independent confirmation that Wagner forces were in the hotel, but such a strike would fit a pattern of attacks by Ukrainian forces on critical points of military infrastructure or concentrations of troops in territory occupied by Russian forces.”

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

    The Wagner Group itself stayed quiet in the initial aftermath of the Sunday attack, with no official statements or social media posts verifying the Ukrainian version of events, or that its members suffered any casualties.

    If accurate, however, it would mark a huge escalation given the high visibility of Wagner Group as a leading private contractor firmed with links to President Vladimir Putin, and also given the allegations a devastating strike was carried out using the US HIMARS system – a weapon that allows Ukrainian forces to strike deep behind Russian lines. It also goes without saying that whole incident risks a greater Russian response.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 19:20

  • The "Barbarous Relic" Helped Enable A World More Civilized than Today's
    The “Barbarous Relic” Helped Enable A World More Civilized than Today’s

    Authored by George Ford Smith via The Mises Institute,

    One of history’s greatest ironies is that gold detractors refer to the metal as the barbarous relic. In fact, the abandonment of gold has put civilization as we know it at risk of extinction.

    The gold coin standard that had served Western economies so brilliantly throughout most of the nineteenth century hit a brick wall in 1914 and was never able to recover, or so the story goes. As the Great War began, Europe turned from prosperity to destruction, or more precisely, toward prosperity for some and destruction for the rest. The gold coin standard had to be ditched for such a prodigious undertaking.

    If gold was money, and wars cost money, how was this even possible?

    First, people were already in the habit of using money substitutes instead of money itself—banknotes instead of the gold coins they represented. People found it more convenient to carry paper around in their pockets than gold coins. Over time the paper itself came to be regarded as money, while gold became a clunky inconvenience from the old days.

    Second, banks had been in the habit of issuing more bank-notes and deposits than the value of the gold in their vaults. On occasion, this practice would arouse public suspicion that the notes were promises the banks could not keep. The courts sided with the banks and allowed them to suspend note redemption while staying in business, thus strengthening the government-bank alliance. Since the courts ruled that deposits belonged to the banks, bankers could not be accused of embezzlement. The occasional bank runs that erupted were interpreted as a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people lined up to withdraw their money because they believed their bank was insolvent, the bank soon would be. People had no idea their banks were loaning out most of their deposits. They did not know fractional reserve banking, a form of counterfeiting, was the norm.

    Gold coin redemption requirements put limits on fractional reserve banking. Such limits were not welcomed by banks. Since banks could loan to the government, limitations also capped government spending, so the government did not like the limitations of gold coin redemption either.

    Which brings us to the wall gold allegedly hit.

    Preparing for War Means Preparing for Inflation

    In his 1949 book, Economics and the Public Welfare, economist Benjamin Anderson tells us, “the war [in 1914] came as a great shock, not only to the masses of the American people, but also to most well-informed Americans—and, for that matter, to most Europeans.” And yet, Germany, Russia, and France began accumulating gold prior to the war (with Germany starting first in 1912). Gold was taken “out of the hands of the people” and carried to the reserves of the Reichsbank, the German central bank. People were given paper notes “to take the place of gold in circulation.”

    When war broke out in August 1914, Gary North explains that the pre–World War I policy of gold coin redemption was

    independently but almost simultaneously revoked by European governments. . . . They all then resorted to monetary inflation. This was a way to conceal from the public the true costs of the war. They imposed an inflation tax, and could then blame any price hikes on unpatriotic price gouging. This rested on widespread ignorance regarding economic cause and effects regarding monetary inflation and price inflation. They could not have done this if citizens had possessed the pre-war right to demand payment in gold coins at a fixed rate. They would have made a run on the banks. Governments could not have inflated without reneging on their promises to redeem their currencies for gold coins. So, they reneged while they still had the gold. Better early contract-breaking than late, they concluded.

    If governments had not broken their promise to redeem paper notes for gold coins, they would have had to negotiate their differences rather than engage in one of the deadliest wars in history. Abandoning the gold coin standard, which had always been under government control, was the deciding factor in going to war.

    Though the US did not formally abandon gold during its late participation in the war, it discouraged redemption while roughly doubling the money supply. Blanchard Economic Research discusses the situation in “War and Inflation”:

    War also causes the type of inflation that results from a rapid expansion of money and credit. “In World War I, the American people were characteristically unwilling to finance the total war effort out of increased taxes. This had been true in the Civil War and would also be so in World War II and the Vietnam War. Much of the expenditures in World War I, were financed out of the inflationary increases in the money supply.”

    Governments had a choice to make: fight a long, bloody war for specious reasons, or retain the gold coin standard. They chose war. US leaders found their decision irresistible. It was not J.P. Morgan, Woodrow Wilson, Edward Mandell House, or Benjamin Strong who would be fighting in the trenches.

    When we hear that “going off gold” was the prerequisite for global peace and harmony, we should remember places such as the Meuse-Argonne American Cemetery in France, where grave markers seemingly extend to infinity. These are mostly the graves of young men who died for nothing but the lies of politicians and the profits of the politically connected. Gold wanted no part in the slaughter. But politicians and bankers knew a paper fiat standard was the monetary prerequisite to achieving their goals.

    Conclusion

    John Maynard Keynes, who coined the term “barbarous relic” in reference to the gold standard, wrote about the world that was lost when gold was abandoned:

    What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man that age was which came to an end in August, 1914! . . . The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various products of the whole earth, in such quantity as he might see fit, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep. . . . He could secure forthwith, if he wished it, cheap and comfortable means of transit to any country or climate without passport or other formality, could despatch his servant to the neighboring office of a bank for such supply of the precious metals as might seem convenient, and could then proceed abroad to foreign quarters, without knowledge of their religion, language, or customs, bearing coined wealth upon his person, and would consider himself greatly aggrieved and much surprised at the least interference. But, most important of all, he regarded this state of affairs as normal, certain, and permanent, except in the direction of further improvement, and any deviation from it as aberrant, scandalous, and avoidable.

    If Keynes had read what he wrote, he might have been a better economist. And we might be living in a better world today.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 19:00

  • Sam Bankman-Fried Arrested In The Bahamas, Charged With Wire/Securities Fraud And Money Laundering
    Sam Bankman-Fried Arrested In The Bahamas, Charged With Wire/Securities Fraud And Money Laundering

    Update (8:35pm ET): According to the NYT, the charges against SBF which in an indictment which will be unsealed on Tuesday included wire fraud, wire fraud conspiracy, securities fraud, securities fraud conspiracy and money laundering. Of course, SBF should also be charged for talking too damn much and adding 15 years to his sentence by being a megalomaniac sociopath, but we’d take attempted bribery of the entire Democratic Party instead.

    A lawyer chimes in, pointing out that according to federal sentencing guidelines, SBF could be looking at approximately 612,000 years in prison.

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

    While more than half a million years in prison may seem excessive, life in prison for the disgraced democrat donor sounds about right.

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

    And since SBF was the only person charged in the indictment, it appears that we were right when we said that his co-worker (and former lover) Caroline Ellison would roll on him (see “Alameda’s Caroline Ellison Spotted In NY Amid Speculation She Is About To Roll On SBF After Hiring Iconic Clinton Lawyer”).

    * * *

    Just hours after refusing to attend a Senate hearing on his role in the collapse of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried has been arrested by The Royal Bahamian Police Force, according to a statement from the Attorney General of The Bahamas Sen. Ryan Pinder KC.

    The arrest came after the U.S. filed criminal charges against Bankman-Fried. US prosecutors say they’ll unseal an indictment on Tuesday…

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

    It does make one wonder at the timing, as this happened just a week after Carline Ellison – the former CEO of Alameda Capital – was spotted in NY (not in custody) and had sought council, represented by DC law firm, WilmerHale.

    Did his girlfriend throw him under the bus pre-emptively as she saw the ‘Simple Jack’ defense gaining ground?

    Furthermore, the statement said that the nation expects the U.S. to request The Bahamas extradite Bankman-Fried in short order.

    “As a result of the notification received and the material provided therewith, it was deemed appropriate for the Attorney General to seek SBF’s arrest and hold him in custody pursuant to our nation’s Extradition Act.

    At such time as a formal request for extradition is made, The Bahamas intends to process it promptly, pursuant to Bahamian law and its treaty obligations with the United States.”

    This should not have come as a total surprise after John Ray, the current FTX CEO, wrote in prepared remarks that FTX had ‘commingled’ funds…

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

    Responding to SBF’s arrest, Prime Minister Davis stated:

    “The Bahamas and the United States have a shared interest in holding accountable all individuals associated with FTX who may have betrayed the public trust and broken the law. While the United States is pursuing criminal charges against SBF individually, The Bahamas will continue its own regulatory and criminal investigations into the collapse of FTX, with the continued cooperation of its law enforcement and regulatory partners in the United States and elsewhere.”

    Presumably this means he will not be attending tomorrow’s Congressional hearing with Maxine Waters… which is a shame because we would have liked to hear some answers…

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

    In his prepared remarks for that hearing, Bankman-Fried offered a blunt assessment of his plight. 

    “I would like to start by formally stating under oath: I f*cked up,” he said in the remarks obtained by Bloomberg News.

    Indeed you did young man…

    *  *  *

    Official Statement below:

    Source

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 18:44

  • Why Supertanker Rates Are Suddenly Crashing
    Why Supertanker Rates Are Suddenly Crashing

    Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,

    • Supertanker rates reached record levels earlier this year.

    • Very Large Crude Carrier rates have plunged to just $38,000 per day, falling some 62% from a few weeks ago. 

    • OPEC+ cuts and waning SPR releases are short-term volume headwinds in the oil transportation sector.

    Earlier in the year, supertanker freight rates hit record levels as traders scrambled to park crude in storage to take advantage of a record gap between spot and future prices shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine. Freight rates for very large crude-oil carriers (VLCC) along the Middle East Gulf to China route reached as high as $180,000 a day while VLCC time charter rates for floating storage jumped to as much as $120,000 per day.

    But the situation has now reversed with supertanker rates plunging sharply. According to Bloomberg, ships capable of hauling 2 million barrels of crude are now earning about $38,000 a day, down 62% from just weeks ago after OPEC+ cut production and reduced releases from US reserves lowered seaborne volumes, Bloomberg reports.

    “Clearly OPEC+ cuts and waning SPR releases would both be short-term volume headwinds. They cut production from the first of November and you would expect some lag, and we are seeing activity in the Middle East cooling off somewhat. That’s the simple explanation,” Lars Bastian Ostereng, an analyst at Arctic Securities has told Bloomberg.

    Lower freight rates are encouraging some crude to travel longer distances. For instance, Bloomberg has reported that a South Korean refiner bought 2 million barrels of U.S. crude for March arrival. Meanwhile, offers for long-haul U.S. cargoes for delivery to Asia have declined partly due to lower shipping costs.

    But things could not be more different in the natural gas arena.

    Energy Crisis Sparks Mad Dash For Floating LNG Terminals

    Demand for LNG floating storage and regasification units (LNG-FSRUs) has increased sharply this year, with Europe facing an energy supply squeeze as Russia has progressively cut pipeline gas flows. 

    Demand for LNG imports has intensified after the ruptures on the key Nord Stream pipeline system quashed any prospect of Russia turning its gas taps back on. This has forced dozens of countries in Europe to turn to FSRUs or floating LNG terminals, which are essentially mobile terminals that unload the super-chilled fuel and pipe it into onshore networks.

    Currently, there are 48 FSRUs in operation globally, with Rystad Energy revealing that all but six of them are locked into term charters. 

    According to energy think-tank Ember, the EU has lined up plans for as many as 19 new FSRU projects at an estimated cost of €9.5bn. 

    The biggest beneficiaries are Korean shipbuilding, for whom FSRUs are a major revenue-generator. Korea is the definitive world leader in this field. According to local media, Korean shipbuilders managed to book 46% more orders so far, YoY. And the government’s goal is for the country to grab 75% of the market share by 2030. 

    The setup couldn’t be better. With the supply of these vessels so tight, the cost of charters into Germany has doubled year-on-year to $200,000 a day. 

    “Last year there was a surplus of FSRUs and this year there is a deficit. Up until now there have been sufficient vessels in the market, but as most have now been taken, it’s becoming more challenging,” Per Christian Fett, the global head of LNG at shipbrokers Fearnley LNG in Oslo, has told Bloomberg.

    Texas-based Excelerate Energy Inc. is sending three FSRUs to Europe with combined throughput capacity to import 15 billion cubic meters of gas, or about 10% of the pipeline and LNG imports from Russia in 2021. Demand for the terminals in Europe is so strong that it could make it less affordable for emerging nations to use FSRUs for their own needs.

    “The risk is real that underutilized facilities in other regions of the world could be relocated to Europe, existing charter terms permitting,”Kaushal Ramesh, a senior analyst at consultant Rystad Energy, has said.

    New Dutch terminal

    The Netherlands has taken its first delivery of LNG at a new terminal, boosting Europe’s efforts to wean itself off Russian gas. Previously, the Netherlands could only import LNG through Rotterdam; however, that has changed with the commissioning of two FSRUs, the Golar Igloo and Eemshaven LNG, moored in Eemshaven. The FSRU project was completed in record time Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. With the pair of floating ships now supplying gas to the landlocked Czech Republic and Germany.

    “The arrival of the new LNG terminal is an important step not only for the Netherlands, but for the whole of Europe to completely phase out the dependence on energy from Russia as quickly as possible,” Rob Jetten, Dutch minister for climate and energy, has declared. FRSUs offer the quickest and most efficient way for Europe to end its reliance on the pipelines that bring in large quantities of natural gas from Russia.

    Europe has been working hard to wean itself off Russian energy commodities ever since the latter invaded Ukraine. The European Union has banned Russian coal and plans to block most Russian oil imports by the end of 2022 in a bid to deprive Moscow of an important source of revenue to wage its war in Ukraine.

    But ditching Russian gas is proving to be more onerous than Europe would have hoped for. Whereas supplies of Russian pipeline gas–the bulk of Europe’s gas imports before the Ukraine war–are down to a trickle, Europe has been hungrily scooping up Russian LNG. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the bloc’s imports of Russian liquefied natural gas jumped by 41% Y/Y in the year through August.

    “Russian LNG has been the dark horse of the sanctions regime,” Maria Shagina, research fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, has told WSJ. Importers of Russian LNG to Europe have argued that the shipments are not covered by current EU sanctions and that buying LNG from Russia and other suppliers has helped keep European energy prices in check. 

    Source: WSJ

    LNG Deluge

    Maybe Europe’s LNG imports from Russia can be justified on a purely economic basis.

    Natural gas prices in Europe have plunged over the past few weeks with CNBC reporting that a  “Wave of LNG tankers is overwhelming Europe in an energy crisis and hitting natural gas prices.” According to MarineTraffic via CNBC, 60 LNG tankers, or  ~10% of the LNG vessels in the world, are currently sailing or anchored around Northwest Europe, the Mediterranean, and the Iberian Peninsula. 

    It’s a fair bet that a good chunk of those vessels originated from the United States.

    Europe’s natural gas demand has skyrocketed as the EU tries to lower its reliance on Russian natural gas following its invasion of Ukraine. Europe has displaced Asia as the top destination for the U.S. LNG, and now receives 65% of total exports. The EU has pledged to reduce its consumption of Russian natural gas by nearly two-thirds before the year’s end while Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have vowed to eliminate Russian gas imports outright. Unlike pipeline gas, supercooled LNG is much more flexible and can be shipped from far-flung regions, including the U.S. and Qatar. 

    Europe is not alone here. Shipping data has revealed that China has imported nearly 30% more gas from Russia so far this year, typically at a steep discount.

    Thankfully, there’s a clear upside to imports of Russian LNG to Europe: the continent has managed to fill its gas stores well ahead of schedule, with Reuter’s gas meter revealing that 90% of the EU gas storage is currently filled.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 18:20

  • Democratic Lawmakers Make Rare Visit To Cuba In Normalization Push
    Democratic Lawmakers Make Rare Visit To Cuba In Normalization Push

    Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute, 

    A delegation from the Congressional Progressive Caucus met with the Cuban president, in a rare high-level meeting among government officials. Washington maintains a Cold War-era embargo against Havana.

    The Associated Press reported Representatives James McGovern (D-MA), Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Troy Carter (D-LA) met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel in Havana on Sunday. Miguel Díaz-Canel tweeted, “we address our differences and topics of common interest. The shared will to improve bilateral relations was ratified. I expressed the need to put an end to measures that harm the Cuban population.”

    Representatives James McGovern (D-MA), Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Troy Carter (D-LA) met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel in Havana via Twitter.

    “In the past year, Cuban arrivals to the U.S.-Mexico border have skyrocketed, and a growing number of boats packed with migrants have been found off of Florida’s coast,” the AP has noted. “In October, Cubans replaced Venezuelans as the second most numerous nationality after Mexicans arriving at the border. U.S. authorities stopped Cubans 28,848 times, up 10% from the previous month, the latest data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection shows.”

    Havana was a client of Moscow throughout much of the Cold War. Washington first sanctioned weapon sales to Cuba in 1958. Two years later, Cuba nationalized American-owned businesses. The US responded by placing an embargo on Cuba. 

    In February 1962, Washington extended the blockade of Cuba to include nearly all exports. Eight months later, the US and USSR nearly engaged in a nuclear exchange over strategic missiles deployed in Cuba. 

    Near the end of his second term, Barack Obama took a number of steps to normalize relations with Cuba. President Donald Trump walked back nearly all of Obama’s détente policies. The Trump administration justified the U-turn claiming American diplomats in Cuba were targeted with a mysterious weapon that caused a wide variety of symptoms.

    The US government dubbed the so-called disease ‘Havana Syndrome.’ However, a recording of the alleged weapon was identified to be the sound of native crickets. Joe Biden was expected to adopt the policy of his former boss for Cuba, but the White House has been slow to return to diplomacy with Havana.

    Via Cuban presidency’s office

    In July 2021, the US imposed sanctions on Cuba over human rights abuses committed by government forces. While the Cuban government is repressive, the worst human rights abuses in Cuba occur at Guantanamo Bay. The US military occupies a portion of the island and has operated the infamous torture prison at the base for two decades. 

    In June, the White House eased some sanctions on Havana, signaling some loosening of the embargo. Last month at the UN, the US voted to keep the blockade against Cuba. Recent talks between Washington and Havana have focused on slowing Cuban immigration to the US.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 17:40

  • SEC Chairman Gensler Scrubbed Evidence Of Clinton, Soros And Pelosi Meetings: FOIA Lawsuit
    SEC Chairman Gensler Scrubbed Evidence Of Clinton, Soros And Pelosi Meetings: FOIA Lawsuit

    Sunlight is the best disinfectant – unless you’re Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Gary Gensler – who scrubbed evidence of a meeting with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from his calendar, along with key details of a meeting with Billionaire leftist-operative George Soros.

    He also concealed September 21 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and former Bill Clinton White House official-turned-DC consultant, Minyon Moore.

    Gensler, a former Goldman Sachs executive, Obama administration official, Clinton’s 2016 campaign CFO, and FTX associate, essentially had two calendars. His public calendar showed that on Aug. 7, 2021, he only had a staff meeting, while his private calendar lists a meeting with Hillary Clinton, Fox News reports.

    Thirteen days later on Aug. 20, 2021, Gensler’s public calendar does list a meeting with Soros, but the agenda was hidden. His private calendar reveals that the meeting was held to discuss an upcoming WSJ op-ed Soros was planning to write in which he slammed BlackRock for launching investment products for Chinese customers, while also applauding the company’s ESG policies.

    Gensler’s private calendar revealing the discrepancies was obtained by the watchdog group Energy Policy Advocates and shared with Fox News Digital. The group was only able to obtain the internal records after filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the SEC.

    In recent days, around the time Fox News Digital contacted the SEC, the agency updated Gensler’s public calendar to include his meeting with Clinton in August 2021. As recently as Wednesday the public calendar didn’t include the meeting, and archived copies of the webpage from April also list just a meeting with staff. -Fox News

    When contacted for comment, the SEC initially lied – saying that the Clinton meeting was visible on Gensler’s public calendar. When confronted with screenshots to the contrary, the spokesperson said that the agency updates calendars “from time to time” when inaccuracies are discovered (by watchdog groups?). 

    Gensler also concealed several September 2021 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Minyon Moore – both of which have been now updated on Gensler’s public calendar.

    “That even George Soros is calling out progressive darling BlackRock for craven blundering is striking — even if it did carry the requisite, tribal praise for BlackRock’s truly damaging ‘ESG’ (environmental, social and governance) campaigning to impose their shared ‘climate’ agenda on the U.S., an agenda also much to China’s delight,” said Chris Horner, a lawyer representing Energy Policy Advocates. “That it appears Soros received counsel from Gary Gensler on the mega-donor’s call for more SEC powers as a result is truly astonishing.”

    “This gives further credence to the widespread concern that Gensler is deeply politicizing a supposedly independent commission,” he continued. “He may have been Hillary Clinton’s ‘Progressive Beacon’ not long ago, but Gary Gensler is now the SEC chairman, and his calendar indicates he knew the purpose of the meeting. It seems important to know whose idea this was, why, what was said arranging it and through what channel.”

    According to the SEC spokesperson, Gensler has never asked anyone to ‘draft or submit’ an op-ed, but declined to comment on the meeting with Soros.

    Gensler has faced heavy criticism from business groups and Republican lawmakers for pushing progressive policies, including a climate disclosure rule that would require publicly traded companies to share carbon emissions data and other climate information.

    Reps. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and Andy Barr, R-Ky., two top GOP members on the House Financial Services Committee, introduced legislation this month that would limit the SEC’s ability to require such climate disclosures. -Fox News

    “That this and Gensler’s consultation with Hillary were scrubbed from the public version of his calendar is frankly the least surprising aspect of this,” Horner continued. “The SEC first told Energy Policy Advocates that the publicly posted calendars were all they would get.”

    “Energy Policy Advocates challenged that, pointing out that these sanitized versions, typically posted months after the fact, were certainly not produced from memory and the group wanted the originals. Here you see the reason for the scrubbing these internal versions receive.“

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 17:20

  • Will Central Banks Do What It Takes?
    Will Central Banks Do What It Takes?

    Authored by Carmen Reinhart via Project Syndicate,

    Few would doubt that, after 15 years of ultra-low interest rates, reining in inflation by restoring real positive rates will be difficult. And with 2023 expected to bring heightened global financial and economic risks, monetary tightening will almost certainly become even more complicated.

    The advanced economies are experiencing their highest inflation in 40 years, with a median rate of nearly 9% for the 12 months ending in September 2022. For central banks and financial markets, the expectation – or, more accurately, the hope – that the inflation spike would be transitory has been broadly replaced by the sobering realization that price growth is a persistent problem that demands significant and sustained monetary tightening. With the exception of the Bank of Japan, the major central banks are now raising interest rates and moving to stabilize or reverse balance-sheet growth

    Few would doubt that, after 15 years of exceptionally low interest rates, this policy shift will be difficult, especially with the global economy teetering on the edge of recession. But with 2023 expected to bring heightened global financial and economic risks – not to mention rising geopolitical tensions – it will almost certainly become even more complicated.

    A historical perspective illuminates some of the challenges that are likely to emerge as international financial conditions tighten. Real policy interest rates (nominal interest rates minus inflation) in the world’s financial center, the United States, have been consistently negative since the 2008-09 global financial crisis.

    Real interest rates have remained negative for multiyear periods in a global financial center only four times since the mid-1800s (at least). The first three episodes were during the two world wars and in the aftermath of the OPEC oil shock from 1974-1980. In these three cases, average inflation in the US ranged from 7% to 15%, and the restoration of positive real interest rates was part of an effort to tackle inflation.

    The current period of prolonged negative real interest rates is the longest of the four. Moreover, real rates in other advanced economies have been even more deeply negative. In much of Europe and Japan, nominal interest rates were also negative – a historical novelty.

    Yet another historically anomalous feature of the recent “low-for-long” interest-rate era is that, under the heading of quantitative easing (QE), advanced-economy central banks have purchased massive amounts of government (or government-guaranteed) debt, setting new peacetime records. While central-bank balance sheets shrank modestly after the global financial crisis ended, they remained far larger than they were before the crisis, and swelled to new highs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    This exceptional accommodation explains why, despite significant rate hikes, the US federal funds rate remains well below the 12-month inflation rate of about 8%. Likewise, the European Central Bank’s policy rate remains well below the US federal funds rate, while eurozone inflation nears double digits.

    Against this backdrop, restoring positive real interest rates – thereby stabilizing inflation – may require monetary policy to be kept tighter for longer than many policymakers and market participants seem to expect. Yet it is far from clear that central banks will maintain their commitment to tightening in the face of weakening economic activity. The persistence of inflation in the 1970s can be explained partly by the US Federal Reserve’s tendency to do too little too late or to waver in the tightening process.

    Experience also points to another underappreciated risk: the return of volatility in fixed-income (bond) markets. The recent turmoil in the United Kingdom, which forced the Bank of England to launch an emergency bond-buying program, is a case in point.

    Price volatility is standard in global commodity markets, regardless of the interest rate. But, in fixed-income markets, higher volatility is the handmaiden of higher and more unstable inflation rates. The variation in inflation rates across the major advanced economies was about seven times higher in 1974-89 than in 2008-21.

    This means that, in the era of sustained ultra-low interest rates, fixed-income-market volatility declined steadily. Low and stable inflation rates across the advanced economies also contributed significantly to a reduction in exchange-rate volatility after 2008, as Kenneth Rogoff, Ethan Ilzetski, and I have shown.

    Persistent ultra-low interest rates shaped balance sheets by encouraging private-sector and government borrowing and aggressive risk-taking in search of yield (increasing the likelihood of asset-price bubbles). While ultra-low rates technically strengthen government balance sheets, they may have created or aggravated off-balance-sheet losses, including by undermining pension-fund solvency (especially among local governments). “Low for long” has, in some cases, weakened fiscal discipline and delayed reforms.

    For countries with very high debts (such as Italy), negative interest rates – together with massive debt purchases by central banks – may have replaced debt restructuring, which at least in principle can deliver faster and greater progress on debt reduction. It remains to be seen how that gap will be filled in an era of tighter monetary policy.

    The message is clear: the risks posed by the exit from sustained negative real interest rates extend well beyond recession. The question is how central banks will respond when those risks manifest.

    Central-bank independence seems to have eroded – not necessarily de jure, but possibly de facto, as officials weigh the broader consequences of their actions. If leverage (public and private) and risk exposures raise doubts about financial stability, will central banks return to accommodation? What if fears of a market crash emerge, or sovereign insolvencies seem imminent (as might occur in the eurozone)? In the 1970s, economies endured years of high inflation before the exit from negative real interest rates was complete.

    And yet more risks loom in 2023. China – a key engine of global economic growth after the last global financial crisis – is grappling with financial and political fragilities. Tighter global financial conditions could severely damage emerging-market and developing economies in the short run. Those with large US-dollar-denominated debts will suffer even more. Already, more than 60% of low-income countries are either at high risk of distress or already there.

    But just as the exit from the “low-for-long” interest-rate era raises grave risks, so, too, does persistent high inflation, which, among other things, exacerbates inequality within and across countries. To say that this is a challenging time for governments and central banks would be a massive understatement.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/12/2022 – 17:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 12

Today’s News 12th December 2022

  • Xi Jinping's Saudi Trip & The Overthrow Of Atlanticism
    Xi Jinping’s Saudi Trip & The Overthrow Of Atlanticism

    Via The Cradle, 

    As Atlanticists continue their commitment to a future shaped by energy scarcity, food scarcity, and war with their nuclear-capable neighbors, most states in the Persian Gulf that have long been trusted allies of the west have quickly come to realize that their interests are best assured by cooperating with Eurasian states like China and Russia who don’t think in those zero-sum terms.

    With Chinese President Xi Jinping’s long-awaited three-day visit to Saudi Arabia this past week, a powerful shift by the Persian Gulf’s most strategic Arab state toward the multipolar alliance is being consolidated. Depending on which side of the ideological fence you sit on, this consolidation is being viewed closely with great hope or rage.

    Xi’s visit stands in stark contrast to US President Joe Biden’s underwhelming ‘fist bump’ meeting this summer, which saw the self-professed leader of the free world falling asleep at a conference table and demanding more Saudi oil production while offering nothing durable in return.

    Source: The Cradle

    In contrast, Xi’s arrival was greeted by a multi-cannon salute and Saudi jets painting the red and yellow colors of China’s flag in the skies over Riyadh. Beijing’s delegation of political and business elites will continue to meet with Saudi counterparts to strike long-term strategic deals in cultural, economic and scientific domains.

    The visit culminated in the first ever China-Arab Summit on Friday in which Xi met with 30 heads of state. The Chinese foreign ministry described this as “an epoch-making milestone in the history of the development of China-Arab relations.”

    While $30 billion in deals were signed between Beijing and Riyadh, something much bigger is at play which too few have come to properly appreciate.

    Riyadh’s steps toward the BRI since 2016

    Xi Jinping last visited the kingdom in 2016, to advance Riyadh’s participation in China’s newly unveiled Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). A January 2016 policy report by the Chinese government to all Arab states reads:

    “In the process of jointly pursuing the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road initiative, China is willing to coordinate development strategies with Arab states, put into play each other’s advantages and potentials, promote international production capacity cooperation and enhance cooperation in the fields of infrastructure construction, trade and investment facilitation, nuclear power, space satellite, new energy, agriculture and finance, so as to achieve common progress and development and benefit our two peoples.”

    It was only three months later that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) inaugurated Saudi Vision 2030 which firmly outlined a new foreign policy agenda much more compatible with China’s “peaceful development” spirit.

    After decades serving as an Atlanticist client state with no viable manufacturing prospects or autonomy beyond its role in supporting western-managed terror operations, Saudi Vision 2030 demonstrated the first signs of creative thinking in years, with an outlook toward a post-oil age.

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

    On the energy front, China Energy Corp is building a sprawling 2.6 GW solar power station in Saudi Arabia, and Chinese nuclear developers are helping Riyadh develop its vast uranium resources while also mastering all branches of the nuclear fuel cycle.

    In 2016, both nations signed an MoU to build fourth generation gas-cooled nuclear reactors. This follows the UAE’s recent leap into the 21st century with 2.7 GW of energy now constructed. By early 2017, Riyadh had firmly bought its ticket on the New Silk Road with a $65 billion agreement integrating the Saudi Vision 2030 and BRI with a focus on petrochemical integration, engineering, refining, procurement, construction, carbon capture, and upstream/downstream development.

    In the new post-American epoch, signs of this spirit of cooperation and bridge building have increasingly come to be felt, even while its effects have been forcibly restrained – as millions of Yemenis suffering under seven years of war can testify.

    Unlike the Atlanticist fixation on Green New Deals which threaten to annihilate industry and farming, Riyadh’s post-oil outlook is much more synergistic with China’s idea of “sustained growth” that demands nuclear power, continued hydrocarbons, and robust agro-industrial development.

    China’s trade with Saudi Arabia rose to $87.3 billion in 2021, which saw a 39 percent increase over 2020, while US-Saudi trade has collapsed from $76 billion in 2012 to only $29 billion in 2021. Some of this Beijing-Riyadh trade may now be conducted in the Chinese Yuan, which will only undermine the US-Saudi relationship further.

    In the first 10 months of 2022, China’s imports from Saudi Arabia were $57 billion and exports to the kingdom rose to $30.3 billion. China is additionally building 5G systems and cultivating a vast technology hub with a focus on selling electronic goods, all while helping Saudi Arabia build up an indigenous manufacturing sector.

    A trend of Harmonization

    Despite the continued chaos in Yemen, and economic devastation in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, Beijing’s subtle trend has nonetheless been one of healing with Saudi Arabia – and regional power Turkiye. Saudi Arabia and Turkiye have often acted as rivals, and front two distinct foreign agendas with broad regional ambitions that overlap on many fronts. But despite this competitive past, higher necessities have induced both nations to harmonize their foreign policy outlooks with a new “look east” focus.

    This was expressed during the Saudi crown prince’s visit to Ankara in June 2022 where the two heads of state called for “a new era of cooperation” with a focus on political, economic, military and cultural cooperation outlined in a joint communique.

    Only days after MbS’s return from Turkiye, then-Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi visited Jeddah to promote regional stability stating in a press release “they changed points of view on a number of issues that would contribute to supporting and strengthening regional security and stability.”

    Iraq and Saudi Arabia had only re-established diplomatic ties in November 2020 due to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait 30 years earlier. Between 2021-2022, Iraq had worked hard to host bilateral talks between Saudi Arabia and Iran with five rounds of talks held and Kadhimi stating his belief that “reconciliation is near.” Tehran-Riyadh diplomatic ties were cut in the aftermath of the 2016 execution of outspoken Saudi Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, prompting the storming of the Saudi embassy in Tehran by angry protestors.

    In March 2022, MbS stated that Iran and Saudi Arabia “were neighbors forever” and stated that it is “better for both of us to working it out and to look for ways in which we can co-exist.”

    By August 23, 2022, the UAE and Kuwait created a new milestone by restarting diplomatic relations with Iran. And although nearly every Persian Gulf state (plus Turkiye) had devoted years to supporting regime change in Syria, a new reality has imposed itself with all Arab parties veering toward the Chinese BRI model of regional integration and economic development.

    The Key Role of Iran

    Not only is Iran a key player in the Greater Eurasian Partnership serving as a strategic hub for the southern route of China’s BRI, but it is also a keystone of the Russia-Iran-India-led International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) which has become a major force synergizing with the BRI.

    Iraq and Iran themselves are in the final stages of building the long-awaited Shalamcheh-Basra railway which will unite the two nations by rail for the first time in decades while also offering a potential extension to the already existent 1500 km railway through Iraq to Syria’s border.

    The climate for cooperation was undoubtedly made possible by the presence of Chinese economic diplomacy which established a 25 year, $400 billion energy and security deal with Iran – but also Russia, whose similar but smaller $25 billion, twenty-year deal with Tehran may easily expand to $40 billion in Russian investments in Iran’s vast oil and natural gas fields in the coming years.

    Saudi Arabia and Russia’s relationship with OPEC+ demonstrated its potency this summer when Riyadh won the ire of Washington by not only denying Biden’s requests for increased oil production, but cutting overall oil production and driving up global prices of oil. Saudi Arabia benefited by vastly increased imports of discounted Russian oil which were then sold to a desperate Europe.

    Furthermore, Saudi plans to join the global hub of multipolarity itself, BRICS+ (alongside Turkiye, Egypt, and Algeria), in addition to recently becoming a full-fledged Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) dialogue partner, have placed its destiny ever deeper into the growing Multipolar Alliance.

    With the increased potential for stability and harmonization of interests across various power blocs, an atmosphere more conducive to long-term economic investments is finally presenting itself to Chinese investors who had long looked upon conflict-ridden West Asia with justifiable trepidation.

    In August 2022, the Saudi state oil company Aramco and China’s Petroleum and Chemical Corporation Ltd signed an MOU expanding on the aforementioned $65 billion cooperation deal of 2017, which involves the construction of Fujian Refining and Petrochemical Company (FREP) and Sinopec Senmei Petroleum Company (SSPC) in Fujian, China, and Yanbu Aramco Sinopec Refining Company (YASREF) in Saudi Arabia.

    Rail and interconnectivity

    Perhaps most exciting are prospects for interconnectivity that play directly into the development corridors tied to the BRI. In Saudi Arabia, this train has moved steadily apace with the 450 km high speed Haramain Railway built by China Railway Construction Company connecting Mecca to Medina completed in 2018.

    Discussions are well underway to extend this line to the 2400 km North South Railway from Riyadh to Al Haditha completed in 2015. Meanwhile, 460 km of rail connecting all Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members is currently under construction, which is driving reforms in engineering, trade schools, and manufacturing hubs across the Arabian Peninsula.

    Source: The Cradle

    In 2021, all GCC states gave their full support to a $200 billion Persian Gulf-Red Sea high speed railway dubbed “The Saudi Landbridge,” which also dovetails another $500 billion megaproject with vast Chinese investments, dubbed the futuristic NEOM mega-city on the Red Sea.

    The Eurasianists stand to gain

    It can only be hoped that this new chemistry of harmonization and win-win cooperation may soon provide a key to ending the fires of conflict in Yemen and other regional states.

    Further, with Russia and China both helping to broker diplomatic backchannels, and with Iran playing an active role within this process, perhaps negotiations for reconstruction can begin in this war-torn zone of conflict. It is not an extreme stretch of the imagination to see the new Persian Gulf-Red Sea rail project extending north into Egypt and south into Yemen.

    Looking at a map of the region, one can imagine the reactivation of the “Bridge of the Horn of Africa” first unveiled in 2009, that would have extended rail across the 25 km Bab el Mandeb strait connecting pipelines and rail lines into Djibouti and East Africa, more broadly.

    While a western-manipulated Arab Spring derailed that concept in 2011, and the Saudi war against Yemen drove it further under ground since 2015, perhaps this new spirit of inter-civilizational cooperation under a new economic architecture liberated from the Atlanticist-dominated dollar system may provide just what it takes to revive the idea once again.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 23:30

  • NBC Makes Big Correction In Report On US-Russia Prisoner Swap
    NBC Makes Big Correction In Report On US-Russia Prisoner Swap

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

    NBC News has updated a story that initially claimed President Joe Biden’s administration had a choice between freeing basketball player Brittney Griner and Marine veteran Paul Whelan in the prisoner exchange for Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout.

    Citing a person described as a “senior U.S. official,” NBC initially reported that the U.S. government wanted both Griner and Whelan freed as part of the swap.

    “But the official said Russia has treated Whelan differently because he is an accused spy, and that the Kremlin gave the White House the choice of either Griner or Whelan—or none,” the story said.

    Griner was jailed because she brought, by her own admission, cannabis into Russia. Whelan is behind bars because he was convicted of espionage. Whelan has maintained his innocence.

    U.S. officials have described both as “wrongfully detained.”

    (Left) Paul Whelan, a former U.S. marine, in Moscow on June 15, 2020. (Right) Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA) basketball player Brittney Griner at the Khimki Court, outside Moscow on Aug. 4, 2022. (Kirill Kudryavtsev/AFP via Getty Images)

    After Biden spoke about the exchange, claiming there was “not a choice of which American to bring home,” NBC stealthily updated its piece without noting that it was altered, according to archived versions reviewed by The Epoch Times.

    The outlet’s updated version stated, “But the official said Russia has treated Whelan differently because he is an accused spy, and that the Kremlin ultimately gave the White House the choice of either Griner or no one after different options were proposed.”

    Hours later, after critics noted the stealth edit, NBC added a correction.

    “An earlier version of this article misstated the choice the Biden administration was given over hostages. It was to swap for Griner or no one, not a choice between Griner or Whelan,” the correction states.

    An NBC spokesperson did not respond to a list of emailed questions, including why the initial update did not include a correction and what it means when it says it “misstated the choice” the government faced.

    U.S. President Joe Biden (R) speaks on the release of Olympian and WNBA player Brittney Griner from Russian custody, at the White House in Washington on Dec. 8, 2022. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    ‘Left Behind’

    Critics said the administration should have negotiated the release of Whelan.

    “Paul Whelan has been let down and left behind at least three times by 2 Presidents,” the Bring Our Families Home Campaign said in a statement.

    “He deserves better from his government, and our Campaign implores President Biden to urgently secure Paul’s immediate return using all tools available.”

    White House officials have backed Biden, saying the United States did not have a choice.

    “In recent weeks, it became clear that while Russians were willing to reach an agreement to secure Brittney’s release, they continue to treat Paul Whelan differently, given the nature of the totally illegitimate charges they have levied against Paul,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters in Washington this week. “Unfortunately, the choice became to either bring Brittney home or no one.”

    “This was not a choice for us on—of which American to bring home. That was not the choice. It was a choice between bringing home one American or bringing home none,” she added later.

    “Our choices was: Brittney or no one at all. Bring home one American or no American at all.”

    A senior administration official, speaking to reporters on background, offered a similar view.

    “So I want to be very clear: This was not a situation where we had a choice of which American to bring home. It was a choice between bringing home one particular American—Brittney Griner—or bringing home none,” the official said.

    U.S. Basketball player Brittney Griner looks through bars as she listens to the verdict standing in a cage in a courtroom in Khimki, outside Moscow on Aug. 4, 2022. (Evgenia Novozhenina/Pool via AP)

    Whelan

    Whelan said after the swap that he was “greatly disappointed that more has not been done to secure my release, especially as the four year anniversary of my arrest is coming up.”

    David Whelan, Whelan’s brother, said he was glad Griner was freed but relayed fresh disappointment, noting that Whelan was also not released in a swap that brought American Trevor Reed home earlier this year.

    “As I have often remarked, Brittney’s and Paul’s cases were never really intertwined. It has always been a strong possibility that one might be freed without the other. The sentiments I shared in April about Trevor are unchanged: this is the event we wish for so much for our own family. She will be reunited with her family. Brittney is free. And Paul is still a hostage,” David Whelan said.

    “But how many more times do I need to write that?”

    Other Americans still in Russian custody include Marc Fogel, a teacher who was arrested in Moscow in 2021 with marijuana, which he reportedly uses as medicine following a spinal injury.

    Bout was serving a 25-year sentence for conspiring to kill Americans. He was convicted in late 2011.

    Bout was described by then-Attorney General Eric Holder as “one of the world’s most prolific arms dealers.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 22:30

  • China's Top Medical Advisor Says Omicron No More Dangerous Than The Flu
    China’s Top Medical Advisor Says Omicron No More Dangerous Than The Flu

    About a year ago, the nation was on the verge of another lockdown when a tidal wave of Omicron infections prompted those who use masks alone… in their car… with their windows down, to hyperventilate that covid is about to kill several million more Americans, and anyone who suggested that this was nothing more than the flu was promptly suspended from twitter most likely by this guy, er gal: Melissa Ingle.

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

    … deplatformerd demonetized and canceled.

    So it was with great shock that we read today that once again, all those “conspiracy theorists” were dead on: according to Chinese officials, who have continued to downplay the risks of Covid-19 as the country’s idiotic covid zero restrictions are further eased after the economy ground to a halt following two years of lockdowns, with a top medical adviser saying the fatality rate from the omicron variant of the virus is in line with influenza.

    Echoing what so many mouth-breathing rednecks said for most of the past year – at least according to their far more intelligent (in their own opinion) big-city dwelling liberal peers all of whom have at least one and more mental disorders, the death rate from omicron is around 0.1%, similar to the common flu, and the infection rarely reaches the lungs, Zhong Nanshan was quoted in an interview with state news agency Xinhua. Most people recover from the variant within seven to 10 days, he said.

    Zhong’s comments follow the government’s latest line on the coronavirus, which – two weeks after sporadic violent protests nearly sunk the Xi regime – has been suddenly talking down the disease’s dangers as China moves toward exiting its Covid Zero policy. The nation reported 10,514 local infections for Saturday, more than 20% lower than Friday. Doubts have been raised about the accuracy of case numbers because fewer people are being tested, but one could say the same about the numbers on the way up.

    But one thing is certain: China’s covid slowdown is history.

    Still, China is not in the clear just yet: on Saturday, Zhong was quoted saying that there’s an “urgent need” to increase booster-shot rates as travel during upcoming holidays will raise the risk of a large-scale spread.

    “It’s unlikely people will stay put for the 2023 Lunar New Year holiday so I advise those who will travel home to get booster shots so that even if they are infected, symptoms will be mild,” he said.

    The Lunar New Year holiday runs from Jan. 21 to Jan. 27 but usually lasts about 40 days as people take off before and after the official break. Hundreds of millions of Chinese return to their home provinces for family reunifications during New Year.

    China issued a plan on Sunday to enhance capacity of county-level medical facilities to better protect people living in rural areas from Covid. It requested such hospitals to boost their intensive care unit capacity by the end of December. Medical staffers from pediatrics and other units need to receive training on how to look after patients in ICU, according to the plan.

    Separately, in a Sunday commentary, the Communist Party’s flagship People’s Daily said local governments have swiftly put into practice the 10 new Covid measures announced by the National Health Commission last week, including a reduction of mass testing and loosening of quarantine rules. Regions including Chongqing, and cities in Liaoning, Shandong and Guangdong have urged schools to resume offline teaching, the paper reported separately.

    These new measures will pave the way for China to further optimize Covid controls in the future and eventually claim victory over the outbreak, the commentary said.

    But back to the main topic, the end of covid in China, state-backed tabloid Global Times on Sunday cited Zeng Guang, a former chief epidemiologist at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, as saying that suggestions for China to downgrade its Covid control from the top Category A to Category B has gained momentum in the scientific world.

    Once Chinese scientists have reached a consensus that variations of the coronavirus continue to be less dangerous, China will downgrade its Covid control at the right time, Zeng said. China currently classifies Covid-19 as a Category-B disease, but is controlling it as a Category-A disease.

    China’s road to reopening could be “bumpy,” which coupled with the scenario of a mild recession in Europe and the US may lead to a tougher economic climate, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. President John Waldron said via video link at Shanghai’s Bund Summit on Saturday.

    “That will obviously have some negative implications for growth,” Waldron said, in remarks that underscore how lenders are gauging the impact of China’s pivot from a Covid Zero policy.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 22:00

  • Ex-CIA Officer: The Lies Spies Tell About Assange
    Ex-CIA Officer: The Lies Spies Tell About Assange

    Authored by John Kiriakou via Consortium News,

    I attended a panel discussion at the National Press Club last week (Monday) about the fate of WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange. The event happened to be at the National Press Club, but it was actually sponsored by the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy, and International Security at George Mason University. Hayden, the notorious former director of both the C.I.A. and the N.S.A., who oversaw the C.I.A.’s torture program during part of the George W. Bush administration, was front and center at the event. 

    The panel, moderated by Sasha Ingber, a national security correspondent in Newsy’s Washington, D.C., bureau, included Assange’s U.S. lawyer Barry Pollack, one of the finest criminal defense attorneys in America; Gabe Rottman, a senior attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press; the notorious Mark Zaid, who bills himself as a “whistleblower attorney,” but who has probably done more damage to legitimate whistleblowers than any other person in Washington; and Holden Triplett, a former F.B.I. agent and former director for counterintelligence at President Donald Trump’s National Security Council.

    Former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden (left) at Julian Assange event Monday. (Joe Lauria)

    While acknowledging my own biases (Pollack is a genius and Zaid is a scoundrel), the one thing that surprised me was how utterly clueless Holden Triplett was. This is a guy who promotes himself as a counterintelligence expert. He runs a consulting company hilariously named “Trenchcoat Advisors.” 

    Triplett claims to have been a top F.B.I. counterintelligence official in the U.S. embassies in Moscow and Beijing. And he served Donald Trump loyally for two years in a GS-14 position at the White House.  Triplett made no mention of why he left the F.B.I. before qualifying for the pension. What struck me most about Triplett was his willingness during the event to throw a rhetorical turd into the middle of the room and then to expect the audience to nod politely and agree with him. 

    On more than one occasion, he made completely unfounded statements about Julian Assange, only to then have the neoliberal Washington swells nod in agreement, despite having literally no evidence to back up his assertions. He said, choosing his language carefully, for example, that “When I look at anything Julian Assange has done over the years, whatever it is has the hallmarks of a Russian intelligence operation.” 

    ‘Hallmarks’ & ‘Earmarks’

    Notice the language there. He didn’t say that Julian was a Russian agent. He didn’t say that WikiLeaks was working for or on behalf of the Russians. He said that it all had the hallmarks of something that Russian intelligence would do. 

    April 5, 2010: Julian Assange addressing National Press Club about WikiLeaks Collateral Damage video from Baghdad showing U.S. air attacks that killed civilians. (Jennifer 8. Lee, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)

    The language is meant, of course, to bring the DNC/MSNBC crowd over to his point of view. And judging by the reception he got, he was mostly successful.

    Triplett’s disingenuous and damaging statements reminded me very much of an open letter published in October 2019 and signed by more than 50 retired senior C.I.A. and other Intelligence Community officials, saying that the Hunter Biden laptop “had all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” 

    They ignored the fact that Hunter Biden said that it was his laptop. These esteemed intelligence professionals offered no proof of an intelligence operation, of course, even though most, if not all, currently maintain their security clearances. They threw that same rhetorical turd into the middle of the room and expected all the rest of us to nod in agreement.

    It wasn’t flunkies who signed this letter. It was otherwise serious people, including National Press Club conference host Hayden; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper; former Secretary of Defense and C.I.A. Director Leon Panetta (himself a well-documented leaker); torture-supporter and former C.I.A. Director John Brennan; torture apologist and former Acting C.I.A. Director Mike Morrell; among others. 

    They offered no proof of any ties between the Hunter Biden laptop and Russia, between Trump’s election as president in 2016 (which they went on about at length) and Russia, or between WikiLeaks and Russia. 

    We’re just supposed to take their word for it because they’re important, smart and well-placed. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard the likes of these signatories say, when somebody disagrees with them, “Well, if you could only see the information that I see…,” or “If you had access to the information that I have access to … .”

    It’s time to call a spade a spade. They’re lying. And they want us to believe their lies. I was at the C.I.A. too. I underwent the same training that they underwent. And if there was one thing the C.I.A. taught me, it was that if I was going to make a judgment or draw a conclusion, I had to offer proof. I wasn’t allowed to hide behind language like, “all the hallmarks of” or “leads me to believe…”. If you don’t have any proof, keep your mouth shut.

    In the meantime, I was greatly heartened by the confidence that Pollack exuded at the National Press Club event. Julian Assange is in good hands. Barry will provide him with the best defense possible. 

    As for these other characters, it’s up to the rest of us to counter them and their propaganda. It’s up to us to demand the truth.

    John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act—a law designed to punish spies. He served 23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush administration’s torture program.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 21:30

  • Oregon Eyes 2023 Crackdown On Illegal Marijuana Growers
    Oregon Eyes 2023 Crackdown On Illegal Marijuana Growers

    Oregon lawmakers are looking to crack down on illegal marijuana growers who aren’t abiding by the state’s 2014 laws governing recreational use and cultivation.

    Kristian Foden-Vencil / OPB

    Year-to-date, approximately 95 metric tons of illegally grown marijuana have been seized across the state, according to the Oregon-Idaho High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area task force. In 2019, they seized just 8 metric tons.

    The 2014 legislation was supposed to eliminate problems caused by “uncontrolled manufacture” of the drug, however growers haven’t all magically agreed to the taxes and red tape that accompanied the legalization. Now, officials who have heard complaints from everyone from legal growers to the police are looking to crack down, AP reports.

    Now, a draft bill set for introduction in the 2023 legislative session would double the maximum fine and prison sentence for illegal grows to 10 years and $250,000 for those growing more than 100 plants, or possession in excess of 32 times the legal limits.

    FILE: Oregon State police troopers seized an estimated 500,000 pounds of processed marijuana in 2021 after serving a search warrant on a property in White City, north of Medford. (via Oregon Live)

    The bill would also limit personal possession to 2 ounces of marijuana in a public place, and 8 ounces at home.

    The measure also holds people accountable for environmental damage and prohibits use of water at locations not licensed for growing marijuana. Addressing immigrant labor, the draft bill makes it a crime for managers of an illegal grow site to confiscate a passport or immigration document, to threaten to report a person to a government agency for arrest or deportation, or withhold wages without lawful justification.

    Some parts of Oregon have seen record seizures as police raid plantation after plantation. Police say foreign criminal gangs have become involved, from Mexico, Russia, China and other countries. -AP

    In October, a single raid in Yamhill County yielded 76,930 pounds of marijuana –  roughly $76 million worth, the largest pot bust on record. According to the report, the haul would be worth $269 million on the East Coast.

    “Investigators found the entire property had been converted to facilitate the growth, storage, processing, and packaging of marijuana to be shipped or transported out of the area,” said the sheriff’s office.

    And in another October raid, Oregon State Police, with the assistance of SWAT officers, raided a property in southern Oregon – destroying around 1,000 pounds of illegal, processed marijuana. Firearms, stolen vehicles and the carcass of a black bear were found in the raid.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 21:00

  • Dupe Or Designated Defendant? The Criminal Case Against Jack Dorsey
    Dupe Or Designated Defendant? The Criminal Case Against Jack Dorsey

    Authored by Jonathan Turley via jonathanturley.org,

    The latest Twitter disclosures have raised potential legal liability for Twitter and its executives. No one appears more at risk than Twitter’s former CEO Jack Dorsey

    It is an ironic turn of events since Dorsey supported the takeover by Elon Musk and has called for all files to be released without filtering. Dorsey has the feel of a “designated defendant,” someone who was pushed forward by others to take any legal hit.

    On its face, Dorsey has vulnerability after the latest release. He was repeatedly asked by members of Congress about censoring and shadow-banning, which has now been confirmed in these files.

    In September 2018, Dorsey testified under oath and denied what these files appear to now confirm. Rep. Mike Doyle, D., Pa., asked, “Social media is being rigged to censor conservatives. Is that true of Twitter?”

    Dorsey responded, “No.”

    Doyle then asked “Are you censoring people?”

    “No,” Dorsey said.

    “Twitter’s shadow-banning prominent Republicans… is that true?” Doyle asked.

    Dorsey again said no.

    Dorsey was also asked about my prior testimony on private censorship in circumventing the First Amendment as a type of censorship by surrogate. Dorsey and the other CEOs were asked about my warning of a “‘little brother’ problem, a problem which private entities do for the government that which it cannot legally do for itself.” In response, Dorsey insisted that “we don’t have a censoring department.”

    It now appears that the entire company was operating as a censoring department. However, there were in fact super-censors. Dorsey did not mention the Strategic Response Team-Global Escalation Team (SRT-GET), which operated above what journalist Bari Weiss described as “a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company’s policy on paper.”

    That group reportedly included Vijaya Gadde, head of Legal, Policy and Trust; Yoel Roth, the global head of Trust and Safety; CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.

    Notably, others at the company made similar denials as Dorsey but may not have done so under oath. In 2018, Gadde and head of product Kayvon Beykpour expressly declared, “We do not shadow-ban. And we certainly don’t shadow-ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.”

    Even if untrue, lying in public is generally not a crime. However, when you repeat a lie to federal investigators or Congress or the courts, it becomes a federal offense.

    The question is whether Dorsey was left in the dark on these decisions. He was reportedly a member of SRT-GET. However, some of the files indicate that these decisions may have been made without his knowledge. That includes the decision on the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, which Dorsey called a “total mistake.”

    Dorsey could quibble over the term “shadow-banning” but the question was obviously meant as a follow-up to the inquiry over “rigging” discourse on the platform. He could also stress other answers, where he tied “shadow-banning” to a more subjective notion of political bias. For example, Dorsey also repeated these statements in public, including an appearance with Sean Hannity on Fox, when he was asked if “Twitter has ever been involved in shadow-banning, Dorsey again categorically denied such practices: “We do not shadow-ban according to political ideology or viewpoint.”

    For most people, Dorsey’s comments clearly suggested that there was no shadow-banning. However, he could claim that he knew that they were shadow-banning but that they were not doing so “according to political ideology or viewpoint.” That is clearly refuted by the new files showing a hair-triggered censorship system directed against conservative and Republican posters.

    The other defense is lack of knowledge but, even if accepted, that will raise the question of whether this was a case of a designated defendant or willful blindness. 

    In some cases, there is a suspicion that corporations will assign some executive to sign off on compliance or certifications as the fall guy or designated defendant if things go wrong. The chump is often a junior lawyer or executive who takes personal responsibility for certifying a false fact.

    Dorsey is clearly no chump or junior executive. The question is then whether this was a case of willful blindness or an attempt by other executives like Gadde or Roth to give him plausible deniability by keeping him in the dark.  He then became the public face in unequivocally and confidently denying practices like shadow-banning.

    The greatest defense for Dorsey may be found in the Justice Department itself. Any prosecution of Twitter executives could prove a hard sell for Attorney General Merrick Garland, whose department has been repeatedly accused of pronounced political bias. 

    While Garland has aggressively pursued contempt sanctions against Trump associates, it is not clear if he would prove as aggressive with Democratic allies like Dorsey or other Twitter executives. He could face that question if the House under the GOP pursues perjury or contempt sanctions.

    Dorsey once said about Twitter that “It’s really complex to make something simple.” He may now be hoping that his answers before Congress were simple enough to make any prosecution complex.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 20:30

  • Destructive Ambiguity In Crypto Regulation
    Destructive Ambiguity In Crypto Regulation

    By Marcel Kasumovich, Deputy CIO of One River Asset Management

    Market Notes: Destructive Ambiguity In Regulation

    “Had we over-regulated the Internet early on, we would have missed out on many innovations that we can’t imagine living without today. The same is true for blockchain. Disruptive technologies rarely fit neatly into existing regulatory considerations, and rigid regulatory frameworks have repeatedly stifled innovation. It’s likely that innovations in the Blockchain will outpace policy, let’s not slow it down.”

    Brookings Institution made this declaration in 2015. It is time to heed those wise words.

    But it’s money. The stakes are higher. That digital assets have lived to see their fifth bear market is already an achievement. Liberty Reserve is a reminder of how hard it is to survive. Regulatory clarity is THE issue. It’s not easy. It’s especially hard for technology built to shred powerful middlemen. Be attentive to the resilient components of the ecosystem. They matter most in disruptive downturns. Those are the building blocks. Today, it is Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Stablecoins – more than two-thirds of the market cap (Figure 1). Tomorrow, it will be the things built on those foundations.

    Discussions on regulation are met with a natural first response: I’m not a lawyer. You don’t have to be. Follow the money. That trail will tell you a lot about regulatory policy and compliance. Where are my assets? Most investors want to spend time focused on price risk and portfolio construction, not operational ones. Yet, the digital financial crisis has investors reasonably going back to the basics: Custody, the foundation for institutional scale.

    “Self-custody.” Aren’t digital assets about bringing users control? Yes, to a point. The concept of unhosted wallets, or “self-custody,” removes counterparty risk entirely. It pushes all the risk to the investor. The user controls the keys, and thus, the assets. For individuals, this can be a powerful tool. The keys are used to identify your place on the blockchain. However, lose the keys, and you lose your assets. It also introduces various regulatory issues, such as the Travel Rule for money under the Bank Secrecy Act. Unhosted wallets need to adhere to these rules to avoid illicit activity.

    But unhosted wallets are not institution friendly. “The investor” in this case is an institutional machine. Private keys can be broken into pieces. To unlock assets requires an entire key, and diversity of the pieces can ensure security. Phrases can be stored in multiple places. Unhosted wallets could be widespread. But this isn’t where institutions start. Reasonably. State Street. BNY Mellon. These are familiar custodial arrangements and native digital players need to come as close as possible to replicating them. And they have.

    Demand for hosted, third-party custody solutions has mirrored that of institutional interest in digital assets. Figure 2 illustrates industry players in custodial solutions over time. There’s a surge in 2018, just after the super-spike in digital assets in 2017. In the most recent cycle, traditional banks were drawn to provide custodial support, just in time for the peak in 2021 asset prices. The solutions are there, but not all are created equal. And investors would like tools familiar to traditional markets.

    “Qualified custodian” is one of those familiar elements. Digital custodians were attracted to this standard. But there’s an issue – it is defined by the Custody Rule, regulated by the SEC, and there appears no urgency to provide clarity for digital assets. Entities seeking regulatory clarity found creative solutions through State Chartered Trust Companies. Independently capitalized. Segregated assets. 100% reserved. Deep cold storage solutions. In 2018, digital “qualified custodians” were led by the New York State Department of Financial Services. It is an institutional standard.

    Yet, there are roadblocks imposed by regulators. The Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 took banks out of the custody business. “The staff believes that Entity A should present a liability on its balance sheet to reflect its obligation to safeguard the crypto-assets held for its platform users.” Traditional custody is off balance sheet. Custodial services are uneconomic as banks are capitalized to gross balance sheets. A win for digital custodians? Not quite. The Bulletin required disclosure that custodial assets may not be protected in bankruptcy, adding uncertainty rather than clarity.

    Pulling on the disclosure thread takes us down another regulatory path – the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) that governs all US commercial transactions. Digital assets do not fit neatly into UCC. We learned the same with our Digital Income strategy. And there has been little effort to provide clarity to date. Service providers are now spelling it out for users. Agreements are being updated to state the applicability of UCC Article 8. That article implies custodial assets are bankruptcy remote from general creditors. This is the same legal protection offered in traditional asset markets.

    Clarity is being realized by enforcement. The wave of bankruptcy is bringing clarity to custody issues – Celsius’s segregated customer assets are being returned to the customer. And precedent is being set on the value of regulatory clarity. LedgerX, a derivative intermediary, was part of the FTX family and excluded from the bankruptcy filing. It has been subject to CFTC regulatory oversight since 2017. Simple things followed. Communication lines between LedgerX and the CFTC. Capital requirements to meet operating costs. Segregation of client assets. Regulation worked.

    Don’t let any crisis go to waste. The transformative potential of digital assets is driven by their resiliency – the foundations can’t be easily killed. Big thinkers on money, like Hayek, contemplated the issues holistically. When in doubt go back to those. Hayek’s thinking was simple – competition is good. Why should money and its regulations be different? Hayek evaluated innovation in the monetary sector through digital currencies long before their existence. His last revision on the topic was in 1990, at the age of 91. Life is long. Live it.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 20:00

  • North Carolina Treasurer Wants BlackRock CEO Larry Fink To 'Resign Or Be Removed'
    North Carolina Treasurer Wants BlackRock CEO Larry Fink To ‘Resign Or Be Removed’

    Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    You might call it the “battle of BlackRock.”

    BlackRock CEO Larry Fink attends a session at the World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos on Jan. 23, 2020. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)

    The conflict, which pits Republican officials in states across the country against the world’s largest asset manager, has only intensified in recent months.

    Just days ago, Florida became the latest state to pull money from BlackRock—in its case, $2 billion in state-controlled assets.

    The state’s chief financial officer, Jimmy Patronis, explained that “using Florida’s cash to fund BlackRock’s social-engineering project isn’t something we signed up for.”

    Now, North Carolina Treasurer Dale Folwell has taken the rhetoric up another notch.

    In a Dec. 9 letter to BlackRock’s board of directors, he called for the firm’s CEO, Larry Fink, to “resign or be removed” from his position.

    BlackRock CEO Larry Fink during the 79th Annual Convention of Bankers in Acapulco, Mexico, on March 11, 2016. (Pedro Pardo/AFP/Getty Images)

    Folwell argued that BlackRock’s focus on “environmental, social and corporate governance” (ESG) under Fink’s leadership runs contrary to its fiduciary duty—in other words, its legal obligation to serve its clients’ best interests.

    Those many clients include the North Carolina Retirement System, for which Folwell serves as sole fiduciary. Of the $111.4 billion fund, $14 billion is presently managed by BlackRock, according to the letter.

    ESG is an investment philosophy that aims to embed particular values—for example, concern about climate change—into the financial system. Its conservative critics argue that it distorts the economy by privileging politically correct sentiment over the hard realities of the market.

    Folwell warned that Fink’s “pursuit of a political agenda has gotten in the way of BlackRock’s same fiduciary duty.”

    “A focus on ESG is not a focus on returns and potentially could force us to violate our own fiduciary duty,” he added—a broad hint, perhaps, at a potential future willingness to divest from the asset manager.

    Florida’s divestment from BlackRock isn’t the only such move in the last several months.

    Under Missouri’s Republican Attorney General Eric Schmitt, now the Show Me State’s senator-elect, millions in Missourians’ retirement dollars were taken out of BlackRock’s hands.

    State Attorney General Eric Schmitt and family members attend an election-night gathering after winning the Republican primary for U.S. Senate at the Sheraton in Westport Plaza in St Louis, Mo., on Aug. 2, 2022. (Kyle Rivas/Getty Images)

    Louisiana, Utah, and Arkansas have followed similar courses of action.

    The biggest concern from many of those states has been BlackRock’s efforts to steer investors away from fossil fuels, out of a stated concern with climate change driven by human activity.

    In his 2020 Letter to Shareholders, Fink wrote that “in the near future—and sooner than most anticipate—there will be a significant reallocation of capital.

    Fink went on to tout BlackRock’s “initiatives to place sustainability at the center of our investment approach.”

    A subsequent list of those initiatives included “exiting investments that present a high sustainability-related risk, such as thermal coal producers” and “launching new investment products that screen fossil fuels.”

    Treasurers, attorneys general, and other officials from fossil fuel-producing states have argued that BlackRock’s ESG-related commitments undermine the prosperity and stability of their own communities.

    BlackRock, for its part, has responded to the ongoing pressure campaign from state-level officials with a website, “Energy investing: Setting the record straight.”

    There it argues that it identifies climate change as a long-term risk it needs to protect its clients’ interests from.

    “Our consideration of the risks and opportunities of a transition to a low-carbon economy is in the interest of realizing the best long-term financial results for our clients and entirely consistent with our fiduciary duty,” that website states.

    Many environmental groups argue that the big banks and asset managers targeted by Republican officials are not doing enough to promote fossil fuel divestment. They’re among the biggest supporters of ESG-like policies to transform the private sector under President Joe Biden, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) proposal to mandate climate-related disclosures from publicly traded companies.

    A drilling crew member raises drill pipe onto the drilling rig floor on an oil rig in the Permian Basin near Wink, Texas, on Aug. 22, 2018. (Nick Oxford/Reuters)

    A Dec. 8 article from the Sierra Club, for example, praised BlackRock for “starting to push back” against Republican officials’ campaign against ESG.

    Yet they noted that BlackRock continues to manage fossil fuel investments on behalf of its clients.

    The Epoch Times has reached out to BlackRock for further comment.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 19:30

  • Identical Twins Awarded $1.5 Million Over Med School Cheating Accusations
    Identical Twins Awarded $1.5 Million Over Med School Cheating Accusations

    Identical twin sisters who were accused of cheating on their year-end medical school exams have been awarded $1.5 million in a defamation case against the Medical University of South Carolina.

    Kayla (left) and Kellie Bingham now work for the same South Carolina law firm.

    Kayla and Kellie Bingham were accused of “academic dishonesty” in May 2016 after test proctors deemed their exam performance to be too close to be a coincidence – with identical answers to 296 out of 307 questions, including 54 wrong answers. University officials launched an investigation, and a school “honor council” alleged the sisters were “signaling one another and passing notes,” according to court documents. The school ultimately ruled they had cheated on the exam.

    “It was an eight-hour exam during which we exhibited normal test-taking behavior,” Kayla Bingham told CBS MoneyWatch.

    The Binghams successfully appealed the decision and filed a lawsuit against the university, arguing that for years they had behaved and performed similarly academically and in athletics. After a four-day trial in November, a South Carolina jury decided the school had defamed the sisters and awarded them a total of $1.5 million in damages. 

    The Binghams’ legal case hinged on the theory that it is common for identical twins to perform similarly on tests given their genetic profiles. Nancy Segal, who runs California State University, Fullerton’s Twin Studies Center and who testified in the case, said numerous studies show that identical twins often perform similarly on a range of cognitive tests. -CBS News

    “There is a wealth of psychological research that shows that identical twins do perform very similarly on tests of intelligence, information processing and speed of response, and I was not at all surprised they turned in very similar exams,” said Segal. “When identical twins perform very differently it catches our attention.”

    “When they perform alike, it’s very consistent with the literature. I would have been surprised if they hadn’t scored alike.”

    The Binghams claimed that the allegations of cheating caused them psychological distress, which included panic attacks and post-traumatic stress disorder.

    “It was a very hostile environment. People we had known, sat next to and studied with for two years would not speak to us,” Kellie Bingham told CBS. “They knew our work ethic and study habits but refused to hear our side of the story. People we trusted completely turned their backs on us.”

    The university’s accusation and the events that ensued also interfered with the Binghams’ plans to become doctors. The two now work as government affairs advisers at the same South Carolina law firm.

    And according to Kayla, “We came to understand that once word gets out, even if it’s not accurate, it damages your reputation as a person. So we completely switched tracks,” adding that she “wanted to fight back because I had been wronged.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 19:00

  • Ban TikTok Everywhere?
    Ban TikTok Everywhere?

    Authored by Anders Corr via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    It’s time to ban TikTok. The social media app is wildly popular with young adults and children but controlled by an authoritarian regime in China. Apple rates the platform for users ages 12-plus. Yet the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) uses the app’s secret algorithm to influence and track their opinions, messaging, keystrokes, and locations.

    The TikTok logo is displayed outside a TikTok office in Culver City, Calif., on Aug. 27, 2020. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

    One billion users globally are vulnerable to the theft of their passwords and future blackmail. Based on data already collected, TikTok could leverage American leaders over the entire 21st century.

    TikTok is expanding into online purchases, music, search engines, warehouses, and fulfillment centers. It would like to become an everything app that replaces Google, Apple, Twitter, Amazon, and Facebook.

    Unfortunately, the Biden administration is doing next to nothing against the threat that TikTok poses to the American public and economy. The silence of most Democrats on the issue is a form of complicity.

    Republican States Against TikTok

    But Republicans in Congress and state capitals across the United States are increasingly voicing their concerns and stepping up to the plate.

    Nebraska’s Governor Pete Ricketts was the trendsetter, having banned TikTok on state-owned and leased devices two years ago. In the past few weeks, other Republican leaders—including in Texas, South Dakota, South Carolina, Maryland, and Arkansas—have taken similar actions.

    The State of Indiana filed two lawsuits against Tiktok, alleging the app deceives consumers about content and security. Indiana claims the algorithm purposefully addicts young people. One lawsuit claims it promotes inappropriate content and is linked to mental and eating disorders.

    A young girl looks at social media apps, including TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, and WhatsApp, on a smartphone on Nov. 12, 2019. (Peter Byrne/PA)

    Indiana’s Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita said, “TikTok is actively exposing our children to drug use, alcohol abuse, profanity and sexually explicit material at a young age.”

    In South Carolina, the Republican governor not only removed the app from government devices, but asked state offices to block TikTok’s website.

    Republican Governor of Maryland Larry Hogan issued an emergency cybersecurity directive prohibiting technologies from both Russia and China, including TikTok, from the executive branch.

    South Dakota’s tourism bureau deleted its TikTok account of 60,000 followers.

    These states are stepping up to pay the price for U.S. national security.

    South Dakota’s Governor Kristi Noem, who signed the state’s executive order against TikTok, wrote that the CCP collects personal information on users, including internet browsing data and keystrokes. That would mean it could harvest passwords.

    In an opinion article, Noem criticized the Biden administration for insufficiently protecting the United States from foreign adversaries.

    “Mr. Biden hasn’t demanded that Beijing or TikTok cease gathering the data of American citizens, and he hasn’t pushed Congress to ban the app nationally,” she wrote. “By refusing to respond to this threat, the president is allowing China’s communist leaders to continue their attack on American security.”

    Noem also plans to work with South Dakota’s legislature to address China’s buying of American farmland. Companies from China often purchase land near U.S. military bases, threatening surveillance of strategic assets, including nuclear weapons.

    “South Dakota is showing the nation how to create a state-led response to threats from communist China,” the governor wrote. “We are taking the lead on preventing Beijing from accessing the private data of our citizens and throttling our food supply.”

    Noem, a Republican, will get support from most of South Dakota’s voters as 53 percent are Republicans, compared to only 37 percent Democrats. China can be a bipartisan issue—perhaps many Democrats will support her measures. But TikTok users and farmland owners could turn against her.

    Taking a strong position against the CCP, even on a bipartisan issue in the United States, carries political risk.

    Biden’s Big Choice

    The Biden administration faces increasing risk from its limited options on the TikTok issue as well. Whether it bans the app or not, someone will be unhappy.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 18:30

  • White House Says Still "Negotiating" For Whelan's Release, Lashes Out At Critics
    White House Says Still “Negotiating” For Whelan’s Release, Lashes Out At Critics

    The Biden administration says it is still engaging with Moscow in an ongoing attempt to secure detained Marine veteran Paul Whelan’s release from the Russian prison where he’s serving a 16-year sentence, which reportedly involves hard labor.

    On Sunday, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told ABC’s “This Week” the US is still “negotiating” for his release – confirming that recently a “very serious, specific proposal” was made to the Russians.

    He further gave some background on the Brittney Griner release while seeking to deflect widespread criticisms that Whelan was left behind for the less serious case of WNBA star Griner. Biden has been accused of simply choosing her for her fame and the bigger PR campaign rallying behind her.

    Kirby described that for months the White House pushed hard to gain Whelan and Griner’s release together, but “it just didn’t land anywhere… with the Russians,” he explained in the Sunday comments.

    “As we progressed through this summer and into the fall… it was clear that they were treating Paul very separately, very distinctly because of these sham espionage charges they levied against him.” Kirby said that just before Griner’s release it became clear that Whelan’s release would remain unlikely. 

    “It really occurred to us that there was just no chance of doing it last week… we had been trying all the way up until the moment we actually secured the deal that got Brittney home, we were still trying to get Paul out,” he said.

    Days ago CNN cited US officials who listed some of the Russian names that could potentially be included in a future Whelan swap: 

    US officials made quiet inquiries to the Germans about whether they might be willing to include [Vadim] Krasikov in the trade, a senior German government source told CNN earlier this year. But ultimately, the US was not able to secure Krasikov’s release. The German government was not willing to seriously consider including Krasikov –who assassinated a Georgian citizen in broad daylight in Berlin in 2019 – in a potential trade, the German source said.

    The US made several other offers to the Russians, sources said, to try to get them to agree to include Whelan in the swap. Among the names floated by the US was Alexander Vinnik, a Russian national extradited to the US in August on allegations of money laundering, hacking and extortion. The US also offered to trade Roman Seleznev, a convicted Russian cyber-criminal currently serving a 14-year sentence in the US, sources said.

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

    The biggest name on that list is Vadim Krasikov, a former colonel from Russia’s domestic spy organization. He’s serving out a life sentence in Germany for murder after being convicted in the assassination of a former Chechen fighter, Zelimkhan “Tornike” Khangoshvili, which was carried out in a Berlin park.

    Kirby used the Sunday morning media interviews to lash out at the White House’s critics who point to the Russians getting the deal of the century in Viktor Bout’s release.

    “They weren’t on the phone. They weren’t watching the incredible effort and determination by [Roger Carstens] and his team to try to get both Paul and Brittney out together,” Kirby said. “In a negotiation, you do what you can. You do as much as you can. You push and you push and you push. And we did. And this deal we got last week, that was the deal that was possible. It was the deal we could get now. Now was the moment we could get it, and we executed it.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 18:00

  • 14 Border Agents Committed Suicide In 2022
    14 Border Agents Committed Suicide In 2022

    Authored by Madalina Vasiliu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Fourteen Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents who worked at the southern border committed suicide this year, according to members of Congress.

    A Border Patrol agent organizes a large group of illegal immigrants near Eagle Pass, Texas, on May 20, 2022. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

    The Republican and Democrat lawmakers released the grim, and growing, tally during a press conference on Dec. 7 at the House Triangle.

    Between 2007 and Nov. 2022, a total of 149 CBP agents located at the U.S. southern border took their lives.

    CBP agents are exposed to traumatic experiences that affect their lives, said the lawmakers, noting that it’s common for law enforcement officers to keep their mental health needs to themselves.

    CBP agents feel abandoned by the current administration, Rep. Mayra Flores (R-Texas) said, referring to President Joe Biden’s recent remarks.

    When asked on Dec. 6 why he wasn’t going to the border while visiting a border state, Biden told reporters at the White House it was “because there are more important things going on.”

    Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) said, “While in Washington, there’s a lot that divides us in policy and often drives us in a lot of different directions, but there are a lot of things that should unite us.”

    Congressman Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) spoke at the bipartisan meeting about border patrol suicide rates at the House Triangle in Washington on Dec. 7, 2022. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

    During the 2022 fiscal year, $23 million has been allocated to the mental health of CBP agents, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said, adding that the same budget for the 2023 fiscal year will be the same.

    The Taking Action to Prevent Suicide (TAPS) Act would allow CBP agents to freely speak with health care professionals without fear of losing their jobs as well as increase the number of local behavioral health specialists with the expertise to provide psychological assistance to CBP officers.

    If there are no health care experts in the agency, Cuellar said, the government should work with local organizations to provide what the CBP agents need for their mental health.

    Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) spoke at the bipartisan conference about border patrol suicide rates at the House Triangle in Washington on Dec. 7, 2022. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

    “Until we take out the fear of law enforcement coming forward and talking about their mental health issues, they’re never going to do it,” said Brandon Judd, president of the Border Patrol Union.

    There needs to be more than a friendly social worker, said Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.). CBP agents should have health care personnel trained to guide them through traumatic experiences when necessary, she added.

    “We all know that our immigration system is fully broken. It is working for no one. Therefore, the folks who are manning the southern border are bearing the brunt of our failed policies,” Slotkin said.

    The Epoch Times previously obtained data indicating that CBP captured 209,664 illegal aliens along the southern border in October.

    Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.), said that CBP’s southern agents need more advanced technology, such as sensor towers and refugee processing facilities. Soto supports Biden’s proposed homeland security budget “to keep our homeland safe and respect international refugee laws.”

    “While many of us may have disagreements on border solutions, both here and across Congress, we still have to come together, find common ground, find solutions like the TAPS Act because our Border Protection officers deserve nothing less for protecting our homeland,” Soto told the press.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 17:30

  • "Egregious": McCarthy To Subpoena 51 Intel Agents Who Called Hunter Laptop Bombshell 'Disinformation'
    “Egregious”: McCarthy To Subpoena 51 Intel Agents Who Called Hunter Laptop Bombshell ‘Disinformation’

    Amid calls that he sucks and should be replaced, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) says he’ll subpoena the 51 former intelligence officials who said the New York Post‘s bombshell report on the Hunter Biden laptop had ‘all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

    The California Republican — who is expected to become speaker when the GOP takes control of the House of Representatives in January — said what Twitter did with The Post’s bombshell October 2020 report was “egregious.”  -NY Post

    “Those 51 intel agents that signed a letter that said the Hunter Biden information was all wrong, was Russia collusion, many of them have a security clearance,” McCarthy told Fox News on Saturday. “We’re going to bring them before a committee. I’m going to have them have a hearing​,​ bring them and subpoena them before a committee. Why did they sign it? Why did they lie to the American public?”

    McCarthy – former roommate of liberal pollster (and Hunter Biden pal) Frank Luntz – has faced strong opposition to his bid to become the next Speaker of the House, particularly from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), so you’ll understand our skepticism over his ‘vow’ to get to the bottom of the 51 former senior intelligence officials.

    Former CIA Director John Brennan and ex-National Security Council Director James Clapper were among a group of former intelligence officials who signed a statement days after the expose, claiming it “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”  

    ​McCarthy questioned the move. “Why did you use the reputation that America was able to give to you … but use it for a political purpose and lie to the American public?” he said on Fox. 

    Republicans are preparing to launch a number of investigations into the Biden family as a result of The Post’s reporting about Hunter Biden’s overseas business relationships while his father was vice president in the Obama administration. -NY Post

    Journalist Glenn Greenwald puts the whole thing in perspective in a great Twitter thread:

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

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

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

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

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 17:00

  • Morgan Stanley On What Will Drive The Next Phase Of ESG Research
    Morgan Stanley On What Will Drive The Next Phase Of ESG Research

    By Stephen Byrd, Head of North American Equity Research, Power/Utilities and Clean Tech at Morgan Stanley

    Debate among investors is growing about whether to focus on stocks which are ESG ‘enablers’ with best-in-class ESG metrics, or on ‘ESG improvers’. We see merit in both approaches but believe the benefits of owning ‘ESG rate of change’ stocks and engaging with companies in transition are underappreciated. In a recent report, Morgan Stanley’s Sustainability Research team, in collaboration with industry analysts, our Quantitative Investment Strategies (QIS) team, and AlphaWise, show that focusing on names with improving ESG metrics can deliver both alpha and positive ESG impacts.

    Our work is distinctive on multiple fronts. First, in collaboration with our analysts, we developed a forward-looking framework to analyze ESG rate of change at the stock level. We think it provides a better gauge of the likely future rate of change than typical data services, which are often backward looking and/or not informed by in-depth, sector-specific analyses. In addition, our analysts focused on companies with an opportunity to improve their financial performance thanks to ESG rate of change, a key difference from typical ESG analyses.

    From a quant perspective, our QIS team assessed the impact on stock returns of ESG criteria such as carbon efficiency, exclusions driven by environmental harm, percentages of revenues linked to fossil fuels, and non-climate ESG concerns. The team found little evidence of a significant positive or negative effect on performance from screening on such broad ESG criteria. This underscores the need to marry ESG capabilities with strong sector expertise in order to generate alpha, tailoring ESG criteria and strategies to industry dynamics. We developed a robust set of sector-specific ESG rate of change criteria.

    We were surprised how often deflationary technologies are driving simultaneous improvement in both ESG and financial metrics. An usually broad range of innovations are dropping in cost so much that they offer significant net benefits on both fronts. These include solar/wind/clean hydrogen, green ammonia, precision agriculture, improved molecular plastics recycling technology, more efficient electric motors, energy storage cost reductions, ‘green steel’, more durable vehicle tires, recycling technologies, electrification of many products/industrial processes, carbon capture tech, and waste-to-energy/waste-to-plastics technologies.

    We reject a dichotomy between investing in ESG ‘enablers’ versus ‘improvers’. We would highlight a recent Morgan Stanley report on Earthshots led by Ed Stanley that identified a number of important emerging ‘enabling’ technologies – radical decarbonization accelerants or global warming mitigants. With the help of our global analysts, the team reviewed 40 promising technologies but zeroed in on six of the most game-changing. Given a growing mismatch between the pace of climate technology adoption and the planet’s need for these solutions, we believe these Earthshots are likely to be a key secular trade of the 2020s.

    In evaluating ‘improvers’, we reiterate the need to marry ESG investing principles and deep sector expertise. Applying ESG metrics without such knowledge can lead to suboptimal results. For example, in the US utilities sector, management teams are shutting down expensive coal-fired power plants and building renewables, energy storage, and transmission, which drives superior EPS growth. Our quantitative research team showed the superior stock returns for companies leading the way on this ‘carbon rate of change’ strategy, but many of these stocks would screen negatively on classic ESG metrics such as carbon intensity.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 16:30

  • Lithium-Ion Battery Prices Rise For First Time
    Lithium-Ion Battery Prices Rise For First Time

    Lithium, a mineral used in batteries to power electric vehicles, smartphones, laptops, and all sorts of gadgets, has surged to a record high this year as the world pushes forward with a ‘green’ future. But in the process of decarbonizing the global economy, battery prices, for the first time since BloombergNEF began tracking the market in 2010, have risen on an annual basis. 

    After a decade of deflation, the volume-weighted average price of lithium-ion battery packs across all industries increased to $151 per kilowatt-hour in 2022, a 7% increase from last year. BloombergNEF forecasts prices could continue rising next year. 

    “Never before in the 12 years BNEF has surveyed battery prices have they recorded an annual increase, instead dropping sharply as production grew,” Bloomberg said. 

    The rising costs of lithium, nickel, cobalt, aluminum, and manganese — crucial metals used in battery making have increased lithium-ion battery pack prices. 

    Just look at the Lithium Price Index — prices are out of control … 

    “Not until 2024, when more lithium production is expected to come online, are prices forecast to drop again,” Bloomberg explained. 

    The rise in lithium-ion battery packs could be the first red flags in the energy transition that prices to decarbonize economies will be costly. 

    “With the advent of electromobility and all this excitement about lithium, the world needs new sources,” Daniel Jimenez from consultancy iLiMarkets recently told the FT. “Whoever is producing lithium in the coming three years is going to make abnormally high margins.”

    Yet until new supply comes online, lithium-ion battery packs will rise, which has already caused EV affordability concerns. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 16:00

  • The Rise And Fall Of Inflation Risk Factors
    The Rise And Fall Of Inflation Risk Factors

    By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

    This week we will all focus on CPI on Tuesday and the Fed on Wednesday. What Chair Powell says and does on Wednesday will reverberate through the markets. For the record, I expect 50 bps and he will keep a rate hike on the table for the February 1 st announcement.

    Rather than attempting to estimate this week’s CPI data (which will be important), today’s report will focus on what will drive inflation (and the economy/markets) after the Fed decision.

    We have seven weeks between this FOMC decision and the next one. Seven weeks feels like  a lifetime in a market that is prone to large daily and weekly swings. Even the views on the economy are shifting rapidly as more economists seem to be heading in our direction, which is that the recession will start sooner (Q1) and be deeper than most people previously thought.

    If anything, the market is pricing in a Squishy Landing. That report tried to define a “squishy” landing and also tried to figure out why markets may misinterpret data as indicating a “soft” landing when the worst is yet to come. Finally, we re-iterated our more pessimistic outlook in that report.

    Inflation Factors versus Inflation

    Rather than just trying to “estimate” inflation, we examine the factors that “drive” inflation. While we could just estimate various inflation components such as rent, in this report, we will try something different. We will lay out the factors that drive inflation. We believe that these factors do a good job of predicting where inflation and the economy are headed

    In theory this is what many do, but we hope that today’s analysis makes it clear how these factors have been behaving (and how they will behave). That will go a long way in explaining why our current outlook is more pessimistic and is strongly in the camp that “the Fed has gone too far already.”

    We will address the individual components that go into this model. This model shows the highest inflationary pressures were from Q2 2021 to Q4 2021. It remained elevated for that extended period of time due to a variety of factors (the importance of which changed within that period). The factors have been pointing to steadily declining inflation and growth pressures ever since.

    If anything, the factors point to deflationary pressures in Q1 and Q2 next year – which is another way of reaching our conclusion that the economy and markets are in jeopardy of a large “risk-off” trade that will break 2022’s lows on stocks (while yields plummet).

    The Inflation Factors

    We will use 5 factors. The factors are somewhat broad and the influence that they have on inflation is just an estimate. Yes, inflation and the economy are closely linked. No, our model is not tested and is both arbitrary and subjective. Nonetheless, it seems logical and almost elegant. The explanation fits the narrative of what has been going on, and some version of this “model” has been influencing my thoughts on inflation, the economy, and markets. It is a good starting point for this overall discussion and what to expect in terms of economic data and corporate reporting over the next seven weeks.

    The factors that we use are:

    • The Fed. This is primarily focused on rates and the balance sheet. Lower rates are stimulative and higher rates act as a headwind. Balance sheet expansion (QE) is stimulative while balance sheet reduction (QT) is contractionary. Other “extraordinary” measures are included as well.
    • Stimulus. This includes a range of items such as checks sent to individuals, moratoriums on rent/student loans, PPP, and government spending programs like the “Inflation Reduction” Act.
    • Supply Chains. This attempts to broadly incorporate supply chain issues from the actual inability to produce goods to the costs of shipping and transporting. It is difficult to get an exact definition, but we all know it when we see it.
    • War. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions are also factors.
    • Disruptive. Another broad topic and not only is it extremely important, but it has been overlooked by many. It does not just include the wealth gained and lost by investors or the impact on the economy. The spending generated by “disruptive” companies (and even units of larger/more “traditional” organizations) was quite simply massive. This segment can easily include crypto as well as disruptive companies (some of which were already public or recently went public, and others largely benefitted from PE/VC investments). This may be the most contentious factor, which likely makes it the most important in terms of explaining why our outlook remains so pessimistic.

    We did not treat wage inflation as an inflation factor. This is a tricky and almost circular issue. Is wage inflation a factor? Certainly, the Fed focuses on wage inflation because it could potentially create “sticky” (or rather “non-transitory”) inflation. From that perspective, it is a factor rather than an output. However, we will treat wage inflation as another output (wage inflation will respond to the other factors, making it okay to ignore in the factor model). It is somewhat circular, which is why we highlight it.

    The Fed

    The Fed did everything it could in the immediate aftermath of COVID and the COVID lockdowns. They bought corporate bonds/ETFs, backstopped money markets and corporate new issuance, expanded their balance sheet, and cut rates to zero.

    Over time they pulled back on that support. By Q3 of 2022 we saw them acting as a moderate headwind. We should not just expect higher rates for now because the Fed is telegraphing higher rates into the future (while ramping up QT) as well.

    By early 2023 the Fed will be a deflationary pressure.

    That will start to reverse course as the Fed backpedals (likely smaller QT before rate cuts). In any case, on a standalone basis this might be the right policy, but given how the other factors are behaving, it may be a mistake.

    Stimulus

    Stimulus started slowly, ramped up, tailed off, ramped back up again, and is now in the process of declining. We’ve left it as a small positive factor for much of this year and next year.

    The bump in Q2 2021 may have been the most awkward of the inflation drivers as yet another stimulus package was passed long after there was an obvious need for it (the very nature of inflationary).

    We didn’t get a “bounce” in the factor when the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” was passed, because it wasn’t heavily front loaded, but it is why we leave stimulus as a positive factor going forward.

    Supply Chain

    The supply chain issues didn’t manifest themselves right away. In Q2 2020 oil (WTI) futures briefly traded negative. Yes, there were all sorts of weird shortages and mismatches during that time. You could get rolls and rolls of industrial grade toilet paper if you could figure out where to go, but it was virtually impossible to get high quality toilet paper (I’m sure there were other initial issues, but that one sticks out).

    It was only over time as we re-opened and inventories got whittled down that supply chain issues started to mount. Add to that the fact that there weren’t enough workers at the docks to unload (let alone ship) things. Supply chain constraints were off the charts (as was the cost of shipping). However, those costs have since come down.

    There are still some supply chain issues. Shipping isn’t great, but other issues are much smaller now. Offsetting that pressure further are the inventory builds that we’ve seen across so many industries. It is still a moderately inflationary factor, but should go away by Q2

    War

    Russia invaded Ukraine in Q1 2022, but as troops were building up before that, we started to see some pressure on commodity prices that could be attributed to the war risk. That escalated post invasion as sanctions took hold. It abated a little in the summer on the energy front (seasonal) and as some deals were attempted on the commodity front. It has ramped back up and that will continue into Q1 of next year and then it should subside into the summer again.

    Disruptive

    This doesn’t exactly follow the chart of bitcoin, ARKK, or SPAC issuance, but it is probably somewhat linked. Were those just a factor of the other factors, or a factor in their own right?

    The wealth created and spent in this subset of the universe (which was unique to this period) is its own driver. It ties into my argument that jobs lost will NOT be the metric of this recession, rather it will be jobs lost multiplied by average pay that will define this recession.

    I’m hearing this from programmers, software and hardware sellers, and event planners. The wealth created and spent was enormous, concentrated, and inflationary.

    The Whole Picture

    This chart might be a little bit messy, but it is a useful illustration of how these various factors have worked to drive inflation.

    Thinking about these factors and when they started to turn down (and how inflation/the economy have followed) sends a somewhat chilling message if they are correct.

    We are seeing little to no inflationary (growth) pressures in the economy in Q1, yet we are behaving as though fighting inflation is still job number 1.

    Bottom Line

    Look for growth and inflation to slow, regardless of what the Fed does going forward. Inflation was driven by many factors, most of which are receding on their own.

    We have seven weeks of data after this Fed meeting and will be entering into Q4 earnings. I have little reason to be optimistic unless something about these risk factors change. It would be great to have discussions on the appropriateness of these factors and their relative importance.

    This model may have many errors, but I welcome the opportunity to discuss/refine it and hopefully it gives you some food for thought on why our inflation and growth projections are on the pessimistic side of consensus.

    Good luck on Wednesday and get ready for the next 7 weeks!

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 15:30

  • The Twitter Files: The Corporate Media Ignores The Biggest Story Of The Decade
    The Twitter Files: The Corporate Media Ignores The Biggest Story Of The Decade

    The biggest story of the past decade is not the covid pandemic, the January 6th protests, the war in Ukraine, the BLM riots, or even the stagflationary crisis in the US.  Behind these major events is another story, one that connects them all together in a disturbing way.  Even more important than the effects of geopolitical and economic chaos is the effect of mass censorship; without the free exchange of information and debate the public remains ignorant.  And if the public remains ignorant, crisis events have an increasing potential to explode.

    Public perception of national and international affairs is a key determinant of the outcome of disasters and conflicts.  This is why governments and elitists from around the world often seek to manipulate the ways in which people digest information.  The idea is rather simple – They believe that ‘we the people’ cannot be allowed to come to our own conclusions.  They think we cannot be trusted to develop the “proper” viewpoints and we are not smart enough to understand the implications of governmental decisions.  

    In other words, they believe the exact opposite of what is outlined in the US Constitution.  The establishment will give numerous reasons why they need to censor, suppress, spin and misrepresent the facts of any given situation, but in the end the real rationale is that they have a vision for society that is contrary to our foundations.  They have appointed themselves the arbiters of reality to see that vision done.  As Edward Bernays, the “father of public relations” once stated in his book ‘Propaganda’:

    “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

    This is pure authoritarianism.  It’s the stuff of nightmares and revolutions.  But for many years now a large subsection of the world has denied such a dynamic exists.  It’s “conspiracy theory” and “tinfoil hattery” to claim that a small number of elites work together in secret to control public perception and govern our society from the shadows.  After all, where is the proof?

    Of course, this kind of argument is a coping mechanism for the mentally deficient.  Proof of such secretive governance and control is everywhere these days, but some people prefer willful denial.  Take for example the ongoing data drops for what is now being called “The Twitter Files.”

    The mainstream media is barely responding to the information dump initiated by Elon Musk.  They seem to be far more interested in Donald Trump’s tax records.  When they are forced to acknowledge the story, they are hostile, calling the information “boring” or unimpressive.  It’s a classic psychological  tactic of typical narcissists and criminals – When they get caught, they act indifferent, as if neither the evidence nor their crimes really matter.  If getting caught doesn’t matter to them, then their crimes must not be all that bad, right?

    The content of these files is astonishing, but at the same time it is true that the conclusions are not surprising.    

    The files simply confirm almost everything conservative and libertarian commentators have been saying for years; all those “conspiracy theories” about Big Tech censorship of conservatives turned out to be true.  Not only that, but the theory that government agencies and officials from the DNC worked with Big Tech to silence and undermine their political opponents was also true.  

    Twitter has long denied that they “shadow ban” users, but this was a lie.  The data shows that small groups within Twitter called “strategic response teams” suppressed up to 200 accounts per day.  Usually these were accounts of larger and more influential conservative politicians and celebrities.  And, these teams operated in coordination with Democrat officials and agencies like the FBI.  In some cases the goal was to mute a particular individual. In other cases the goal was to steer national elections.   

    Internal Twitter communications show that SRT groups spent most of their time fabricating reasons why certain information was subject to TOS.  In other words, if Twitter’s rules were not being violated, they made up new rules.  

    The exposure of Twitter is the biggest story of the decade because it provides proof of a hidden cabal.  It shows the ugly mechanics behind the scenes and exposes a network of elites and their errand boys who were involved in direct operations to destroy the 1st Amendment for the sake of ideological supremacy.  

    It’s the classic definition of fascism, a definition that Benito Mussolini reiterated when he argued:  “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.”

    And, if this brand of Fascism was happening within the halls of Twitter, then there is little doubt it is also happening at companies like Google/YouTube, Apple, Facebook, etc.  Before we had evidence, now we have confirmation.  

    The corporate media argues over relevance instead of morality because they benefited from the censorship.  It’s important to remember that one of the first measures Big Tech companies applied after suppressing the alternative media during the pandemic was to then amplify the corporate media.  These companies are floundering with dismal audience numbers and dwindling profits.  No one listens to them anymore.  Yet, as long as they promote the establishment narrative their opinions and disinformation are given priority on nearly every search engine and social media platform.  

    Of course they aren’t interested in the Twitter Files, liars are often “bored” by honest commentary and factual information.  Also, their continued existence relies on the censorship of their competition in the alternative media.

    The bottom line is this:  According to the Bill of Rights, it is illegal for agents of the US government to obstruct the free speech of law abiding American citizens.  It does not matter if the action is done by using “private businesses” as middlemen.  And, if a private business is colluding with government to implement political policy then it is no longer a private business.  Twitter was participating in a form of treason, along with the agencies that they cooperated with.  It’s a huge story, and one that should lead to punishment for those involved.      

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 15:00

  • Army Captain Separated From Service For Refusing Vaccine As House Passes Bill That Rescinds Military’s Vaccine Mandate
    Army Captain Separated From Service For Refusing Vaccine As House Passes Bill That Rescinds Military’s Vaccine Mandate

    Authored by J.M. Phelps via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    An Army captain was separated from the service for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine as the GOP attempts to roll back Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s military vaccine mandate.

    A soldier watches another soldier receive his COVID-19 vaccination from Army Preventive Medical Services in Fort Knox, Ky., on Sept. 9, 2021. (Jon Cherry/Getty Images)

    Capt. Stephen Rogerson (a pseudonym) has served in the Army for 17 years, and on Dec. 6, a three-person administrative board voted to separate him from service. On the same day, the House passed an $858 billion defense funding bill, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year 2023, that included a provision to rescind the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

    But soldiers like Rogerson are “falling through the cracks of a failed policy at precisely the wrong time,” according to R. Davis Younts, an Air Force Reserve Judge Advocate General (JAG) and civilian attorney.

    In October 2021, Rogerson received a temporary medical exemption through his primary care manager. Within two hours of submitting his request for exemption to the vaccine to his command, it was denied.

    “Rather than accepting my exemption, they gave it to the command surgeon who overturned it and took measures to deny it—without the authority or policy in place to do so,” he told The Epoch Times, using a pseudonym for fear of reprisals.

    “In addition to opposing the vaccine for medical concerns, I was opposed to it because it came out so quickly and there was no way possible to know its long-term side effects.” Thus, he took all necessary steps to oppose the vaccine.

    For this, Rogerson received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand in February, which was permanently filed into his record.

    “Those things are going to be in my record, unless there’s some sort of language requiring the military to take out the adverse actions given to soldiers who refused to take the experimental vaccine,” he said.

    “While Congress taking action is a great thing, the language isn’t clear,” Rogerson said.

    According to Younts, “The latest language in the NDAA is compromised language,” explaining that the agreement will only end the Department of Defense’s (DoD) vaccine mandate, and does not address the issue of the thousands of service members who have already been separated or who have had adverse action taken against them due to their refusal to take the vaccine.

    If the NDAA is approved by the Senate and signed into law by President Joe Biden, Austin would have 30 days to rescind the mandate.

    “I know, firsthand, the military is continuing to push the vaccine and boosters,” he said. “The Navy and Coast Guard, in particular, are putting tremendous pressure on its members.”

    Younts believes the “coercion” to get the vaccine will continue, even if the mandate is rescinded.

    He questioned whether “the DOD’s intent will be to continue to punish and kick out those individuals who violated the supposed ‘lawful order’ to get the vaccine while it was a mandate.”

    The White House said including the provision in NDAA was “a mistake.”

    “Making sure our troops are ready to defend this country and prepared to do so, that remains the President’s priority, and the vaccine requirement for COVID does just that,” John Kirby, National Security Council coordinator for strategic communications, said during a press briefing on Dec. 7.

    A Whole New Fight

    Service members in the Air Force, Marines, and Navy are currently protected by a preliminary injunction that prohibits the respective services from taking adverse actions against the unvaccinated. Meanwhile, the Army and Coast Guard are subject to such restrictions.

    “Without a change in the policy, soldiers could still be punished with travel restrictions, other measures to prevent training and education, and more,” Rogerson said. He expects “restrictive measures to remain in place, depending on how the DoD treats the guidance that comes down from Congress.”

    To that end, Younts said, “There are still a lot of people in the Army and Coast Guard that have a letter of reprimand in their file for refusing the vaccine.” Many have not been promoted, have been restricted from travel, and have had other actions taken against them, he said.

    “Because of this, the military’s position could be that [service members] violated the initial order when it was a mandate, and they’re still going to move to kick them out.”

    Rescinding the vaccine mandate via the NDAA is “a small step,” Younts said. “What’s going to force the DoD and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to change their policy and not punish or retaliate against those who are in a refuser status, but their cases still haven’t been processed to completion yet?”

    Furthermore, the language of the NDAA does not reinstate thousands of military members who have already been separated from the service. “Congress has not required the DoD to address any of these issues,” Younts pointed out.

    “All it says is that as the NDAA goes into effect, the mandate doesn’t exist anymore,” Younts explained. “Unless there’s more court action or another intervention,” he said, “the DoD is still going to consider the previous vaccine mandate a valid order, and those who refused that order, they’re going to continue to be punished.”

    Younts is also concerned about the current injunctions in place for the Air Force, Marines, and Navy.

    “For example, if the Air Force case goes to trial next year and we lose, a whole bunch of these people already have a letter of reprimand in their record or have had other adverse action taken against them,” he said. And because of this, “The Air Force could still punch them and kick them out for disobeying a so-called lawful order,” the attorney added.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 14:30

  • Bond Investors Switch From Mutual Funds To ETFs At Record Clip
    Bond Investors Switch From Mutual Funds To ETFs At Record Clip

    The worst year for bonds since at least 1975 has prompted plenty of investors to abandon the asset class. However, of those who are sticking around, a great number are swapping from mutual funds to exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in execution of loss-harvesting tax strategies. 

    Amid this mass wave of so-called “wrapper-swapping” — reallocating from a mutual fund to an ETF in the same broad asset class — ETFs now comprise a record-high 21% of bond fund assets, according to a new report from The Wall Street Journal. That’s around double the share ETFs had six years ago.  

    Through Oct. 31, 2022. Wall Street Journal chart sourced from Strategas and Investment Company Institute 

    The bond market beatdown has “set off the acceleration of wrapper-swapping that we have seen in equities for a while,” ETF strategist Todd Sohn of Strategas tells the Journal . “Now we’re finally getting it in bonds.”

    Many investors have been stunned by bond funds’ failure to buffer portfolio returns in a rough year for equities. While the S&P 500 is down 17%, Bloomberg’s aggregate U.S. bond index is off 11%. 

    Bond mutual funds have seen net redemptions of a whopping $454 billion this year, but bond ETFs have drawn a net $157 billion — by far a record swap. 

    Through Oct. 31, 2022. Wall Street Journal chart sourced from Strategas and Investment Company Institute 

    As investors wrapper-swap, many are shifting their bond allocation to emphasize U.S. Treasury debt, jettisoning stakes in riskier bond asset classes as worries over the country’s economic health mount. Almost 60% of bond inflows at iShares have gone into Treasury funds. 

    Taxes are a big driver of the trend. By redeeming losing bond positions held outside of 401(k)s, IRA and other tax-sheltered accounts, investors can realize capital losses and improve the bottom line on their upcoming 2022 tax filings. 

    Before you swap wrappers, beware of IRS “wash sale” rules, which disallow the recognition of capital losses if the investor replaces it with a “substantially identical” investment during a window that extends from 30 days before the sale through 30 days after.

    Caution is required even when swapping from a mutual fund to an ETF — as there are no clear IRS rules on what constitutes “substantially identical.” 

    The more your choice of ETF differs from the mutual fund you sold, the better your chance of passing IRS muster. For example, selling Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund and swapping into the Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF within 30 days is almost certainly asking for trouble — as Biden recruits his legions of 87,000 new IRS employees.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 12/11/2022 – 14:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 11

Today’s News 11th December 2022

  • Why The Left Must Destroy Free Speech… Or Be Destroyed
    Why The Left Must Destroy Free Speech… Or Be Destroyed

    Authored by Thomas DiLorenzo via LewRockwell.com,

    In Hayek’s famous 1944 book, The Road to Serfdom, he warned that the intellectual and political classes of the democracies of that time were embracing some of the same ideas that inspired Hitler’s Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, and Stalin’s Russia:  comprehensive government planning, hyper regulation of industry,  nationalization, welfare statism, and collectivism in general.  He did not predict that these societies would end up “in serfdom,” however, as some have mistakenly claimed.  Quite the contrary.  In his first chapter he clearly stated that he hoped the ideas in the book would help these countries to avoid that disastrous fate.  He hoped the ideas of the book would be a roadblock on the road to serfdom.

    The eleventh chapter of The Road to Serfdom is entitled “The End of Truth,” about the historical imperative in all totalitarian states throughout history to destroy freedom of speech so that the only true belief is “the social plan” imposed by the state, whatever that may be.  This is achieved by relentless institutionalized lying and propaganda, coupled with harsh censorship of all contrary ideas or even questions about the propriety of forcefully imposing one single “social plan.” This is American society today, in other words, in case you haven’t noticed.  (Socialism, Hayek said, has always been about substituting the plans of politicians for the plans that all of the citizens make for themselves.  It’s not a matter of planning versus no planning, but who is to do the planning).

    The significance of propaganda in totalitarian countries, Hayek wrote, is that “If all the sources of current information are effectively under one single control, it is no longer a question of merely persuading people of this or that.  The skillful propagandist then has power to mold . . . minds in any direction he chooses . . .”  Jeff Deist, among others, has commented that America today has become a “post-persuasion society” and he is right, almost eighty years after Hayek issued this warning.  The Left is no longer willing to seriously debate anything – at least for the time being while they control the universities, all three branches of government, the media, (laughingly-named) “entertainment” industries, and more.  Even dopey Prince Harry publicly denounced the First Amendment in a pathetic attempt to ingratiate himself with Hollywood Leftists like his wife shortly after divorcing himself from his family and moving to Hollywood.  If you disagree with their latest version of socialist totalitarianism (“woke-ism” coupled with green hysteria and calls for worldwide central planning), then you can be canceled, smeared as a racist, a white supremacist, or even fired from your job and prevented from getting a new one.

    The moral consequences of totalitarian propaganda are even more profound.  It is “destructive of all morals” because it “undermines one of the foundations of all morals:  the sense and respect for the truth.”  An avalanche of Official Lies has always been the tool of “various theoreticians of the totalitarian system,” wrote Hayek, citing Plato’s “noble lies” and “social myths” championed by the French philosopher Georges Sorel.  The ends justify the lying means to totalitarians everywhere.  When was the last time a “White House spokesperson” did not lie in public?  (See my 1992 book, Official Lies: How Washington Misleads Us, with James T. Bennett).

    Of course minority opinions “must also be silenced” and “every act of the government must become sacrosanct and exempt from criticism.”  This was never more on display than in government responses to the “pandemic” of 2020, followed by the Biden campaign and its collusion with “Big Tech” to censor even the president of the United States along with massive evidence of the colossal criminality and corruption of the Biden family crime syndicate.  This was arguably the biggest governmental assault on the First Amendment, apparently organized by the FBI and CIA, since it was essentially done away with by the John Adams administration’s “Sedition Act.”

    Academe must also be thoroughly corrupted, said Hayek, for “the disinterested search for truth cannot be allowed in a totalitarian system.”  American universities have gone almost all the way down to the end of the road to serfdom in this regard.  Many have fallen off the cliff completely.  This is especially true, said Hayek, of the disciplines of history, law, and economics.  They must be compromised in a way that supports the state rather than criticizes it, however mildly.  The American history profession is almost completely dominated by Marxists, for example, and economics has been plagued by Keynesian central planners and “market failure theorists” for decades.  As Doug Casey once remarked, most economists today “are political apologists masquerading as economists.”  They “prescribe the way they would like the world to work and tailor theories to help politicians demonstrate the virtue and necessity of their quest for more power.”  The field of economics, said Casey, “has been turned into the handmaiden of government in order to give a scientific justification for things the government . . . wants to do.”

    In totalitarian societies, wrote Hayek, truth is not something that is discovered by learning, education, self-study, research, and debate and discussion.  Instead, it is “something to be laid down by authority . . .”  In today’s world, for example, global warming hysteria is “settled science,” the most un-scientific phrase ever uttered.  A true scientist always questions the status quo, not necessarily rejecting it but keeping an open mind that new research can alter his thinking.  Nothing is ever “settled.”  How a slippery politician like Al Gore is considered to be an expert on the philosophy of science – and atmospheric science to boot — is one of the wonders of the world.   (Don’t forget that the notion that the earth was flat was once declared to be “settled science” by the Al Gores of that day).

    Medical science is not science, we have been told; Anthony Fauci is medical science. 

    Or rather, the “authority” of Anthony Fauci, a grotesquely overpaid government bureaucrat is science.  Again, nothing is more un-scientific than these ridiculous, arrogant, and tyrannical pronouncements by Anthony Fauci and his political sidekicks.

    “[I]ntolerance, too, is openly extolled,” in totalitarian societies said Hayek, anticipating by decades the 1960s-era “New Left” hero, the totalitarian intellectual Herbert Marcuse, who authored a widely-celebrated paper on “repressive tolerance,” the idea that only “the oppressed classes” deserve free speech.  In the world of the 60s “New Left,” whose students and political descendants now control almost all of academe, television, the media in general, much of government, “woke” corporations, and other institutions, the “oppressor class” is comprised essentially of all white heterosexual males, especially ones of European descent.  Everyone else is oppressed by them, the theory goes.  The poorest, lowliest, white redneck is said to “oppress” black millionaires and billionaires.  Question this theory in our post-persuasion society and you will be labeled a racist, a white supremacist, and probably even a Nazi.

    Hayek based these ideas on his years of study of world history and of the totalitarian regimes of the early twentieth century.  “Wokeness” did not just suddenly appear and proceed to take over almost the entire Western world.  It is just the latest manifestation of totalitarianism that has been marching through the institutions for several generations.  There are always totalitarians in our midst, the title of Chapter 13 of The Road to Serfdom, and today’s totalitarians consider themselves to be standing on the shoulders of all those who preceded them, however unsavory they might have been.  That is why many on the Left celebrated after the worldwide collapse of socialism in the late 1980s and early 1990s.  “We no longer have to be associated with monsters like Stalin, Mao, Nicolae Ceaucescu, and other mass-murdering communists of the twentieth century,” they said.  And like all other totalitarians who came before them, they fully understand that freedom of speech is to them what sunlight or a Christian cross is to Dracula.  That is why they are all now hellbent on destroying Elon Musk, a man who is attempting to add a tiny smidgen of free speech to the stifling, statist political correctness of American society.  Their treatment of Musk will eventually make their treatment of Donald Trump seem like a love fest in comparison.

    Their hatred for Trump, by the way, is derived from the same source as their hatred for Elon Musk:  Like Musk, Trump called out and publicized many of the official lies and official liars of the Washington establishment, especially those in the “fake news” business.  The Left considers the fight over free speech to be a political death struggle, and they are right about that.  If anything deserves to be strangled in its crib it is the Left’s current assault on the First Amendment.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 23:30

  • Visualizing The Military Imbalance In The Taiwan Strait
    Visualizing The Military Imbalance In The Taiwan Strait

    Taiwan has reported a sharp increase in the number of Chinese military aircraft entering its Air Defense Identification Zone of late with a record 56 warplanes detected on October 4, 2021, followed by numerous spikes since.

    China has never ruled out the possibility of invading Taiwan and it has continued acquiring the military capability to do so. In recent years, it has modernized its military, introducing the J-20, an indigenous 5th generation stealth fighter. It has also commissioned two aircraft carriers along with several modern amphibious transport dock/landing vessels. Even though the likelihood of China taking Taiwan by force remains unclear, the military balance in the Taiwan Strait is firmly in China’s favor. The following infographic, via Statista’s Martin Armstrong, provides an overview of that imbalance and is based on an annual U.S. government report.

    Infographic: The Military Imbalance In The Taiwan Strait | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    One aspect which appears to be in Taiwan’s favor however, is Joe Biden as United States president. Despite the White House scrambling to clarify his comments, Biden said twice in the space of three months in 2021 that the U.S. would defend Taiwan in the event of an attack by China.

    The president has continued to reiterate this position since, with a 60 Minutes interview broadcast in October one recent such example.

    While the United States is required by law to “support Taiwan’s self-defence”, as described by a White House spokesperson after the 2021 Biden statements, the country has traditionally employed a policy of “strategic ambiguity” when it comes to adherence to the Taiwan Relations Act. Biden’s explicit statements in favor of taking defensive action in the region are a clear step away from this position.

    Speaking in October last year, Biden said: “I don’t want a cold war with China. I just want China to understand that we’re not going to step back, that we’re not going to change any of our views.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 23:00

  • Institutions Matter…But So Does Culture
    Institutions Matter…But So Does Culture

    Authored by David C. Rose via RealClear Wire,

    In 1993 Douglass North won the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work in economic history. He stressed the importance of institutions—regularized patterns of behavior—for improving our understanding of how societies evolve and function. His main point was that high transaction costs choke off the economic activity that makes societies rich. Institutions are therefore vitally important because they help keep transaction costs low.

    North’s insight helped revive institutional economics. Unfortunately many New Institutionalist economists viewed institutional theory as leaving little role for culture. Moreover, any role culture might play was subsumed in their paradigm as informal institutions. It is true that many cultural practices are informal institutions. But what if cultural beliefs can achieve outcomes that institutions can’t?

    Suppose an individual from a poor country moves to a rich one and quickly starts to prosper. Most economists would argue that this happens because the rich country has better institutions.

    But what if sudden uplift is just what happens when honest hardworking people from poor countries are dropped into high trust societies? In this case it’s trust, not institutions, that makes the difference.

    This doesn’t mean that institutions are not important. Quite the opposite. Trust is so important because institutions are important, and many of them are highly trust-dependent. It’s not in every country that you would use an expensive coat to lay claim to a seat in a public place when you go to the rest room, for example.

    David Landes, Deirdre McCloskey and Joel Mokyr have revived interest in the connection between culture and economic development. They argued that the beliefs and values of pre-industrial Europe set the stage for the rise of modern free market economies. In my latest book I explained why they would not have worked so well if they weren’t also culturally transmitted.

    We don’t ponder whether to blink when dust blows into our eyes. We also don’t ponder whether to express sympathy to a friend upon hearing his mother died. Both involve behavior that is rather automatic, almost like it was encoded as an “if-then” statement in a computer program.

    The first is baked in our genetic cake and is therefore a product of hardwired neural architecture, while the second is learned early in life and is therefore better described as a product of constructed neural architecture. At its core, culture is a mechanism for constructing a consistent neural architecture across individuals in a society to solve problems that are not well solved either by genetic encoding or consciously rational decision making.

    If all behavior is consciously rational in the sense of Daniel Kahneman’s System 2 mode of thinking, then all individuals would always behave in a manner that was best for them and not the group. Game theorists would say they would “play defect” against rules created to support large group cooperation. This is a problem, because while we trust and therefore cooperate well in small groups, small group trust doesn’t scale up to work in the kind of large group contexts Adam Smith showed are necessary for the good life.

    Smith didn’t think most behavior was consciously rational in the way modern economists think about behavior. He argued that our sensitivity to approval and disapproval provided a mechanism for forming consistent responses to circumstances. Smith’s perspective comports well with Kahneman’s conception of System 1 thinking, which is fast and intuitive, like holding a door for a stranger or leaving a coat to hold a seat. It’s pre-rational automaticity effectively circumvents rational analysis.

    On the other end of the spectrum is genetic encoding. But if high trust societies were solely products of our genes, like honeycombs are for bees, then all human societies would be high trust societies. They aren’t because nearly all of our evolution took place in very small groups so there has been too little time to reinforce genes that support large group trust. Large group trust cannot be based on genetically encoded behavior. I submit that it can, however, be based culturally encoded behavior.

    Some cultures convey moral beliefs that culturally encode the automatic rejection of untrustworthy actions. The earlier such beliefs are taught, the stronger they are reinforced, and the more they take precedence over other beliefs, the more likely behaving in an untrustworthy way isn’t even considered in adulthood.

    When a critical mass of individuals abides by such beliefs, it becomes rational to presume most others can be trusted in most circumstances, producing a high trust society. Just as North would have predicted, by reducing transaction costs this makes cooperation through economic activity possible on a grand scale, unleashing human flourishing as never before. 

    David C. Rose is a Professor Economics at the University of Missouri-St. Louis and a Senior Fellow at Common Sense Society. He is author of The Moral Foundation of Economic Behavior and Why Culture Matters Most, both from Oxford University Press.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 22:30

  • Study Finds Prejudice Against COVID-19 Unvaccinated Around The World
    Study Finds Prejudice Against COVID-19 Unvaccinated Around The World

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

    People who have received COVID-19 vaccines express discriminatory attitudes toward unvaccinated people, a new study of over 15,000 citizens of 21 countries across the world suggests.

    “Individuals who comply with the advice of health authorities morally condemn the unvaccinated for violating a social contract in the midst of a crisis,” two Denmark-based scientists wrote in their paper, published Thursday in Nature.

    “Those who refuse vaccines report that they feel discriminated and pressured against their will.”

    A sign stating proof of a Covid-19 vaccination is required is displayed outside of Langer’s Deli in Los Angeles, California on Aug. 7, 2021. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)

    To measure COVID-19 vaccination status-based prejudice, researchers asked some 15,233 people how they feel if a close relatives of theirs are going to marry a vaccinated or unvaccinated person—a question that has long been used in surveys on discrimination along racial, ethnic, or partisan lines.

    Specifically, participants were presented with brief descriptions of a series of fictitious individuals and asked to imagine that these are people whom one of their close relatives intends to marry. They were shown two profiles at a time, side by side, and asked to rate each profile by saying whether they agree or disagree with statements such as, “I would be unhappy if this person married one of my close relatives,” and “I think this person is untrustworthy.”

    One of the six attributes describing these targeted individuals has been their COVID-19 vaccination status, randomly varying between “fully vaccinated” and “unvaccinated.” The other attributes were age, occupation, hobbies, personality, and “family background,” which distinguished between people “born and raised in [the respondent’s country]” and people who “immigrated from the Middle East.”

    The Findings

    Across six countries—Germany, India, Indonesia, Morocco, South Africa, and the United Kingdom—selected to represent both affluent Western and developing non-Western nations, the unvaccinated were found to be disliked among vaccinated people (14 percentage points) as much as people with drug addiction (15 percentage points), and significantly more so than people who had been in prison (10 percentage points), atheists (7 percentage points), or people with mental illness (6 percentage points).

    In addition, the overall dislike of the unvaccinated among vaccinated people (13 percentage points) was found to be two and a half times greater than that of Middle Eastern immigrants (5 percentage points). In fact, according to the paper, unvaccinated people face significantly more hostility than immigrants even in 10 countries that are deemed unfriendly to immigrants. Interestingly, discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated Middle Eastern immigrants were found to be just as strong as those toward unvaccinated natives.

    By contrast, researchers found that the unvaccinated respondents on average showed almost no discriminatory attitudes toward the vaccinated.

    “The results demonstrate that prejudice is mostly one-sided,” the authors wrote. “Only in [the] United States and Germany do we find that the unvaccinated feel some antipathy towards the vaccinated. But even here we do not find statistical evidence in favor of negative stereotyping or exclusionary attitudes.”

    “The observation that vaccinated individuals discriminate against those who are unvaccinated, but that there is no evidence for the reverse, is consistent with work on the psychology of cooperation,” said leading author Alexander Bor, a political psychologist at the George Soros-funded Central European University (CEU).

    A Psychological Explanation

    Such prejudice can be explained by a psychological mechanism against “free-riding,” according to the study. In other words, a highly polarized and moralized sentiment surrounding COVID-19 vaccination activated this mechanism in vaccinated people, causing them to see those who refuse to get the jabs as morally-failed “free riders” of a collective effort.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 22:00

  • Supreme Court Hears Case That Could Empower State Legislatures, Not Judges, To Regulate Elections
    Supreme Court Hears Case That Could Empower State Legislatures, Not Judges, To Regulate Elections

    Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    North Carolina Republicans told the Supreme Court on Dec. 7 that the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures preeminent authority to make the rules for presidential and congressional elections without interference from the courts.

    Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan stands for a group photograph of the Justices at the Supreme Court in Washington on April 23, 2021. (Erin Schaff/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

    The case is important because, if the high court finds for North Carolina, the rules governing how states regulate federal elections could change dramatically. The hearing comes at a time when tensions between Republicans and Democrats over voting procedures are growing in light of former President Donald Trump’s continuing claims that the 2020 presidential election was marred by massive electoral fraud.

    At issue is the once-obscure independent state legislature doctrine, under which Republicans argue that the Constitution has always directly authorized state legislatures alone to make rules for the conduct of federal elections in their respective states.

    Democrats say this doctrine is a fringe conservative legal theory that could endanger voting rights, enable extreme partisan gerrymandering in the redistricting process, and cause upheaval in election administration.

    Liberal law professor Richard Hasen has called the doctrine the “800-pound gorilla” of election law because of its potentially disruptive effect on election administration norms.

    Conservatives, on the other hand, say the doctrine is derived from the plain text of the Constitution and would restore reasonable rules on the electoral playing field and allow elected state officials, instead of judges, to make election rules.

    The Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on the doctrine directly, but some justices have said that it could have been argued in the Bush v. Gore case, which resolved the disputed 2000 presidential election.

    The doctrine, if endorsed by the high court, could in theory allow state legislatures to select presidential electors in disputed elections, something critics decry as a threat to democracy.

    When he launched the appeal in March, Tim Moore, a Republican who’s the speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, said the Constitution is “crystal clear: State legislatures are responsible for drawing congressional maps, not state court judges and certainly not with the aid of partisan political operatives.”

    Moore is appealing the Supreme Court of North Carolina’s order redrawing the state’s electoral map against the wishes of the state’s Republican-majority legislature.

    Two key clauses in the U.S. Constitution lay out the rules governing federal elections in the states.

    The elections clause in Article 1 states, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”

    The presidential electors clause in Article 2 gives each state the power to appoint presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”

    The case is Moore v. Harper, court file 21-1271.

    During nearly three hours of oral arguments on Dec. 7, liberal justices pushed back against the doctrine, while conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch seemed receptive to it to varying degrees.

    Moore’s attorney, David H. Thompson, told the justices that the two constitutional provisions have been misinterpreted for years.

    “The elections clause requires state legislatures specifically to perform the federal function of prescribing regulations for federal elections,” Thompson said.

    “States lack the authority to restrict the legislatures’ substantive discretion when performing this federal function … and it is federal law alone that places substantive restrictions on states legislatures’ performing the task assigned them by the federal Constitution.

    “For the first 140 years of the republic, there was not a single state court that invalidated on substantive grounds any congressional redistricting plan.”

    Precedent holds that “the Founders tasked state legislatures with federal functions that transcend any substantive limitation sought to be imposed by the people of the state.”

    Thomas wondered aloud if the court had the authority to consider this case.

    Thomas asked Thompson what “the basis of our jurisdiction” was, given that “we don’t normally review state supreme courts’ interpretation of state constitutions.”

    Thompson said the Supreme Court of North Carolina’s decision reflects the state’s law but is still “a violation of the elections clause and that’s why we’re here.”

    Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Thompson that his argument wasn’t resonating with her.

    “If judicial review is in the nature of ensuring that someone’s acting within their constitutional limits, I don’t see anything in the words of the Constitution that takes that power away from the state.”

    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked Thompson if it was his argument “that the state constitution has no role to play—period—in terms of imposing substantive limits on the exercise of that federal function.”

    Thompson confirmed that was his position, saying that a state constitution may require that an election measure be presented to a governor for approval or veto.

    Justice Elena Kagan seemed alarmed at the ramifications of Thompson’s argument.

    The doctrine under discussion, she said, “gets rid of the normal checks and balances on the way big governmental decisions are made in this country, and then you might think that it gets rid of all those checks and balances at exactly the time when they are needed most.”

    “Think about consequences because this is a theory with big consequences,” she said.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 21:30

  • Oregon's New Gun Law Temporary Blocked As Firearm Background Checks Erupt
    Oregon’s New Gun Law Temporary Blocked As Firearm Background Checks Erupt

    Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) secured a temporary restraining order (TRO) in Oregon state court earlier this week, preventing a new law that requires a permit to purchase firearms and bans high-capacity magazines from being enforced. In recent weeks, the threat of more gun control has led to a state-wide scramble for gun enthusiasts to panic buy firearms and magazines. 

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

    Ballot Measure 114, which Oregon voters passed on Nov. 8, was scheduled to take effect on Thursday. It would: 

    • Ban magazines over ten rounds
    • Require a permit to purchase any firearm
    • Require a training course, application fee, fingerprinting, and a duplicative background check to obtain the permit-to-purchase

    The TRO was a win for GOA and GOF, which filed the suit against Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, Gov. Kate Brown, and Police Superintendent Terri. 

    “Oregon’s measure 114 is a joke. Since when do criminals wait in line to get permits or to register their guns? They don’t. This unconstitutional law will only keep decent Oregonians from exercising their Second Amendment rights. And for this reason, we’re very glad that Judge Robert Raschio responded to our arguments by imposing a temporary restraining order that prevents the law from being enforced,” Erich Pratt, senior vice president of GOA, told us. 

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

    So the fear of not owning a gun because of the possibility of more gun control measures led to a surge in background checks in recent weeks, Karl Durkheimer, owner of Oregon’s Northwest Armory gun store, told Fox News. He said more than 36,000 Oregon residents are backlogged in the background check system. 

    “Two things are happening. There’s fear they won’t be able to get a gun, but there’s the actual logistics that they won’t be able to do the background check,” Durkheimer said. “It’s going to take a year before an Oregonian has a permit.”

    GOA and GOF have a hearing next Tuesday to see if the TRO can be permanent. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 21:00

  • Americans Might Be In For A Tax 'Refund Shock' Next Year: Analyst
    Americans Might Be In For A Tax ‘Refund Shock’ Next Year: Analyst

    Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Millions of Americans could face a “refund shock” when they file their taxes next year because a number of pandemic-related programs are set to expire or have expired, said an analyst.

    Blank Social Security checks are run through a printer at the U.S. Treasury printing facility in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on Feb. 11, 2005. (William Thomas Cain/Getty Images)

    Data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) shows that the average refund taxpayers got back for their 2021 taxes was about $3,200, or some around 14 percent higher than the previous year. The next refunds will average about $2,700, said Mark Steber, chief tax information officer at Jackson Hewitt.

    The 2021 tax year “was quite a remarkable year with the insertion of all those new tax breaks,” Steber told CBS News this week. “But jump ahead to this year, and a lot of the increases expired, hence the term ‘refund shock’ or ‘refund surprise.’”

    Due to the expiration of some programs, “You’re probably going to have not as pleasant an experience as you had last year,” he noted. “There were larger, enhanced tax credits available last year that aren’t available this year,” Steber also remarked.

    For example, the child tax credit is one benefit that will shrink when parents file their 2022 taxes. Normally, parents get about $2,000 for each of their children, but in 2021, the benefit increased to $3,600 for every child under 6 and $3,000 for minor children aged 6 and older.

    Also, the Child and Dependent Care Credit that parents can use to pay for child care was boosted under the Biden administration-backed American Rescue Plan. That raised the credit up to $8,000 per family in 2021, or more than in previous years.

    The IRS has already issued notices about potentially smaller tax refunds, noting in November that “taxpayers will not receive an additional stimulus payment with a 2023 tax refund because there were no economic impact payments for 2022.”

    Additionally, the agency said, it will be more difficult to claim a deduction for charitable on a 2022 tax return.

    “The IRS cautions taxpayers not to rely on receiving a 2022 federal tax refund by a certain date, especially when making major purchases or paying bills,” the agency said last month. “Some returns may require additional review and may take longer.”

    Online Services

    The agency this week again wrote that Americans who made more than $600 online selling goods and services will have that income reported to the IRS

    People who made money via eBay, Etsy, Poshmark, Uber, and other digital services will face the new scrutiny and rules. It applies to anyone who made more than $600 via those platforms or via Venmo, Cash App, Zelle, PayPal, or similar platforms in return for goods and services.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 20:30

  • SBF Tried To Destabilize Crypto Market To Save FTX: Report
    SBF Tried To Destabilize Crypto Market To Save FTX: Report

    Authored by Ana Paula Pereira via CoinTelegraph.com,

    Trades made by Alameda Research were reportedly focusing on depeg Tether’s stablecoin…

    Trades made by Alameda Research were reportedly focusing on depeg Tether’s stablecoin. Image: Cointelegraph.

    Tether executives and Binance CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao worried that Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), former FTX CEO, was attempting to destabilize the crypto market aiming to save the now-bankrupt exchange, according to reports on Dec. 9.

    Messages seen by The Wall Street Journal of a Signal group chat named “Exchange coordination” reveals an argument between CZ and SBF on Nov. 10 about Tether’s stablecoin USDT. Members in the Signal group include Kraken co-founder Jesse Powell, Paolo Ardoino, chief technology officer of Tether, among others.

    According to the report, CZ and others in the group worried that trades made by Alameda Research were focusing on depeg the stablecoin, which would have a ripple effect in crypto prices. Binance CEO reportedly confronted SBF:

    “Stop trying to depeg stablecoins. And stop doing anything. Stop now, don’t cause more damage.”

    SBF denied the claims in a statement to the WSJ.

    The alleged argument on the Signal group happened a day after Binance announced that it wouldn’t bail out its troubled competitor FTX, citing “reports regarding mishandled customer funds and alleged US agency investigations.” On Nov. 10, Tether’s Ardoino also said the company have no “plans to invest or lend money to FTX/Alameda.”

    As reported by Cointelegraph, new details about the failed agreement between Binance and FTX were revealed on Dec. 9. In a twitter thread, CZ referred to Bankman-Fried as a “fraudster,” saying Binance exited its position in FTX in July 2021 after becoming “increasingly uncomfortable with Alameda/SBF.” SBF was “unhinged” at the exchange pulling out, according to Binance’s CEO.

    In response, SBF claimed that Binance “threatened to walk at the last minute”, accusing CZ of lying about his role in the deal.

    On Nov 11, FTX Group and nearly 130 companies – including FTX Trading, FTX US, under West Realm Shires Services, and Alameda Research – filed for bankruptcy in the United States citing a “liquidity crunch”.

    Since FTX’s bankruptcy, SBF has been named in seven class action lawsuits and numerous probes and investigations, including a market manipulation probe by federal prosecutors.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 20:00

  • THE TWITTER FILES: The Removal Of Donald Trump, Part 2
    THE TWITTER FILES: The Removal Of Donald Trump, Part 2

    The third installment of Elon Musk’s release of internal Twitter communications is devoted to the days surrounding the social media company’s decision to permanently ban President Trump.

    Yesterday, we detailed part 1 – via veteran journalist Matt Taibbi, which focused on the period leading up to January 6th, including details about Twitter executives regular meetings with the FBI and DHS.

    Today, in part 2, Michael Shellenberger reveals the chaos that ran wild inside Twitter on January 7th, as the same executives took decisions into their own hands to reassure ‘a few engineers’ that “someone is doing something about this.”

    The Removal of Donald Trump: January 7

    As the pressure builds, Twitter executives build the case for a permanent ban.

    On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs:

    • create justifications to ban Trump

    • seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders

    • express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban

    This #TwitterFiles is reported with @lwoodhouse 

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

    But after the events of Jan 6, the internal and external pressure on Twitter CEO @jack grows.

    Former First Lady @michelleobama…

    … tech journalist @karaswisher…

    …@ADL…

    …high-tech VC @ChrisSacca, and many others, publicly call on Twitter to permanently ban Trump.

    Dorsey was on vacation in French Polynesia the week of January 4-8, 2021. He phoned into meetings but also delegated much of the handling of the situation to senior execs @yoyoel , Twitter’s Global Head of Trust and Safety, and @vijaya Head of Legal, Policy, & Trust.

    As context, it’s important to understand that Twitter’s staff & senior execs were overwhelmingly progressive.

    In 2018, 2020, and 2022, 96%, 98%, & 99% of Twitter staff’s political donations went to Democrats.

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

    In 2017, Roth tweeted that there were “ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.”

    In April 2022, Roth told a colleague that his goal “is to drive change in the world,” which is why he decided not to become an academic.

    On January 7, @jack emails employees saying Twitter needs to remain consistent in its policies, including the right of users to return to Twitter after a temporary suspension

    After, Roth reassures an employee that “people who care about this… aren’t happy with where we are”

    Around 11:30 am PT, Roth DMs his colleagues with news that he is excited to share.

    “GUESS WHAT,” he writes.

    “Jack just approved repeat offender for civic integrity.”

    The new approach would create a system where five violations (“strikes”) would result in permanent suspension.

    “Progress!” exclaims a member of Roth’s Trust and Safety Team.

    The exchange between Roth and his colleagues makes clear that they had been pushing @jack for greater restrictions on the speech Twitter allows around elections.

    he colleague wants to know if the decision means Trump can finally be banned. The person asks, “does the incitement to violence aspect change that calculus?”

    Roth says it doesn’t. “Trump continues to just have his one strike” (remaining).

    Roth’s colleague’s query about “incitement to violence” heavily foreshadows what will happen the following day.

    On January 8, Twitter announces a permanent ban on Trump due to the “risk of further incitement of violence.”

    On J8, Twitter says its ban is based on “specifically how [Trump’s tweets] are being received & interpreted.”

    But in 2019, Twitter said it did “not attempt to determine all potential interpretations of the content or its intent.”

    The *only* serious concern we found expressed within Twitter over the implications for free speech and democracy of banning Trump came from a junior person in the organization.

    It was tucked away in a lower-level Slack channel known as “site-integrity-auto.”

    “This might be an unpopular opinion but one off ad hoc decisions like this that don’t appear rooted in policy are imho a slippery slope… This now appears to be a fiat by an online platform CEO with a global presence that can gatekeep speech for the entire world…”

    Twitter employees use the term “one off” frequently in their Slack discussions. Its frequent use reveals significant employee discretion over when and whether to apply warning labels on tweets and “strikes” on users.

    Here are typical examples.

    Recall from #TwitterFiles2 by @bariweiss that, according to Twitter staff, “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do.”

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

    Twitter employees recognize the difference between their own politics & Twitter’s Terms of Service (TOS), but they also engage in complex interpretations of content in order to stamp out prohibited tweets, as a series of exchanges over the “#stopthesteal” hashtag reveal.

    Roth immediately DMs a colleague to ask that they add “stopthesteal” & [QAnon conspiracy term] “kraken” to a blacklist of terms to be deamplified.

    Roth’s colleague objects that blacklisting “stopthesteal” risks “deamplifying counterspeech” that validates the election.

    Indeed, notes Roth’s colleague, “a quick search of top stop the steal tweets and they’re counterspeech”

    But they quickly come up with a solution: “deamplify accounts with stopthesteal in the name/profile” since “those are not affiliated with counterspeech”

    But it turns out that even blacklisting “kraken” is less straightforward than they thought. That’s because kraken, in addition to being a QAnon conspiracy theory based on the mythical Norwegian sea monster, is also the name of a cryptocurrency exchange, and was thus “allowlisted”

    Employees struggle with whether to punish users who share screenshots of Trump’s deleted J6 tweets

    “we should bounce these tweets with a strike given the screen shot violates the policy”

    “they are criticising Trump, so I am bit hesitant with applying strike to this user”

    What if a user dislikes Trump *and* objects to Twitter’s censorship? The tweet still gets deleted. But since the *intention* is not to deny the election result, no punishing strike is applied.

    “if there are instances where the intent is unclear please feel free to raise”

    Around noon, a confused senior executive in advertising sales sends a DM to Roth.

    Sales exec: “jack says: ‘we will permanently suspend [Trump] if our policies are violated after a 12 hour account lock’… what policies is jack talking about?”

    Roth: “*ANY* policy violation”

    What happens next is essential to understanding how Twitter justified banning Trump…

    Sales exec: “are we dropping the public interest [policy] now…”

    Roth, six hours later: “In this specific case, we’re changing our public interest approach for his account…”

    The ad exec is referring to Twitter’s policy of “Public-interest exceptions,” which allows the content of elected officials, even if it violates Twitter rules, “if it directly contributes to understanding or discussion of a matter of public concern”

    Roth pushes for a permanent suspension of Rep. Matt Gaetz even though it “doesn’t quite fit anywhere (duh)”

    It’s a kind of test case for the rationale for banning Trump.

    “I’m trying to talk [Twitter’s] safety [team] into… removal as a conspiracy that incites violence.”

    The evening of January 7, the same junior employee who expressed an “unpopular opinion” about “ad hoc decisions… that don’t appear rooted in policy,” speaks up one last time before the end of the day.

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

    Earlier that day, the employee wrote, “My concern is specifically surrounding the unarticulated logic of the decision by FB. That space fills with the idea (conspiracy theory?) that all… internet moguls… sit around like kings casually deciding what people can and cannot see.”

    The employee notes, later in the day, “And Will Oremus noticed the inconsistency too…,” linking to an article for OneZero at Medium called, “Facebook Chucked Its Own Rulebook to Ban Trump.”

    “The underlying problem,” writes @WillOremus , is that “the dominant platforms have always been loath to own up to their subjectivity, because it highlights the extraordinary, unfettered power they wield over the global public square…

    “… and places the responsibility for that power on their own shoulders… So they hide behind an ever-changing rulebook, alternately pointing to it when it’s convenient and shoving it under the nearest rug when it isn’t.”

    “Facebook’s suspension of Trump now puts Twitter in an awkward position. If Trump does indeed return to Twitter, the pressure on Twitter will ramp up to find a pretext on which to ban him as well.”

    Indeed. And as @bariweiss will show tomorrow, that’s exactly what happened.

    credittrader
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 19:33

  • NASA's Orion Spacecraft Will Return To Earth At 25,000 MPH, Splashing Down Off Baja California
    NASA’s Orion Spacecraft Will Return To Earth At 25,000 MPH, Splashing Down Off Baja California

    NASA’s historic uncrewed Artemis 1 mission to the moon and back will conclude on Sunday with the Orion spacecraft returning to Earth. 

    On Sunday afternoon, the Orion spacecraft will slam through Earth’s atmosphere at 25,000 mph, or about 32 times the speed of sound. It will heat up to 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit before splashing into the Pacific Ocean off the western coast of Baja California at 12:40 pm EST. 

    Orion’s descent operations begin around 12 pm EST. Forty minutes later, the spacecraft should be in the ocean if everything runs on schedule. Here’s the splashdown schedule for tomorrow (courtesy of Space.com): 

    “At present, we are on track to have a fully successful mission with some bonus objectives that we’ve achieved along the way,” Mike Sarafin, Artemis I mission manager, told reporters Thursday evening.

    One of the most crucial parts of the mission will be testing the heat shield as Orion enters Earth’s atmosphere. If all goes well, this could indicate NASA is ready to fly astronauts around the moon in 2024 and then put them on the lunar surface by 2025. 

    A live broadcast of the re-entry process will begin around 11 am EST. Watch Live here:

    Meanwhile, Elon Musk’s SpaceX just announced a privately-funded moon mission with DJ Steve Aoki and a Japanese billionaire that could occur soon. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 19:00

  • Perfect Storm Fuels Massive Natural Gas Price Spikes On West Coast
    Perfect Storm Fuels Massive Natural Gas Price Spikes On West Coast

    Authored by Leticia Gonzales via NaturalGasIntel.com,

    Against a backdrop of mostly mild weather across the Lower 48, winter unleashed its fury on the West Coast a bit early this season. The frigid temperatures and unusually heavy precipitation have fueled natural gas demand at a time when storage inventories are low, a drought has reduced hydro-electric power supplies and regional utilities are having trouble receiving coal deliveries.

    The result: historically high natural gas prices that have surged to levels not seen since the summer of 2018. The surge in prices has spread across the Pacific Northwest, farther south throughout California and inland across the Rockies.

    On Thursday, Northern California’s PG&E Citygate recorded spot natural gas prices as high as $36.00/MMBtu. SoCal Citygate cash reached a $33.00 high, while Malin hit $32.00. And that only proved to be batting practice.

    On Friday, the highest price on the West Coast hit $55.00, with offers up to $60.00.

    “I’ve seen prices spike before, but over a short period of time,” said Michael Wiliamson. His consulting firm Williamson Energy purchases wholesale natural gas for end-use customers in California.

    “This sustained period of high prices has never happened before. There’s a lot of different things going on, and they’re all falling at the same time.”

    Is It Really That Cold In California?

    Bitter winter weather has slammed the West Coast this month, driving up heating consumption in a region that normally sees its highest energy needs in the summer.

    The National Weather Service (NWS) said widespread heavy precipitation would begin to blanket the Pacific Northwest and Northern California on Friday and further over the weekend into the Northern Rockies, Great Basin and the rest of California. Anomalously high moisture associated with an atmospheric river was expected to usher in heavy mountain snow, as well as strong rains for lower elevations along the West Coast.

    Snow totals should generally range between six inches and a foot for the higher elevations, according to NWS forecasters. Lighter accumulations of up to three inches were forecast for the interior valleys.

    In the Sierra Nevada mountain range of California, several feet of snow were expected, while excessive rainfall was possible along the coast of southern Oregon and Northern California. Rainfall totals could reach up to four inches, NWS said.

    Even still, with temperatures forecast to climb into the 60s in Los Angeles and into the mid-50s in San Francisco, “it’s not really that cold,” said Fuel and Purchased Power’s Marlon Santa Cruz, manager for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). The executive said a key issue facing the region was that storage inventories are lagging behind.

    Supplies Reclassified, Not Refilled

    Pacific Gas & Electric Corp. (PG&E) in the summer of 2021 reclassified 51 Bcf of storage inventories to cushion gas, rather than working gas. It marked the largest reclassification in any one region, with some market observers calling the scale of the change “preposterous.”

    Williamson said the problem wasn’t with the reclassification. It was that PG&E hasn’t rebuilt working gas inventories.

    As of Dec. 2, Pacific stocks stood at only 217 Bcf, which is more than 18% below year-earlier levels and nearly 24% below the five-year average, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    The Pacific is the only region that continues to fall significantly short of historical levels. After a string of above-average injections in the late fall, Mountain stocks sit about 6% below the five-year average. East inventories sit around 2% below that level. The South Central region, meanwhile, is now at a modest surplus.

    “That’s the head of the nail,” Williamson said.

    “If we had plenty of gas in storage, this wouldn’t be happening. Now, everyone is a hostage.”

    With a client base that include commercial greenhouses and other small customers, the exorbitant prices are concerning, according to Williamson. He worries that if prices were to remain elevated – or climb even higher as the winter progresses – customers may be unable to pay their bills.

    What’s more, the higher prices are not limited to California. In the Desert Southwest, spot gas prices at El Paso S. Mainline/N. Baja surged to $35.75 on Thursday, while the KRGT Del Pool rose to $32.85. By Friday, cash prices in the region also had rocketed to $55.00.

    “At what point in time does a number get so high that people go bankrupt and stop paying their bills? I think we’re getting close to that point,” Williamson said.

    He likened the situation to the fallout of Winter Storm Uri, where utilities filed for bankruptcy and spawned lawsuits and investigations into market manipulation. “People are going to grab lawyers instead of their pocketbooks.”

    Other Issues

    LADWP’s Santa Cruz agreed the storage situation in the West is a concern.

    However, while stockpiles in Northern California remain short of what the market sees as comfortable through the winter, Aliso Canyon storage in Southern California has been “a savior” for the region as it copes with the heightened demand, he said. The storage facility, operating at a reduced capacity following a major leak in 2015, has often had to serve as a buffer during periods of strong demand.

    In November 2021, the California Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously to increase the amount of gas stored at Aliso Canyon ito boost winter supplies for gas and electric customers. The decision was seen as an effort to ensure reliability for the region.

    California may not be the friendliest state to the natural gas industry. Several municipalities have banned the use of new natural gas hook ups, including Los Angeles. Santa Cruz, though, said the municipal utility is relying on natural gas more because coal deliveries also are falling short.

    President Biden earlier this month averted a strike among railroad workers that could have put a stop to coal deliveries. Still, the strike was only one issue plaguing the railroad industry.

    Santa Cruz said following the Covid-19 pandemic, Union Pacific and other railroad companies were forced to lay off workers. Many of the laid off employees never returned as the economy recovered. Now there aren’t enough engineers to drive the trains, he said.

    “There is an endemic supply chain issue impacting the coal industry,” Santa Cruz said.

    “Despite the mines producing, it’s the railroad that can’t deliver the contractual volumes. We find ourselves unable to ramp those coal-fired units up as we normally would. So we make up that generation with natural gas.”

    Meanwhile, West Coast customers find themselves battling for limited supplies.

    Wood Mackenzie notified clients of maintenance on Gas Transmission Northwest’s system between Dec. 6 and 8 that had the potential to impact up to around 300,000 MMBtu/d of volumes flowing through Kingsgate.

    In the Permian Basin, pipeline work on El Paso Natural Gas and the Permian Highway Pipeline also cut into gas deliveries. Ironically, these curtailments have sent prices in that region plunging below zero.

    “All these constraints, and the market is fighting for stagnant supply,” Santa Cruz said. “This is unprecedented.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 18:30

  • Pentagon Chief Warns Putin Is "Modernizing & Expanding" Nuclear Arsenal
    Pentagon Chief Warns Putin Is “Modernizing & Expanding” Nuclear Arsenal

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin in Friday comments weighed in on the state of Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal, saying that President Vladimir Putin is in the midst of undertaking the modernization and expansion of his nuclear capabilities. 

    He further repeated the charge which has been coming from Western officials of late that Putin is making nuclear threats, despite the Kremlin’s insistence that critics are misinterpreting the Russian leader’s remarks, including the latest which came days ago.

    Via Reuters

    Austin said at an event inaugurating the new head of US Strategic Command (STRATCOM), Anthony Cotton, that even as it struggles in enact its military objectives in Ukraine, Russia is “modernizing and expanding its nuclear arsenal.”

    “And as the Kremlin continues its cruel and unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine, the whole world has seen Putin engage in deeply irresponsible nuclear saber-rattling,” he said. 

    “So make no mistake. Nuclear powers have a profound responsibility to avoid provocative behavior, and to lower the risk of proliferation, and to prevent escalation and nuclear war,” he stressed.

    The Pentagon chief hailed STRATCOM (US Strategic Command) as providing the “ultimate backstop” against attacks against the US and its allies, given its chief mission is strategic nuclear deterrence and overseeing global strikes.

    Below: Number of nuclear warheads stockpiled by NATO and Russia as of 2022, by type

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Austin appeared to be responding to the latest remarks by Putin to the press days ago, wherein he once again addressed the threat of nuclear war, a risk which he said is “rising” in relation to the Ukraine situation.

    Putin further took the opportunity to restate Russia’s ‘defensive’ nuclear doctrine, stressing that nuclear weapons would be considered as a response to an attack on Russian territory, while also stating that he stands ready to defend Russian territory “using all available means”. 

    According to a translation of Putin’s remarks in Sky News:

    “We didn’t speak about usage of nuclear weapons.” Then, he said: “Russia has not gone mad.”

    “We have the most advanced weapons, but we do not want to wave it around.”

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

    Despite the thrust of Putin’s comments actually going in the direction of firmly asserting that Russia does not want to use nuclear weapons, he was widely accused in Western press and among officials of making nuclear “threats” – and it wasn’t the first time his words were misconstrued, and likely won’t be the last.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 18:00

  • Gaetz: McCarthy Is Not The Right Leader For The Moment
    Gaetz: McCarthy Is Not The Right Leader For The Moment

    Authored by Rep. Matt Gaetz via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The administration is aiding and abetting an invasion of the Southern border. Our rights are being stripped away. We are at war and the enemy is within.

    In response to this existential threat, we’re told that we need to entrust a congressman previously recognized as the “tech industry’s best friend” as our leader.

    That’s boneheaded. Kevin McCarthy is not the right leader for the moment. Fortunately, enough Republicans recognize that to stop him from being the next Speaker of the House. Five House Republicans, including myself, have announced that we will not vote for McCarthy during the January 3rd speaker election. Many have privately also informed McCarthy of their plans to vote for someone else.

    McCarthy’s allies are fretting and are pushing out a false narrative that opposition to the Paul Ryan endorsed McCarthy will embolden Democrats to elect a squish Republican as Speaker. It turns out that spin is right, just not the way the McCarthy camp sold it.

    Semafor is reporting that “Leader-designate Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. waved off the suggestion Democrats would help elect an alternative for speaker, while Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C. all but volunteered Democrats’ support to help get McCarthy over the threshold of votes needed for speaker.”

    This is the uniparty in action and should let you know that McCarthy is not a threat to the system destroying America. How could he be? His closest adviser has represented Pfizer, Amazon, and a firm dedicated to giving out a path to American citizenship to wealthy Chinese. His roommate counts Google among his clients.

    This is the moment for a fight and McCarthy’s instinct is flight. In the days after January 6, McCarthy asked in a call with Liz Cheney whether Twitter can take away Conservative Congressman Barry Moore’s Twitter account because Rep. Moore pointed out that the shooting of Ashli Babbit doesn’t fit the left’s narrative of January 6.

    McCarthy, likewise, said I was endangering the safety of Rep. Cheney by criticizing her.

    The defense of McCarthy is that he isn’t an ideologue. He just wants to get along, they say, and moves with the times.

    Rep. Matt Rosendale, one of the five Republicans standing athwart McCarthy, put it well when he said, “We don’t need a weatherman, we need a leader.” A leader would stand up to the Biden administration’s demands to send tens of billions of dollars to protect Ukraine’s border instead of ours.

    A leader wouldn’t wait until thousands of military service members have been kicked out due to a mandate to end it. That’s the problem with living with Frank Luntz and making all of your decisions based on polling data. You will always be late.

    But enough about Rep. McCarthy, now is the time for conservatives to come to terms with the fact that the Speakership is up for grabs. Five Republicans are enough to stop Kevin McCarthy from becoming Speaker.

    In order to avoid chaos on January 3rd, Republicans need to embrace reality.

    Rep. Andy Biggs has thrown his hat into the ring. He is a true conservative and would be a much better choice than McCarthy. I recognize, though, that five House Republicans might step up and say that they won’t vote for Biggs under any circumstances.

    There are likely dozens or even hundreds of House Republicans that I would love to support as Speaker. It’s time for them to prove their case. McCarthy has lost his.

    Congressman Matt Gaetz (R) represents the 1st Congressional District of Florida. He is a member of the 117th Congress currently serving his third term in the U.S. House of Representatives. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 17:30

  • Snap And Other Tech Firms Want Employees Back In The Office
    Snap And Other Tech Firms Want Employees Back In The Office

    Silicon Valley employees who have turned ‘work from home’ into ‘drink wine and watch Netflix with your cat in between emails – from home’ have been put on notice.

    Management at several tech companies have told employees they’ll be required to come into the office at least three days a week if they want to keep their jobs, MarketWatch reports.

    The latest salvo came from Snap Inc. SNAP last month, which expects employees to spend at least 80% of their time in the office, according to an internal memo obtained by Bloomberg. Snap Chief Executive Evan Spiegel says the policy, which starts in February, will help the company achieve “full potential” and allow workers to reach “our collective success.”

    According to market research firm IDC, large companies that “deploy reactive and tactical hybrid work models” will suffer an estimated 20% revenue loss in 2024 due to job attrition and underperforming teams.

    Perhaps the most notable case is Twitter, whose employees Elon Musk put on notice in early November that the company’s ‘work-from-anywhere’ arrangement wasn’t going to cut it, and employees would be required to spend at least 40 hours per week in the office.

    Company C3.ai wasn’t having the ‘work from home’ at all – and now has employees filling three floors of a Redwood City, California office building.

    “Everyone is here. Have been for a year,” said CEO Tom Siebel. “Look at that packed parking lot. People need to interact in person to effectively collaborate.“

    Box Inc. CEO Aaron Levie told MarketWatch “It is super important to have people work side by side and in person,” adding “You will see more momentum.“

    And Adds Paul Friesen, chief marketing officer of Rapid – which has advocated for workers to spend at least three days per week in the office, said: “We value having employees come together, collaborate and drive productive outcomes in person while also understanding the new world work environment and the need to balance in-office with work from home and remote experiences.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 17:00

  • Cross-Dressing Book For Pre-K Students Crossed The Line
    Cross-Dressing Book For Pre-K Students Crossed The Line

    Authored by Michael Ryan via RealClear Wire,

    A school district that gave preschoolers a book on cross-dressing has changed its procedures for giving out books after news of the incident surfaced last week.

    As first reported exclusively by The Lion and The Heartlander news sites, a 4-year-old preschooler in the Turner School District in Kansas City, Kansas, took home the book Jacob’s New Dress. It’s a picture book in which a little boy wears girls’ clothes and even competes with his friend Emily to be a princess.

    “I don’t think this should be, obviously, any kind of a subject for a school to be speaking about,” Jim Clay, the 4-year-old’s grandfather, told The Lion. “The sexualization of our children in society today is just disgusting. The grooming that’s taking place is disgusting.”

    At the end of the week, Clay reported the Turner district had explained what happened and what changes will be made to prevent such a sexually provocative book being tendered to young children there again.

    The district’s statement to Clay, and apparently others, says its early-childhood program began accepting once-weekly donated books last year from local nonprofit LiteracyKC. Such partnerships, the district said, help it expand resources and community outreach.

    “Please be assured that these books were not a part of district curriculum, were not required reading, and were sent home to be read at the discretion of parents,” the district wrote without naming the book in question or explaining how it escaped the district’s notice.

    “Moving forward, our district staff will be pre-approving all books and activities provided by Literacy KC to ensure they are age-appropriate and align with our district curriculum and educational mission,” the statement concluded – notably, without apology to offended parents and guardians.

    Case closed? Maybe, maybe not.

    “This past spring we learned State Farm was distributing transgender books in Florida,” says Mary Miller, an Oregon-based parents’ rights advocate who spoke about the cultural divide between parents and schools in Kansas City at a community forum in June.

    “Now Literacy KC is doing the same thing in Kansas City preschool classrooms, after having received a multimillion-dollar grant from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. There is a coordinated effort by trans rights activist groups such as GLSEN (formerly the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) and the Human Rights Campaign to push transgender ideology on schoolchildren nationwide.

    “Literacy KC will need to clean up its act to regain the trust of parents and grandparents in the Kansas City community.”

    Moreover, as Turner has just done, other school districts may need to reconsider the wisdom of outsourcing the approval of classroom materials to even well-intentioned outside organizations.

    The incident also raises questions about Literacy KC’s vetting process, and how many other school districts in the Kansas City region have handed out books such as Jacob’s New Dress to the youngest of students – and whether parents have been made aware of it.

    The Lion on Monday sent questions to both the Turner district and Literacy KC. Among other things, we asked Literacy KC if this book is being given out to other districts in the area, and if so, which ones; if Literacy KC continues to consider a cross-dressing book to be appropriate for such young children – or, if not, whether it will suspend the book’s distribution; and whether it is fair for such sexually and gender-identity suggestive books to be given to such young children without pre-approval by parents?

    The Lion also has requested copies of any correspondence between the Turner district and Literacy KC about the incident.

    The Turner district is not the only one that has been roiled by controversy over this and other gender-fluidity books in early grades. The book was noted as objectionable to parents in a news report last month about outrage over transgender policies in Lawrence Township Public Schools in New Jersey.

    “Can we just get back to teaching?” one New Jersey parent was quoted.

    Jacob’s New Dress also was pulled from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools system in North Carolina in 2017.

    The media portray such actions as right-wing book banning rather than a matter of discretion, and Jacob’s New Dress as “part of a first-grade lesson on what to do when someone is bullied.” Critics counter that anti-bullying messages can be transmitted outside of a cross-dressing context.

    Moreover, in making the issue one of “book banning,” the media overlook the role and rights of parents in bringing up children. The media don’t, for instance, call it “banning” when the Motion Picture Association warns parents about age-inappropriate materials in films, with its PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 (adults only) ratings.

    Yet, with books, it’s anything goes?

    Not for Clay, nor many other parents and grandparents like him.

    “My kids used to dress up like Power Rangers when they were kids, and we’d pretend that they were a Power Ranger with them,” Clay said. “I’m not interested in pretending that guys are girls and girls are guys. 

    “All three of my kids grew up in the Turner district. If there was any questionable material, they always allowed us to opt-out or keep our kid home that day, and they would keep us informed. But apparently not with this.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 16:30

  • "Insidious": Madonna, Jimmy Fallon, Gwyneth Paltrow And Other Celebs Sued Over NFT Endorsements
    “Insidious”: Madonna, Jimmy Fallon, Gwyneth Paltrow And Other Celebs Sued Over NFT Endorsements

    Celebrities who thought doing crypto promotions would be a quick way to make some easy money have another thing coming.

    Weeks ago, Tom Brady, Giselle Bündchen, Larry David & Steph Curry were sued over a now-infamous Super Bowl ad promoting failed cryptocurrency exchange FTX.

    Now, a class action lawsuit filed in federal court is targeting clebrities who were secretly compensated for shipping ‘Bored Ape Yacht Club’ NFTs, Deadline reports. The lawsuit includes Kevin Hart, Madonna, Jimmy Fallon, Justin Bieber, Paris Hilton, Serena Williams, DJ Khaled, Gwyneth Paltrow and a host of other celebrities.

    Photos: Getty via Deadline

    Universal TV is also named as a defendant, while high-profile music manager Guy Oseary has been fingered as the ‘brains’ behind the operation.

    “Defendants’ promotional campaign was wildly successful, generating billions of dollars in sales and re-sales,” reads the lawsuit, filed by Adonis Real and Adam Titcher filed on December 8 in U.S. District Court in California. “The manufactured celebrity endorsements and misleading promotions regarding the launch of an entire BAYC ecosystem (the so-called Otherside metaverse) were able to artificially increase the interest in and price of the BAYC NFTs during the Relevant Period, causing investors to purchase these losing investments at drastically inflated prices,” the filing continues.

    As Deadline notes;

    Essentially, on their various platforms, through public statements and in Fallon’s case on The Tonight Show in late November 2021, the celebs praised the Yuga Labs backed BAYC NFTs to the public by claiming to be customers themselves. Now, the allure of non-fungible tokens may have dimmed considerably ( a.k.a. nosedived) in recent months, but to BAYC buyers jumping on board last year, they quickly proved “losing investments at drastically inflated prices.”

    With the Oseary-backed crypto company Moonpay working with Yuga to covertly slip payments to the promoting A-listed talent, the whole scheme saw Hart, Fallon, Paltrow give BAYC NFTs the seal of approval without the celebs revealing the often hefty compensation they were receiving.

    “The truth is that the Company’s entire business model relies on using insidious marketing and promotional activities from A-list celebrities that are highly compensated (without disclosing such), to increase demand of the Yuga securities by convincing potential retail investors that the price of these digital assets would appreciate,” reads the 95-page fraud complaint, which contains 10 claims.

    “During the Class Period, Defendants engaged in a plan, scheme, conspiracy, and course of conduct pursuant to which they knowingly or recklessly engaged in acts, transactions, practices, and courses of business that operated as a fraud and deceit upon Plaintiffs and the other members of the Class,” the filing continues. “In truth, the Executive Defendants and Oseary used their connections to MoonPay and its service as a covert way to compensate the Promoter Defendants for their promotions of the BAYC NFTs without disclosing it to unsuspecting investors.“

    A spokesperson for Yuga Labs said in a statement that “We strongly believe that they are without merit, and look forward to proving as much.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 16:00

  • A Half-Serious Prediction Of What The Next Two Years Will Look Like
    A Half-Serious Prediction Of What The Next Two Years Will Look Like

    Authored by Eric Utter via AmericanThinker.com,

    *December 9: Last mail-in ballots counted for 2022 midterm elections, more than a month after “Election Day.”

    *December 14: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) visits Wayne Corporation manufacturing site, sings “The Wheels on the Bus” song to executives.

    *December 25: President Joe Biden wishes Americans a “very merry…um, you know, the thing” and adds, “Don’t let your kids eat all the chocolate bunnies at once!”

    *January 3, 2023: Republicans accidentally install Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski as speaker of the House.

    *February 2: New York mayor Eric Adams drops “Staten Island Chuck” during Groundhog Day ceremony, killing him instantly.  Adams blames” systemic racism” for the incident.  Al Gore says climate change to blame.  Other Democrats claim it was Trump’s fault.

    *February 6–10: Democrats in the Senate debate a new proposal to counteract global warming and “save our planet” while record-breaking cold temperatures paralyze much of the nation, causing hundreds of deaths.

    *March 17: President Biden urges all Americans to celebrate “Cinco de Mayo” responsibly.

    *May 9: Project Veritas video released proving “alphabet agencies” headed by Satan-worshipers.

    *May 23: Conservative media release correspondence and video proving that Joe Biden paid for Hunter’s hookers and drugs with money “The Big Guy” obtained from Chinese communists.

    *May 24: The New York Times, Washington Post, and MSNBC denounce the reports, calling them “Russian disinformation.”

    *July 4: President Biden encourages “all, um, uh, immigrants” to enjoy “the, uh, Armistice Day.”

    *October 18: The Federal Reserve announces that the adjusted annual rate of Inflation for September was 20.2%.

    *November 16: Reports indicate that murders were up 49% over last year, burglaries up 742% for same time period.

    *December 1: Democratic Senate passes bill that, if enacted, will ban all forms of Christian worship as “apostasy.”

    *January 1, 2024: President Biden wishes “everyone in the world, except, you know, the Russkies, a Happy Labor Day.”

    *February 22: President Biden, after conferring with the CDC and assorted medical “experts,” announces that a new coronavirus has emerged from a “wet market out east” and orders a two-month lockdown to “fatten…I mean flatten…the curve.”  No one will be allowed to travel, and all non-essential businesses will be shut down.  Some wags have started calling the illness the “Boston Flu.”  Authorities threaten to shoot them.

    *October 10: President Biden issues executive order making it a felony to be caught outside without a full, properly worn hazmat suit as the Boston Flu latest iteration of the coronavirus rages on.

    *October 11: President Biden issues an executive order making ice cream the “official food” of the United States.

    *October 12: President Biden issues executive order permanently banning on-site voting “everywhere and for all time.”  Henceforth, only mail-in balloting will be allowed.

    *November 5: Mainstream media outlets excitedly announce that Democrats are winning in a landslide, and that a “Big Blue Wave” is sweeping the nation on this “Election Day” 2024.  All project John Fetterman (D-Pa.) to be the next president of the United States.

    *November 11: Final totals are announced for the 2024 election, giving Democrats a 61-39 hold on the Senate and a 292-143 edge in the House.  The Big Blue Wave has done its job.

    *January 29, 2025: Democratic Congress ratifies bill to “eliminate” all political opposition.  President Fetterman signs the legislation into law.  After achieving one-party rule, top Democrats boast, “We have — finally — saved our democracy!”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 15:30

  • NYC Health Officials Urge Residents To Mask Up Amid 'Tridemic'
    NYC Health Officials Urge Residents To Mask Up Amid ‘Tridemic’

    A ‘tridemic‘ of flu, RSV, and Covid-19 cases have led New York City health officials to ‘strongly’ recommend that people wear “a high-quality mask, such as a KN95 or KF94, or an N95 respirator” indoors and in crowded outdoor settings.

    On Friday, the city’s health commissioner, Dr. Ashwin Vasan, recommended that New Yorkers get vaccinated and boosted, and wear a mask whenever ‘inside stores, lobbies, hallways, elevators, public transportation, schools, child care facilities and other shared spaces.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsMasks will remain voluntary except in health care facilities such as nursing homes, where mask mandates are still enforced.

    Of course, there’s plenty of evidence masks provide minimal, if zero benefit.

    According to the NY Times, hospitalization rates have increased around 20% over the past two weeks, with the city’s seven-day average going from 2,425 to 3,761 over that period. The number of Covid cases has increased around 55% over the period, while flu cases rose 64% during the week ending Dec. 3, and RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus has also been on the rise.

    Have people’s immune systems been weakened by two years of avoiding largely non-lethal diseases and other factors?

     

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 15:00

  • Digital Currency: The Fed Moves Toward Monetary Totalitarianism
    Digital Currency: The Fed Moves Toward Monetary Totalitarianism

    Authored by André Marques via The Mises Institute,

    The Federal Reserve is sowing the seeds for its central bank digital currency (CBDC). It may seem that the purpose of a CBDC is to facilitate transactions and enhance economic activity, but CBDCs are mainly about more government control over individuals. If a CBDC were implemented, the central bank would have access to all transactions in addition to being capable of freezing accounts.

    It may seem dystopian—something that only totalitarian governments would do—but there have been recent cases of asset freezing in Canada and Brazil. Moreover, a CBDC would give the government the power to determine how much a person can spend, establish expiration dates for deposits, and even penalize people who saved money.

    The war on cash is also a reason why governments want to implement CBDCs. The end of cash would mean less privacy for individuals and would allow central banks to maintain a monetary policy of negative interest rates with greater ease (since individuals would be unable to withdraw money commercial banks to avoid losses).

    Once the CBDC arrives, instead of a deposit being a commercial bank’s liability, a deposit would be the central bank’s liability.

    In 2020, China launched a digital yuan pilot program. As mentioned by Seeking Alpha, China wants to implement a CBDC because “this would give [the government] a remarkable amount of information about what consumers are spending their money on.”

    The government could easily track digital payments with a CBDC. Bloomberg noted in an article published when the digital yuan pilot program was launched that the digital currency “offers China’s authorities a degree of control never possible with cash.” A CBDC could allow the Chinese government to monitor mobile app purchases (which accounted for about 16 percent of the country’s gross domestic product in 2020) more closely. Bloomberg describes how much control a CBDC could give Chinese authorities:

    The PBOC [People’s Bank of China] has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are “whitelisted” for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out.

    (Details on China’s social credit system can be found here.)

    The Chinese government is waging war on cash. And they are not alone. In 2017, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) published a document offering suggestions to governments—even in the face of strong public opposition—on how to move toward a cashless society. Governments and central bankers claim that the shift to a cashless society will help prevent crime and increase convenience for ordinary people. But the real motivation behind the war on cash is more government control over the individual.

    And the US is getting ready to establish its own CBDC (or something similar). The first step was taken in August, when the Fed announced FedNow. FedNow will be an instant payment system and is scheduled to be launched between May and July 2023.

    FedNow is practically identical to Brazil’s PIX. PIX was implemented by the Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) in November 2020. It is a convenient instant payment system (using mobile devices) without user fees, and a reputation as being safe to use.

    A year after its launch, PIX already had 112 million people registered, or just over half of the Brazilian population. Of course, frauds and scams do occur over PIX, but most are social engineering scams (see here, here, and here) and are not system flaws; that is, they are scams that exploit the public’s lack of knowledge of PIX technology.

    Bear in mind that PIX is not the Brazilian CBDC. It is just a payment system. However, the BCB has access to transactions made through PIX; therefore, PIX can be considered the seed of the Brazilian CBDC. It is already an invasion of the privacy of Brazilians. And FedNow is set to follow suit.

    Additionally, the New York Fed has recently launched a twelve-week pilot program with several commercial banks to test the feasibility of a CBDC in the US. The program will use digital tokens to represent bank deposits. Institutions involved in the program will make simulated transactions to test the system. According to Reuters, “the pilot [program] will test how banks using digital dollar tokens in a common database can help speed up payments.”

    Banks involved in the pilot program include BNY Mellon, Citi, HSBC, Mastercard, PNC Bank, TD Bank, Truist, US Bank, and Wells Fargo. The global financial messaging service provider SWIFT is also participating to “support interoperability across the international financial ecosystem.” (This video details the pilot program and how the US CBDC would work.)

    The IMF is also thinking of a way to connect different CBDCs under a single system. In other words, the IMF plans to create a PIX/FedNow for CBDCs around the globe:

    Things could change as money becomes tokenized; that is, accessible to anyone with the right private key and transferable to anyone with access to the same network. Examples of tokenized money include so-called stablecoins, such as USD Coin, and central bank digital currency.

    The reception of Brazil’s PIX shows that FedNow will likely be widely adopted due to its convenience; however, this positive economic and technological element should not overshadow the increased control instant payment systems will give to central banks. The BCB has access to all transactions made by Brazilians through PIX, and this would only get worse should a CBDC be implemented.

    With a CBDC, it would be easier for the government to carry out expansionary monetary policies (which cause misallocations of resources and business cycles) and exert greater control over citizens’ finances.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 12/10/2022 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 10

Today’s News 10th December 2022

  • Former Assistant City Attorney And Police Officer In Atlanta Charged In $7 Million PPP Fraud Scheme
    Former Assistant City Attorney And Police Officer In Atlanta Charged In $7 Million PPP Fraud Scheme

    Authored by Matt McGregor via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A former assistant city attorney and police officer in Atlanta has been charged with defrauding the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) out of $7 million.

    DOJ Media PPP Fraud Chart. (Courtesy of the DOJ)

    The indictment alleges that Shelitha Robertson, 60, and other co-conspirators submitted fraudulent PPP loan applications for several companies they owned, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

    Robertson allegedly siphoned over $7 million in PPP loan funds and used them to purchase luxury items such as a Rolls-Royce, a motorcycle, and jewelry, as well as to transfer funds to her co-conspirators and family members.

    On Dec. 6, Robertson was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering.

    If convicted, she will face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each wire fraud charge and a maximum of 10 years for the charge of money laundering.

    “Robertson allegedly stole millions of dollars in taxpayer money intended to help small businesses stay afloat during the pandemic,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan Buchanan. “CARES Act loans were designed to help sustain small businesses during the pandemic, not to serve as a source of personal enrichment. We will continue to vigorously investigate and prosecute anyone who fraudulently obtains these critical funds.”

    In 2020, Congress passed the largest financial support package in U.S. history: the $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, which authorized $349 billion in PPP loans.

    The program provided small businesses with funds to cover up to eight weeks of payroll costs so the businesses could fill in the financial gaps created by the lockdowns.

    It was implemented by the Small Business Administration (SBA) through the Treasury Department, and it provided forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and other expenses.

    Since its implementation, the program has been open season for multiple fraud schemes.

    The DOJ’s Fraud Section leads its Criminal Division’s prosecution of schemes that target the PPP.

    The Fraud Section has prosecuted more than 192 defendants in over 121 criminal cases and has seized more than $78 million in cash proceeds derived from fraudulently obtained PPP funds, as well as several real estate properties and luxury items purchased with those proceeds.

    In December, the DOJ indicted defendants in more than 10 cases.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 21:40

  • 9 Million Millennials Moved Back In With Their Parents This Year
    9 Million Millennials Moved Back In With Their Parents This Year

    The good news is that they still have jobs (if one believes the goalseeked propaganda spewed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics). The bad news is taht soaring rents have forced millions of young Americans to move back in with their parents this year, according to a new survey.

    As Bloomberg’s Alex Tanzi writes, about one in four millennials are living with their parents, according to the survey of 1,200 people by Pollfish for the website PropertyManagement.com. That’s equivalent to about 18 million people between the ages of 26 and 41. More than half said they moved back in with family in the past year.

    Among those who slunk back to their parents’ basement, the surge in rental costs was the main reason given for the move. About 15% of millennial renters say that they’re spending more than half their after-tax income on rent.

    The disruptions of the pandemic, which triggered massive job losses as well as a spike in housing costs, have driven an unprecedented shakeup in living arrangements. In September of 2020, a survey by Pew found that for the first time since the Great Depression, a majority of Americans aged between 18 and 29 were living with their parents.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 21:20

  • The Debate Between Gold & Bitcoin In 2023
    The Debate Between Gold & Bitcoin In 2023

    Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

    The FTX scandal has thrown the future of cryptocurrencies into doubt. Supporters of bitcoin, which has proved to be remarkably robust at a time when the whole cryptocurrency ecosystem is threatened by scandal and a systemic collapse, are still asserting that it is the future money.

    This article addresses a number of issues that next year will make or break bitcoin’s claim over gold. Besides the interest of governments to prevent it having any monetary role, hodlers ignore the legal status of gold as money, and the different treatment likely to be accorded to bitcoin in criminal law. Furthermore, bulls of bitcoin are mainly only that: speculators hoping for a profit measured in their fiat currencies.

    This is not to deny bitcoin’s virtues: only to question its monetary future relative to gold at a time when the period of declining interest rates, which played a large part in fuelling the cryptocurrency phenomenon, appears to have ended. Furthermore, the financial considerations in the geopolitical context centre on the dollar’s relationship with gold, leaving cryptocurrencies as wallflowers in the financial conflict between east and west.

    Introduction

    If there is one uncontroversial fact in the science of economics, it is that the central issue is the inflation of currency and credit and has been increasingly so since the First World War. The debasement of the circulating medium has always been western governments’ principal monetary policy. The last British attempt to stand in the way of the inflation steamroller ended in 1931, when economists, such as Keynes, pointed out that a gradual and automatic lowering of real wages that results from a reduction of the currency’s purchasing power would be less strongly resisted “than attempts to revise monetary wages downwards”.

    This statement was economical with the reality. The error was found in the difference between pre-war and post-war gold standards. It should be remembered that the UK’s 1925—1931 gold standard was a bullion standard, as opposed to the sovereign coin standard which existed prior to 1914.  From 1925 when the new standard was introduced, the issue of sovereign coin was no longer at the option of banknote holders, but at the Bank of England’s. The Bank was not interested in redeeming its own notes for coin. Therefore, only the very wealthy would be able to redeem currency and credit sufficient to obtain 400-ounce bars, which valued in today’s sterling is about £586,000 ($714,000). The ordinary person was disenfranchised by this arrangement, compared with the pre-war coin standard when a single sovereign could be obtained for a single paper pound. The result was that abandoning the bullion standard in 1931 was the political option of least resistance.

    Instead of a bullion standard, if the British government had resurrected the pre-war coin standard, public opposition to inflationism would have most probably ruled against monetary debasement; and crucially, the government’s room for economic intervention would be severely restricted. But so entrenched is the ideology of interventionism that no British economist today would agree with this analysis.

    Not only can inflationism not be easily refuted today, it is lionised as being an essential policy. Nearly a century of inflationism has conditioned establishment economists to reject the restrictions of gold as money and as the sheet anchor for the valuation of credit. But the few of us conscious of the true cost of monetary debasement are increasingly aware that the commitment to inflation of fiat currencies and credit is rushing us all towards a final crisis. It is this awareness that has also fuelled speculation in cryptocurrency alternatives to gold. But as interest rates began to rise thereby expected to stabilise fiat currencies, the cryptocurrency bubble has deflated. 

    An interesting debate is whether cryptocurrencies, particularly bitcoin, can secure advantage over government currencies if their purchasing power continues to diminish at an accelerated rate. Bitcoin and those of its stablemates claiming a currency role will have to overcome the consequences of a reversal of falling interest rate trends towards higher levels in future. The debate will almost certainly intensify between parties for and against, none of which have a life experience of sound money, of its role as a stabiliser of credit values, and how this might be achieved under a cryptocurrency regime.

    Assuming the reader of this article is aware that after a near four-decade decline to the lower bound, interest rates may have entered a new phase of rising rates, we should address the gold versus cryptocurrencies debate first, before looking at the consequences of rising interest rates for currencies, and therefore gold and bitcoin in 2023.

    The problem with bitcoin as money

    The supreme cryptocurrency standard is widely acknowledged to be bitcoin. It is bitcoin which is currently promoted as the private sector replacement for government currencies. But even to talk of bitcoin as a currency is to mislabel it. A currency is a form of credit, where there is a counterparty risk. This risk is absent when a bitcoin is both owned and possessed by a person or business. It is therefore a competing form of money, which legally is physical gold and silver coin, the international legal position for which is laid out in the Appendix to this article. If it is anything, then bitcoin is not currency but a competing form of money.

    Theoretically, as opposed to the legal position, it is not up to an economist to choose what is money. Ultimately, it is the public that decides. Undoubtedly, for some enthusiasts, bitcoin might be money to be hoarded, and spent as a last resort. This is precisely the established role which gold coin fulfils. But there is good reason to believe that the majority of devotees are in it for speculative profits. In other words, they do not intend to ever spend bitcoin, but to sell it for national currency. Now that interest rates have risen from the zero bound, the test will be whether bitcoin turns out to be no more than a speculative counter, aping the performance of high-flying technology stocks, and correlating more with the Nasdaq index instead of discounting the inflation of state currencies and associated bank credit.

    To its credit, through all the cryptocurrency scams and collapses, bitcoin has retained its integrity. There is no doubt that in its construction bitcoin is remarkably robust. And for the international traveller it retains the advantage of not yet being subject to extensive regulations and restrictions on capital transfers. But the belief that it is a realistic form of money must be based on either the ability of bitcoin to work alongside the fiat currency system or in the event of a total breakdown of the monetary system that it will be replaced by bitcoin. And supporters seem to think that the established international legal definitions of money can be ignored.

    Where this is a particular problem is in the different property rights accorded to money and currency from other forms of property. In criminal law, if, say, a painting is stollen from you and you manage to trace it to a new owner, you can reclaim it as your property, even if the current possessor acquired it in good faith. This is what allows Jewish families to recover artwork stolen from them in the Second World War.

    If, however, someone steals money, currency, or access to your bank account and transfers your property in them to another party, so long as that party was not acting in concert with the criminals, you cannot reclaim this form of property. But when we consider the case of bitcoin, it does not appear to fall into the categories of money and credit for the purpose of the law. Through the blockchain, the trail of previous owners is recorded pseudonymously, so property rights can be established.

    This means that the authorities can also trace the ownership of bitcoin. If you have left them on an exchange wallet, they can be identified as having come into your possession. Even if you have moved them into your own wallet (pseudonymous ownership) the know-your-client and anti-money laundering regulations which would have been completed by you before you opened an account on an exchange would trace possession to you.
    If the authorities know or suspect that at an earlier stage of its ownership, your bitcoin were the proceeds of crime, then they can be confiscated. This means that unlike the possession of money, cash, or bank credit you cannot be certain that you do indeed own your bitcoin acquired in all innocence.

    It might not be beyond the bounds of possibility for the state to use this criminal law to attack bitcoin as a rival to its own currency. So far, this form of attack has not been deployed, but the threat remains.

    In addition to ignoring its legal status, bitcoin enthusiasts do not appear understand the implications of entire economies operating on credit, being central bank credit in the form of banknotes and bank deposits in the commercial banking system. If bitcoin is to act as money, it must support the existence of related credit, and in doing so it will have to provide price stability to goods and services over the long term. But bitcoin’s hard limit of issue makes it more likely that its purchasing power would increase significantly if commonly adopted as money. Furthermore, so far it has proved to be extremely volatile valued in fiat currencies. Both the hard limit to its quantity and its volatility makes it unsuited as a reference point for credit, which is the lifeblood of every economy. It would be impossible for businesses to calculate financial returns for commercial investment, a problem made more acute by today’s borrowers used to their miscalculations being rescued by continual credit debasement and suppressed interest rates.

    Even if they were permitted to do so — which is difficult to envisage ¬– banks will almost certainly not wish to extend credit based on bitcoin. A bitcoin anarchist might respond that the entire banking system should fail with the end of fiat currencies. But this assumes that in this extreme event, the state will not come up with a solution which allows it to maintain control over credit. The best we can hope for in these extreme circumstances is that central banks and the political class learn the painful lessons of inflationism and vow to return to a credit system based on sound money — which is legally, and always has been gold.

    Gold and rising interest rates 

    It has been pointed out above that bitcoin’s value has declined along with rising interest rates. In derivative markets, rising interest rates are also seen as being disadvantageous to gold and favourable to fiat. Indeed, for most of 2022 rising dollar interest rates have seen gold decline, at least until recently, when expectations for higher interest rates softened. It has been that way for gold because the dominant players in derivative markets believe it to be so, and they account for their financing costs in fiat currencies. But while admitting to the accounting issue, the belief in the relationship between interest rates, gold, and currencies is based on a common misconception.

    Both Keynesians and monetarists claim that interest rates are the price of credit, so if interest rates are raised, they say that demand for credit will be reduced. It is on this understanding that central bank interest rate policies are based. But empirical evidence shows that this relationship is incorrect. The explanation is simple. As a reflection of time preference, interest rates compensate creditors for loss of possession of currency or credit in the form of bank deposits. To the loss of use value and a risk that the borrower might default must be added the expectation of any changes in the currency’s purchasing power.

    Unless this last factor is recognised by rate-setters who lean towards suppressing rates, a currency will suffer on the foreign exchanges accordingly. And if policy makers for other fiat currencies are similarly supressing interest rates below their time preference values, then it will be reflected in higher gold prices rather than exchange rate adjustments. With respect to gold, it is not the fact that gold yields a low interest rate on loan: that is a function of gold’s stability relative to that of a fiat currency. Therefore, what matters in the relationship between gold and a fiat currency is the degree to which the interest rate demanded in the market for the currency reflects the prospects for its purchasing power.

    However, traders account in fiat currencies. So understandably, they are more interested in maximising nominal interest rates and view the lower rate on gold as a cost. But as we can see from the chart below, in the 1970s official rates (in this case the Fed funds rate) rose and at the same time the gold price rose as well.

    The day the Bretton Woods gold peg was finally abandoned in 1971, the dollar price of gold was $43. Between 1971—1972, the Fed funds rate had varied between 3.3% and 5.5%. By the end of the decade, on 21 January 1980 at the PM fix gold was priced at $850, an increase of nearly nineteen times. At that time, the Fed funds rate was at 14%, clearly forced higher by the markets in accordance with time preference theory. Chairman Volcker subsequently increased the funds rate to 17.5% by April, and then to 19% in January 1981 to slay the inflation dragon. At that rate, the Fed’s dollar was yielding more than warranted by time preference, which in effect was Volcker’s policy objective.

    For derivative speculators, the condition which breaks the accounting relationship between gold and dollar interest rates is when markets begin to take the inflation threat seriously. Today, that does not yet appear to be the case. We can say this because derivative markets impose a relationship between fiat currency interest rates and that of gold which denies the existence of time preference. It is an important conclusion which begs the question: will 2023 see a return to time preference considerations for the relationship between gold and fiat currency values, and how will bitcoin’s price behave in these circumstances?

    To affirm its status as money, bitcoin will have to obey the laws of time preference. In other words, its current relationship with interest rates must change, so that rising interest rates reflecting fiat currencies’ loss of their purchasing power should become reflected in rising values for bitcoin. We will not try to guess this future. But we can say confidently that if the debasement of currencies accelerates, gold’s relative value will increase accordingly while that of bitcoin might not.

    The geopolitical wildcard

    To the extent that there is a financial war between the American-led western alliance and the Russian Chinese nexus, gold plays a far greater role than any cryptocurrency. Since the early 1980s, China has embarked on a policy of secretly acquiring unknown quantities of bullion none of which has been permitted to leave the nation’s territory. It has financed gold mining, so that for over a decade it has become the largest national producer in the world. And when it was decided that the State in various accounts had accumulated sufficient bullion, it set up the Shanghai Gold Exchange and encouraged its own citizens, previously banned from gold ownership, to accumulate large quantities —so far, totalling over 20,000 tonnes.

    And Russia, implementing gold accumulation policies more recently, has declared that between reserves and holdings in other state accounts it has about 12,000 tonnes. Legislation has been passed in the Dumas which will allow some or all of this gold to be transferred into official reserves, when they could easily exceed the reserves declared at the US Treasury. Moscow is setting up a new bullion exchange. Other Asian central banks have been accumulating gold as well. And tellingly, European central banks refuse to admit to any reduction in their reserve positions.

    The battlefield in this financial tussle is over the US dollar. Russia and China, with the members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the Eurasian Economic Union, and BRICS (shortly to be joined by Saudi Arabia) either want to dispose of the dollar for the purpose of trade settlement entirely or want to become less dependent upon it. How is that to be achieved? The actions of Asian powers and their central banks are signalling to us that they will do so with gold.

    This could become increasingly relevant in the months ahead. With Europe entering a continental winter, fuel and food shortages risk splitting the western alliance. The ascendency of gold-backed Eurasia over a divided western alliance can be expected to lead to further dollar weakness, reflected in the value of true money, which legally is only gold.

    Appendix — The legal position of gold

    As a medium of exchange, the function of money is to adjust the ratios of goods and services, one to another. Thus, the price expressed is always for the goods, money being entirely neutral in transactions. It is therefore an error to think of money as having a price, but it has a value relative to exchangeable items. This should be borne in mind when considering the relationship between legal money, which is habitually given a price nowadays in fiat currencies, and the fiat currencies themselves which, given the status of legal tender, are erroneously assumed to have the status of money. The magnitude of this error becomes clear with understanding what legally is money, and what is currency. And this understanding starts with Roman law.

    Roman law became the basis for legal systems throughout Europe, and by extension those of European settled regions, from North America, Latin America through Spanish and Portuguese influence, and the entire British Empire. In common with the Athenians, Rome held that laws were the means whereby individuals would protect themselves from each other and the state. But it was Rome which codified law into a practical and accessible body of reference.

    The first records of Roman statutes and case law were the Twelve Tables of 450BC. These became the basis upon which individual jurors expounded, developed, and evolved their rulings over the next thousand years. The whole legal system was then consolidated into the Emperor Justinian’s Corpus Juris Civilis, otherwise known as the Pandects. When the empire relocated to Constantinople, the Corpus was translated into Greek and eventually reissued in the Basilica, at the time of the Basilian dynasty in the tenth century. It was that version which became the foundation for European law in the Middle Ages, except for England. As an eminent nineteenth century lawyer specialising in banking put it, the reason common law differed in England was that:

    “The Romans abandoned Britain at the end of the fifth century and the common law of England on the subject of credit was exactly as it stood in Gaius which was the textbook of Roman law throughout the empire at the time when the Romans gave up Britain.  But on the 1st of November 1875, the common law of England relating to credit was superseded by equity which is simply the law of the Pandects of Justinian.”[i]

    In all, two thousand years of legal development had elapsed between the Twelve Tables and the reaffirmation of Justinian’s Pandects in Dionysius Gottfried’s version in Geneva of the Corpus Juris Civilis, translated back into Latin in 1583AD from the Greek Basilica.

    It is the Digest section of the Corpus which is relevant to our topic. The Digest is an encyclopaedia of over nine thousand references of eminent jurors collected over time. Prominent in these references are those of Ulpian, who died in 228AD and was the juror who did most to cement the legal position of money and credit. The Digest defined property, contracts, and crimes. Our interest in money and credit is covered by rulings on property and contracts.

    The regular deposit contract is defined by Ulpian in a section entitled Deposita vel contra (on depositing and withdrawing). He defined a regular deposit as follows:

    “A deposit is something given another for safekeeping. It is so called because a good is posited (or placed). The preposition de intensifies the meaning, which reflects that all obligations corresponding to the custody of the good belongs to that person.”[ii]

    Another jurist commonly cited in the Digest, Paul of Alfenus Varus, differentiated between the regular deposit contract defined by Ulpian above and an irregular deposit or mutuum. In this latter case, Paul held that:

    “If a person deposits a certain amount of loose money, which he counts and does not hand over sealed or enclosed in something, then the only duty of the person receiving it is to return the same amount.”[iii]

    So, a mutuum is taken into the possession of the receiver and in return for a right of action in favour of the depositor to be exercised by him at any time with the receiver having a matching duty to return the same amount, it becomes the receiver’s property to do with as he wishes. This is the legal foundation of modern banking.

    Clearly, the precedent in the Digest is that money is always metallic. While anything can be deposited into another’s custody, it is the treatment of fungible goods, particularly money, which is the subject of these legal rulings. It is only through an irregular deposit that the depositor becomes a creditor. By laying down the difference between a regular and irregular deposit, the distinction is made between what has always been regarded as money from ancient times and a promise to repay the same amount, which we know today as credit and debt.

    There is one issue to clarify, and that is to do with credit rather than money. As noted above, Justinian’s Pandects were compiled a century after the Romans had abandoned Britain. From what was subsequently unified as England and Wales out of diverse kingdoms, common law differed in that debts were not freely transferable as property. The transferee of a debt could only sue as attorney for the transferor. This placed debt as property in a different position from other forms of transferable property. Justinian took away this anomaly as a relic of old Roman law (the laws of Gaius, referred to above), allowing the transferee to sue the debtor in his own name.

    The anomaly in English law was only regularised when the Court of Chancery merged with common law by Act of Parliament in November 1875. Since then, the status of money and credit in English law has conformed in every respect with Justinian’s Pandects.

    While the legal position of money is clear, the economic position is technically different. Jean-Baptiste Say pointed out that money facilitates the division of labour. Technically, money is unspent labour, and is therefore a credit yet to be used. Various other classical economists made the same point. Adam Smith wrote that a guinea might be considered as a bill for a certain quantity of necessaries and conveniences upon all the tradesmen in the neighbourhood. Henry Thornton said that money of every kind [including credit] is an order for goods. Bastiat and Mill opined similarly.[iv]

    But it is the legal difference which is of overriding importance because it was founded on the principal that there is a clear distinction between metallic money and a duty to pay. Money is permanent while credit is not. Money has no counterparty risk, whereas credit does. By way of contrast with money, we can define credit: credit is anything which is of no direct use but is taken in exchange for something else in the belief or confidence in the right to exchange it away again.[v]

    So far, in this article we have established that gold has a legal status as money, which bitcoin lacks. We can also rule out legislation to raise bitcoin to a legal monetary status, even if law makers are prepared to consider doing so — which is unlikely. From the rulings in the Roman Pandects, we can see that a regular deposit differs from an irregular deposit because it is identified as the depositor’s property. Identity is the key to property’s recovery, and in bitcoin’s case the blockchain provides this identity. Attempts to classify a blockchain based cryptocurrency as money fall foul of the established legal position.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 21:00

  • SpaceX's First Moon Mission Will Include Japanese Billionaire And DJ Steve Aoki
    SpaceX’s First Moon Mission Will Include Japanese Billionaire And DJ Steve Aoki

    SpaceX revealed that Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa had selected an unorthodox crew of artists, athletes, and entertainers for an upcoming privately funded lunar mission called “dearMoon.” Starship, SpaceX’s most powerful next-generation launch vehicle, will propel the crew around the moon, orbit for several days, and return to Earth. 

    The lunar mission has been in the works since 2018. Maezawa bought every seat and will now be joined by DJ Steve Aoki, K-pop star Choi Seung-hyun (known as TOP), choreographer Yemi AD, photographer Rhiannon Adam, YouTube creator Tim Dodd, photographer Karim Iliya, documentary filmmaker Brendan Hall, actor Dev Joshi, and snowboarder Kaitlyn Farrington.

    The lunar mission is expected to launch sometime in 2023, though Starship has yet to conduct its first orbital test flight. If early Starship tests are successful, then dearMoon could beat NASA’s Artemis II mission to fly astronauts around the moon by 2024.

    Maezawa has already been to space. In 2021, he flew to the International Space Station on a Russian Soyuz rocket and spent two weeks living in zero gravity. 

    The six-day mission will spend three days orbiting the moon before returning to Earth. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 20:40

  • Americans Dumbed Down On Russia
    Americans Dumbed Down On Russia

    Authored by Ray McGovern via Anti-War.com,

    Five years ago today, Congress learned from sworn, horse’s-mouth testimony that there is no technical evidence that Russia (or anyone else) hacked the DNC emails showing how the DNC had stacked the deck against Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton’s rival for the Democratic nomination.

    I can almost hear readers new to this website cry out in disbelief: “That cannot be. Official Washington and the media assured us that the Russians hacked those emails in order to help Trump win. And didn’t Obama throw out 35 Russian diplomats in reaction? And what about those 12 Russian intelligence agents indicted for hacking?” Were U.S. officials and media mistaken?

    No, not mistaken. They were lying.

    “But … but, does this mean Special Counsel Robert Mueller knew there was no concrete evidence of Russian hacking just six months into his 22-month investigation into Trump-Russia collusion?”

    Get Him Under Oath

    On December 5, 2017, Shawn Henry, head of the cyber security firm CrowdStrike, testified to the House Intelligence Committee that there was no technical evidence that Russia hacked the DNC emails that WikiLeaks published in July 2016. CrowdStrike had been hired by the DNC and the Clinton campaign (with the FBI’s blessing) to investigate “Russian hacking”.

    Shawn Henry is a protégé of former FBI Director Robert Mueller (from 2001 to 2012), for whom Henry served as head of the Bureau’s cyber-crime investigations unit before he went to CrowdStrike. What are the chances that Shawn Henry did not keep his former mentor, the Special Counsel, informed of this critical factoid?

    Why are some of you readers just now learning about this – five years after that testimony? Short answer: Adam Schiff (D, CA), chair of the House Intelligence Committee was able to keep Henry’s unclassified testimony secret from Dec. 5, 2017 until May 7, 2020, when he was forced to release it. Schiff gave the silencer-baton to friends in the corporate media, who have now suppressed Shawn Henry’s testimony for longer than even Schiff could.

    In sum, five years (and counting) after Henry’s testimony, the corporate media are still keeping viewers/listeners in the dark. Were we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) not banned from corporate media, those interested in the “hacking” hoax could have learned what was going on by reading our Memorandum “Allegations of Hacking are Baseless”, of December 12, 2016 – a year before Shawn Henry, under oath, came clean. Henry’s confession came as no surprise to us. (Updates are available here and here.)

    Yet, the New York Times, for example, keeps up the drumbeat. Charlie Savage was careful last week to insert the following, in an article about Julian Assange (don’t miss what the New York Times itself embedded):

    His [Assange’s] public image shifted significantly after WikiLeaks published Democratic emails that had been hacked by the Russian government as part of its covert operation to help Donald J. Trump win the 2016 presidential election.

    Thus the words of Charlie Savage and the Gray Lady. There is always some clown who does not get the word – but Charlie is no clown. He knows what the narrative still has to be, and adheres to it (and, thus, to his job).

    The reasoning behind suppressing Shawn Henry’s testimony appears to have gone something like this: The truth about “Russian hacking” cracks the centerpiece of Russia-gate; it pulls the rug from under what we corporate media have been saying about the evil Putin and what we label Trump’s “bromance” with him. Worse, the truth could deny the MICIMATT the image of the threatening “enemy” it needs to “justify” building and selling weapons. Besides, Americans probably can’t handle the truth. And what they don’t know won’t hurt them.

    What Americans Don’t Know

    Humorist Will Rogers had it right:

    “The problem ain’t what people know. It’s what people know that ain’t so; that’s the problem.”

    What Americans “know” is that President Vladimir Putin is evil and that Russia must be stopped in Ukraine. This comes of six straight years of indoctrination/brainwashing. Putin and his colleagues, of course, are aware of this. It must seem to them that people in the US an Europe are being steeled with the propaganda basis for wider war. This gets extremely dangerous. What people don’t know can really hurt them and lead them into another misbegotten war – this one far worse than other recent misadventures.

    If the sophomores advising President Joe Biden refuse to acknowledge that Russia has escalation dominance in Ukraine, the likelihood of wider war in the coming months looms large. And despite recent optimistic projections by top intelligence officials, Ukraine and NATO are far more likely to run out of ammunition before Russia does.

    *  *  *

    Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. His 27-year career as a CIA analyst includes serving as Chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and preparer/briefer of the President’s Daily Brief. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 20:20

  • Rapper 'Nuke Bizzle' Who Bragged About Scamming Covid Relief Sentenced To Prison
    Rapper ‘Nuke Bizzle’ Who Bragged About Scamming Covid Relief Sentenced To Prison

    A 33-year-old Tennessee rap artist who bragged in a YouTube video about scamming a Covid unemployment insurance program was sentenced to more than six years in federal prison and ordered to return over $700,000 in ill-gotten gainz.

    Fontrell Antonio Baines, aka “Nuke Bizzle,” was sentenced on Wednesday by a California federal judge after pleading guilty to mail fraud and two counts of unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition by a felon. He also pleaded guilty to possession of oxycodone with intent to distribute, WaPo reports.

    Mr. Bizzle filed 92 falsified Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) claims with the California Employment Development Department (EDD) between July and September of 2020, in a scheme which sought to extract around $1.2 million in federal funds for personal benefit. He was successful in obtaining $704,760 of that, according to court filings.

    Baines used information from victims of identity theft and other third parties to fill out relief applications with false statements about applicants’ work histories and residencies.

    In the video, which is believed by agents to have premiered on Sept. 11, 2020, Baines held up a stack of envelopes from California’s Employment Development Department, including one addressed to an individual identified by federal agents in court filings as a victim of Baines’s identity theft, saying he was getting rich by “go[ing] to the bank with a stack of these.”

    The video also featured rapper Fat Wizza and opened with a recording that states: “Your card has now been activated and is ready for use,” according to court filings, before an image closely resembling the logo of California’s Employment Development Department appears in the shot. The lyrics include: “I got rich off E.D.D.,” “10 cards swiping 10k a day,” and “You got to sell cocaine, I can just file a claim.” -WaPo

    Shortly after the video was published to YouTube, a special agent at the US Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector General forwarded it to a branch of the office’s data science team, who identified the rapper. 

    In October 2020, the video’s description was edited to include the disclaimer: “***THIS VIDEO WAS CREATED WITH PROPS AND WAS MADE FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES***.”

    In a filing submitted to the court, Baines admitted to defrauding the EDD and apologized for what he had done – blaming friends for orchestrating the scheme.

    “They said they will give me money for letting mail come to the house. They would send the envelopes, and all I had to do was give them the mail when it arrived. When I found out how much money they were getting I felt played, and I started just taking the cards myself and telling them they never made it,” he told the judge.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 20:00

  • THE TWITTER FILES: The Removal Of Donald Trump, Part 1
    THE TWITTER FILES: The Removal Of Donald Trump, Part 1

    The third installment of Elon Musk’s release of internal Twitter communications has been released, once again via veteran journalist Matt Taibbi.

    In this episode, which is a 3-parter, we learn what happened behind the scenes which led to the banishment of former President Donald Trump from the platform.

    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601352565836640257″ dir=”auto” id=”tweet_2″>2. The world knows much of the story of what happened between riots at the Capitol on January 6th, and the removal of President Donald Trump from Twitter on January 8th…
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601352565836640257″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601352946163544065″ dir=”auto” id=”tweet_3″>3. We’ll show you what hasn’t been revealed: the erosion of standards within the company in months before J6, decisions by high-ranking executives to violate their own policies, and more, against the backdrop of ongoing, documented interaction with federal agencies.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601352946163544065″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601353543390486528″ dir=”auto” id=”tweet_4″>4. This first installment covers the period before the election through January 6th. Tomorrow, @ShellenbergerMD will detail the chaos inside Twitter on January 7th. On Sunday, @bariweiss will reveal the secret internal communications from the key date of January 8th.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601353543390486528″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto” id=”tweet_5″>5. Whatever your opinion on the decision to remove Trump that day, the internal communications at Twitter between January 6th-January 8th have clear historical import. Even Twitter’s employees understood in the moment it was a landmark moment in the annals of speech.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>6. As soon as they finished banning Trump, Twitter execs started processing new power. They prepared to ban future presidents and White Houses – perhaps even Joe Biden. The “new administration,” says one exec, “will not be suspended by Twitter unless absolutely necessary.”
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>7. Twitter executives removed Trump in part over what one executive called the “context surrounding”: actions by Trump and supporters “over the course of the election and frankly last 4+ years.” In the end, they looked at a broad picture. But that approach can cut both ways.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>8. The bulk of the internal debate leading to Trump’s ban took place in those three January days. However, the intellectual framework was laid in the months preceding the Capitol riots.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>9. Before J6, Twitter was a unique mix of automated, rules-based enforcement, and more subjective moderation by senior executives. As reported, the firm had a vast array of tools for manipulating visibility, most all of which were thrown at Trump (and others) pre-J6.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>10. As the election approached, senior executives – perhaps under pressure from federal agencies, with whom they met more as time progressed – increasingly struggled with rules, and began to speak of “vios” as pretexts to do what they’d likely have done anyway.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>11. After J6, internal Slacks show Twitter executives getting a kick out of intensified relationships with federal agencies. Here’s Trust and Safety head Yoel Roth, lamenting a lack of “generic enough” calendar descriptions to concealing his “very interesting” meeting partners.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>12. These initial reports are based on searches for docs linked to prominent executives, whose names are already public. They include Roth, former trust and policy chief Vijaya Gadde, and recently plank-walked Deputy General Counsel (and former top FBI lawyer) Jim Baker.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>13. One particular slack channel offers an unique window into the evolving thinking of top officials in late 2020 and early 2021.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>14. On October 8th, 2020, executives opened a channel called “us2020_xfn_enforcement.” Through J6, this would be home for discussions about election-related removals, especially ones that involved “high-profile” accounts (often called “VITs” or “Very Important Tweeters”).
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>

    15. There was at least some tension between Safety Operations – a larger department whose staffers used a more rules-based process for addressing issues like porn, scams, and threats – and a smaller, more powerful cadre of senior policy execs like Roth and Gadde.
     
    16. The latter group were a high-speed Supreme Court of moderation, issuing content rulings on the fly, often in minutes and based on guesses, gut calls, even Google searches, even in cases involving the President.
     
     
    17. During this time, executives were also clearly liaising with federal enforcement and intelligence agencies about moderation of election-related content. While we’re still at the start of reviewing the #TwitterFiles, we’re finding out more about these interactions every day.
     
    18. Policy Director Nick Pickles is asked if they should say Twitter detects “misinfo” through “ML, human review, and **partnerships with outside experts?*” The employee asks, “I know that’s been a slippery process… not sure if you want our public explanation to hang on that.”
     
     
    19. Pickles quickly asks if they could “just say “partnerships.” After a pause, he says, “e.g. not sure we’d describe the FBI/DHS as experts.”
     
     
    20. 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 (DNI):
     
     
    21. Roth’s report to FBI/DHS/DNI is almost farcical in its self-flagellating tone: “We blocked the NYP story, then unblocked it (but said the opposite)… comms is angry, reporters think we’re idiots… in short, FML” (fuck my life).
     
     
    23. Some of Roth’s later Slacks indicate his weekly confabs with federal law enforcement involved separate meetings. Here, he ghosts the FBI and DHS, respectively, to go first to an “Aspen Institute thing,” then take a call with Apple.
     
     

    24. Here, the FBI sends reports about a pair of tweets, the second of which involves a former Tippecanoe County, Indiana Councilor and Republican named

    @JohnBasham claiming “Between 2% and 25% of Ballots by Mail are Being Rejected for Errors.”

    The FBI’s second report concerned this tweet by @JohnBasham:

    25. The FBI-flagged tweet then got circulated in the enforcement Slack. Twitter cited Politifact to say the first story was “proven to be false,” then noted the second was already deemed “no vio on numerous occasions.”

    26. The group then decides to apply a “Learn how voting is safe and secure” label because one commenter says, “it’s totally normal to have a 2% error rate.” Roth then gives the final go-ahead to the process initiated by the FBI:

    27. Examining the entire election enforcement Slack, we didn’t see one reference to moderation requests from the Trump campaign, the Trump White House, or Republicans generally. We looked. They may exist: we were told they do. However, they were absent here.

    31. In one case, former Arizona governor Mike Huckabee joke-tweets about mailing in ballots for his “deceased parents and grandparents.”

    32. This inspires a long Slack that reads like an @TitaniaMcGrath parody. “I agree it’s a joke,” concedes a Twitter employee, “but he’s also literally admitting in a tweet a crime.”

    The group declares Huck’s an “edge case,” and though one notes, “we don’t make exceptions for jokes or satire,” they ultimately decide to leave him be, because “we’ve poked enough bears.”

    33. “Could still mislead people… could still mislead people,” the humor-averse group declares, before moving on from Huckabee

    33. Roth suggests moderation even in this absurd case could depend on whether or not the joke results in “confusion.” This seemingly silly case actually foreshadows serious later issues:

    34. In the docs, execs often expand criteria to subjective issues like intent (yes, a video is authentic, but why was it shown?), orientation (was a banned tweet shown to condemn, or support?), or reception (did a joke cause “confusion”?). This reflex will become key in J6.

    35. In another example, Twitter employees prepare to slap a “mail-in voting is safe” warning label on a Trump tweet about a postal screwup in Ohio, before realizing “the events took place,” which meant the tweet was “factually accurate”:

    36. “VERY WELL DONE ON SPEED” Trump was being “visibility filtered” as late as a week before the election. Here, senior execs didn’t appear to have a particular violation, but still worked fast to make sure a fairly anodyne Trump tweet couldn’t be “replied to, shared, or liked”:

    “VERY WELL DONE ON SPEED”: the group is pleased the Trump tweet is dealt with quickly

    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>

    37. A seemingly innocuous follow-up involved a tweet from actor @realJamesWoods, whose ubiquitous presence in argued-over Twitter data sets is already a #TwitterFiles in-joke.
     
     
    38. After Woods angrily quote-tweeted about Trump’s warning label, Twitter staff – in a preview of what ended up happening after J6 – despaired of a reason for action, but resolved to “hit him hard on future vio.”
     
     
    39. Here a label is applied to Georgia Republican congresswoman Jody Hice for saying, “Say NO to big tech censorship!” and, “Mailed ballots are more prone to fraud than in-person balloting… It’s just common sense.”
     
     
    40. Twitter teams went easy on Hice, only applying “soft intervention,” with Roth worrying about a “wah wah censorship” optics backlash:
     
     
    41. Meanwhile, there are multiple instances of involving pro-Biden tweets warning Trump “may try to steal the election” that got surfaced, only to be approved by senior executives. This one, they decide, just “expresses concern that mailed ballots might not make it on time.”
     
     

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

    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>To read the rest, click on the tweet above.
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”> 
    thread#showTweet” data-controller=”thread” data-screenname=”mtaibbi” data-tweet=”1601354663265472513″ dir=”auto”>Stay tuned for part II tomorrow…

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

     

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 19:40

  • "It's Time": Miami Mayor Asks Musk To Move Twitter HQ To Miami
    “It’s Time”: Miami Mayor Asks Musk To Move Twitter HQ To Miami

    Miami mayor Francis Suarez tweeted at Elon Musk Tuesday night about moving Twitter’s headquarters from San Francisco to South Florida. 

    “Elon Musk, it’s time to move Twitter headquarters to Miami. It’s not about politics, it’s about the soul of our country,” Suarez quote tweeted Musk’s complaint about San Francisco building inspectors launching an investigation into reports that conference-room sleeping quarters were built. 

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

    Suarez then replied to his quote tweet:

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

    Suarez’s comments garnered positive remarks from some residents who said there was enough space for a new Twitter headquarters. 

    One Twitter user said: “We have all the office space you need, Elon Musk.” 

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

    Musk seemed a bit frustrated with San Francisco officials while following through with his “extremely hardcore” vision for Twitter 2.0. If the world’s richest man were pressured enough, it wouldn’t shock us if he moved Twitter out of the progressive city to Austin or Miami. 

    After all, a big part of Suarez’s vision for Miami is drawing tech and crypto money. Crypto is in a winter phase, and the FTX collapse has worsened. Still, the business environment is so friendly that large financial institutions, such as billionaire Ken Griffin’s Citadel Securities, are moving to South Florida. 

    Remember last year when Musk moved the headquarters of Tesla from Silicon Valley to Austin? That could quickly happen to Twitter. And really, it should. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 19:20

  • Senators Press HHS As Whistleblower Alleges Unaccompanied Children Being Transferred To Criminals
    Senators Press HHS As Whistleblower Alleges Unaccompanied Children Being Transferred To Criminals

    Authored by Rita Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A group of Republicans is seeking information from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) over allegations that the department “knowingly” places some unaccompanied illegal immigrant minors in the hands of criminals, according to a letter released on Tuesday.

    “We write concerning an alarming report by a federal employee whistleblower that the [HHS] is knowingly transferring unaccompanied migrant children in the custody of criminals, including sex traffickers,” five GOP lawmakers wrote in a Dec. 5 joint letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra. The group cited testimony that the government failed to settle minors, who were caught while crossing the U.S. borders, into homes of “safe, non-criminal sponsors.”

    “If these claims are true, this is pure evil being committed by your agency,” they wrote.

    HHS officially acknowledges that unaccompanied border crossers under the age of 18 are “especially vulnerable” to human trafficking, exploitation, and abuse, but states that the “majority” are looked after by state-licensed providers operating under cooperative agreements and contract to deliver high-quality care.

    Unaccompanied minors hold hands as they await transport after crossing the Rio Grande river into the United States from Mexico on a raft in Penitas, Texas, on March 12, 2021. (Adrees Latif/Reuters)

    Whistleblower Testimony

    The letter comes after non-profit investigative journalism watchdog Project Veritas spoke with Tara Lee Rodas, who formerly assisted the HHS with the processing of unaccompanied immigrant children at an Emergency Intake Site in Pomona, California, as an employee of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE). She told the outlet that she believes the current child sponsorship program funded by the department’s Office of Refugee Resettlement is precarious for these minors.

    “The tax dollars of people who are listening are paying to put children in the hands of criminals,” Rodas said of what she has witnessed. “[Most people] have no idea that children are going to unrelated people. That children are definitely—we have proof, evidence—that they are being recruited and transported. They are then in debt bondage.”

    A Veritas journalist found one illegal immigrant female minor who corroborated Rodas’s concerns at an address Rodas provided. The minor told the journalist that her sponsor, who claims to be her aunt, had forced her into situations of sexual abuse: “She was pimping me and I didn’t like that. She would pimp me to men.”

    The Epoch Times has been unable to independently verify the claims.

    Rodas said she has expressed her concerns to department officials. However, this usually led to dismissals of her concerns and sometimes retaliation at work.

    During a previous talk to the command center executives, the whistleblower alleged she was told, “Tara, I think you need to understand that we only get sued if we keep kids in care too long. We don’t get sued by traffickers. Are you clear? We don’t get sued by traffickers.”

    “[The Biden administration] relaxed a lot of the stringent vetting by creating these additional field guidances, and there’s a focus on ‘move the children’ as opposed to ‘place children in safe homes.’ Right now, it is speed over safety,” she added.

    Investigation

    Sen. Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, speaks during a hearing in Washington on Dec. 3, 2020. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Now, leading four of his fellow GOP lawmakers, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC), is demanding that Becerra release information regarding Rodas’s complaint on how the HHS vets sponsors of unaccompanied children who cross borders alone.

    “This cannot be swept under the rug,” the senators said in the letter.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 19:00

  • Defense Aid To Ukraine Tops $20 Billion As New $275M Package Announced
    Defense Aid To Ukraine Tops $20 Billion As New $275M Package Announced

    The Biden administration on Friday unveiled another $275 million in weapons and defense equipment for Ukraine, which crucially will come via the presidential drawdown authority.

    This means the Pentagon will pull arms from its own stockpiles to send to Ukraine to fulfill this package, despite defense officials having long been on record expressing deep concern over dwindling supplies necessary to protect and defend America.

    Via PA Wire: painting of Volodymyr Zelensky which was auctioned in Ireland.

    A Defense Department press release indicated the package is to include “more ammunition for high mobility artillery rocket systems (HIMARS), 80,000 155 mm artillery rounds, counter-unmanned aerial systems equipment, counter air defenses, additional High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles, ambulances and medical equipment, 150 generators and other field equipment.”

    The Ukrainian government and armed forces have been especially interested in procurement of more and longer-range anti-air defense systems. A recent report in The Wall Street Journal indicated the Pentagon had altered missile systems transferred to Ukraine to limit their range at 50 miles, in order to prevent the Ukrainians from targeting Russian territory.

    The Friday DoD press release stated further, “This security assistance package will provide Ukraine with new capabilities to boost its air defenses in addition to providing critical equipment that Ukraine is using so effectively to defend itself on the battlefield.”

    This brings US defense aid commitment since the war’s start to $19.3 billion, while the total tab at the American taxpayer’s expense for Ukraine has reached $20 billion since the start of the Biden administration (accounting additionally for aid sent just prior to the Russian invasion). 

    One “lesson” on display this week (and an obvious longtime trend) is that the deep state and military-industrial complex will always opt for more spending and less accountability – even at the expense of national defense readiness. On Thursday the House passed the massive, record-setting annual defense authorization bill, which will now see the $847 billion measure go to the Senate. Its mammoth size includes plans for much more Ukraine aid to come for the next fiscal year.

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

    Just two days prior to the House approving the massive, record-setting NDAA, the Democrat-led House Foreign Affairs Committee voted down a bill to audit the tens of billions of dollars that Congress has approved to spend on the war in Ukraine. This despite high-level admissions that much of the weaponry sent to Ukraine has little to no oversight once it enters the country, thus it could end up in the hands of terrorists or criminal gangs outside the borders.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 18:40

  • Maxine Waters Confirms Bankman-Fried Will Testify Virtually Next Week… Alongside Current FTX CEO
    Maxine Waters Confirms Bankman-Fried Will Testify Virtually Next Week… Alongside Current FTX CEO

    Update (1830ET): The House Financial Services Committee confirmed that former FTX Chief Executive Officer Sam Bankman-Fried will testify at a hearing next week on the disintegration of his crypto exchange and hedge fund.

    Bloomberg reports that Bankman-Fried will testify virtually.

    He is now listed as a witness alongside current FTX CEO John J. Ray III, according to a media advisory the committee sent out late Friday. This should be fun since Ray described FTX’s collapse in recent court filings as an “unprecedented debacle” brought on by a culture of lax corporate governance.

    “Never in my career have I seen such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy financial information as occurred here,” Mr. Ray said in the filing.

    The hearing will be split into two parts, each one featuring one of the men.

    *  *  *

    Update (0720ET): Having missed yesterday’s deadline to respond to a request to testify at an upcoming Senate Committee hearing, Sam Bankman-Fried

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

    He continued…

    2) I will try to be helpful during the hearing, and to shed what light I can on:

    • FTX US’s solvency and American customers

    • Pathways that could return value to users internationally

    • What I think led to the crash

    • My own failings

    3) I had thought of myself as a model CEO, who wouldn’t become lazy or disconnected.

    Which made it that much more destructive when I did.

    I’m sorry.  Hopefully people can learn from the difference between who I was and who I could have been.

    Presumably there is zero chance he will testify in person.

    Does anyone believe this is anything but stalling for time?

    Meanwhile, Binance founder ‘CZ’ went off on Twitter overnight, lambasting Kevin O’Leary’s ‘woe is me’ tale of wrongdoing by SBF, and detailing the attacks he himself suffered at the hands of the inclusive left’s (second) favorite donor:

    As an early investor in FTX, we became increasingly uncomfortable with Alameda/SBF and initiated the exit process more than 1.5 years ago.

    Sam was so unhinged when we decided to pull out as an investor that he launched a series of offensive tirades at multiple Binance team members, including threatening to go to “extraordinary lengths to make us pay” – we still have those text messages.

    Shortly after that Sam began “investing” in friends in high places – from media, to policymakers, to celebrities (like Kevin). And he used that network to manipulate public opinion, including attacking me and others in the industry.

    My ethnicity was a focus of those attacks and @kevinolearytv signaled his intention to continue those attacks in the media and will likely repeat them at next week’s Senate hearing. I’m Canadian and Binance is not a Chinese company.

    You don’t have to be a genius to know something don’t smell right at FTX. They were 1/10th our size, yet outspent us 100/1 on marketing & “partnerships”, fancy parties in the Bahamas, trips across the globe, and mansions for all of their senior staff (and his parents).

    Which appears to have pissed SBF off…

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

    But hey, he did say he was sorry, right?

    As CoinTelegraph’s Martin Young detailed earlier, Crypto’s public enemy number one, Sam Bankman-Fried has missed a crucial deadline to confirm his appearance at an upcoming Senate Committee hearing.

    The former FTX CEO missed a Thursday 5:00 pm ET on Dec. 8 deadline for responding to a Senate Banking Committee request that he testify at the Committee meeting on Dec. 14. This has set up the possibility of a congressional subpoena.

    On Dec. 8, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Sherrod Brown, and ranking member of the Committee, Senator Pat Toomey, released a statement on the request.

    “FTX’s collapse has caused real financial harm to consumers, and effects have spilled over into other parts of the crypto industry. The American people need answers about Sam Bankman-Fried’s misconduct at FTX,” they stated before adding:

    “The Committee has requested that he testify at our upcoming hearing on FTX’s collapse, and will consider further action if he does not comply.”

    According to the official Committee website, the hearing titled “Crypto Crash: Why the FTX Bubble Burst and the Harm to Consumers” will be webcast on Dec. 14.

    So far, two witnesses have been confirmed to attend the hearing — including American University Washington College of Law professor Hilary J. Allen and actor and author Ben McKenzie Schenkkan.

    Allen is an academic whose research focuses on the impact of new financial technologies on the stability of the financial system.

    Schenkkan is an anti-crypto actor-turned-commentator who played a troubled teenager on a U.S. television series called “The O.C.”

    Messari founder Ryan Selkis commented on the futility of the witness selection:

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

    Meanwhile, Cointelegraph has reached out to Schenkkan for comment but did not receive a response at the time of publication.

    Other than the Dec. 14 Senate Banking Committee hearing, Bankman-Fried has also been requested to attend a separate hearing called “Investigating the Collapse of FTX” on Dec. 13 with the U.S. House Financial Services Committee.

    Bankman-Fried was first requested to attend the hearing via a tweet from Congresswoman Maxine Waters but seemingly declined the invitation on Dec. 5, stating that he wasn’t sure what would happen by the hearing date, “but when it does, I will testify.”

    Waters responded on Dec. 8 stating “a subpoena is definitely on the table” should Bankman-Fried fail to voluntarily testify at the hearing.

    The collapse of SBF’s FTX empire has initiated a tsunami of backlash from U.S. lawmakers and regulators threatening to drown the fledgling crypto asset industry.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 18:25

  • Does Trump Really Want To Be President Again?
    Does Trump Really Want To Be President Again?

    Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

    Team Trump has sometimes compared former President Donald Trump’s current quest for a non-sequential second term to two-term President Grover Cleveland’s similar three election bids.

    Cleveland remains our only elected president (1884) to have lost a reelection bid (1888) — in a disputed vote — only to be reelected four years later in 1892.

    Yet Trump seems determined instead to follow a different, and bullheaded, Teddy Roosevelt model.

    Roosevelt left the presidency in 1908, sat out four years, and then lost a reelection bid in 1912, split and alienated the Republican Party, and ensured the election of the progressive Woodrow Wilson.

    President Joe Biden’s first “corrective” two years have been an utter disaster.

    Biden birthed hyperinflation. He destroyed a secure border and Trump’s energy self-sufficiency. Crime is now out of control. The United States was humiliated abroad in Afghanistan. Rising interest rates will soon spark a recession.

    After promising to unite the country, Biden smeared half the voting population as “un-American” and “semi-fascist.”

    In addition, almost all of Trump’s prior complaints, predictions, and assertions that the media dismissed as conspiratorial, or crackpot have proven eerily prescient.

    Hunter Biden’s laptop was all too authentic.

    The FBI was compromised and acted as an agent of the Democratic Party. Anthony Fauci proved a partisan.

    Russian collusion was an utter hoax. It was engineered by Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and the FBI.

    The Wuhan lab did likely birth the engineered COVID virus. That possibility was covered up by the media and public health establishments.

    Trump did not take “nuclear codes” to Mar-a-Lago. He did not plan on hawking his presidential papers for profit.

    Germany did weaken NATO. Berlin was foolish to mortgage its future with energy dependency on a hostile Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    The Biden family was utterly corrupt. It was deeply involved in lucrative quid pro quo machinations abroad with China and a crooked Ukrainian government-related company.

    John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Anthony Fauci, and Robert Mueller all either did mislead, feign amnesia, or lie either to Congress or while under oath.

    Twitter was corrupt in asymmetrically banning the free expression of conservatives. Silicon Valley elites did conspire to sandbag Trump.

    The media was a fake news corrupt enterprise, as we see from the new Twitter trove, and the mass firings at CNN.

    So given events since Trump’s departure, he should be in the driver’s seat. But he is not.

    Why?

    Rather than offering detailed correctives for Biden’s disastrous record, Trump is again dabbling in social media madness. He needlessly floated the absurd idea that constitutional norms might need to be changed to allow the disputed 2020 election result to be overturned.

    He seems oblivious that the Left, not conservatives, talk of altering the Constitution. They call for the destruction of the Electoral College, and wish to dilute the Second Amendment and redefine the First.

    Why did Trump need to descend into personal invective when prior to the midterms, many primary polls were confirming his front-runner status?

    Why did he not remain magnanimous, unite the party, and focus on giving millions to his endorsed but endangered candidates like Dr. Mehmet Oz, Blake Masters, and Herschel Walker?

    Why did Trump bizarrely claim that possible presidential rival candidate Glenn Youngkin’s name sounded “Chinese”? What was the logic of attacking Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s, R-Ky., wife in racialist terms?

    Every elected public official or candidate — with the exception of former President Barack Obama who once was photographed smiling with a grinning, Jewish-hating Louis Farrakhan — knows there is only one rule concerning antisemites: Go nowhere near them.

    Yet Trump dined with two, the now unhinged Kanye West (“Ye”) and the 20-something crackpot Nick Fuentes.

    Why would Trump all but announce before the midterms that after the election he would be a candidate?

    Or why right before November 8, did Trump attack Ron DeSantis (whom he calls “DeSanctimonious”), the miracle-worker Republican governor of Trump’s own Florida?

    Did Trump wish to rile up left-wing Trump-haters to rush to the midterm polls, or to persuade miffed conservative DeSantis voters to stay home?

    In the impending Trump-DeSantis collision, voters will be looking for resolution of two respective unknowns.

    One, will Trump run on his stellar record, avoid controversy, and stick to the issues? And will he thereby win back independent, swing voters on assurances that they could get more MAGA successes, but this time around without the insults and spats?

    And two, could DeSantis assure Republicans of a fire-in-the belly, Trumpian zeal to take on the Left, while soberly promoting a MAGA agenda — and thus win over the hard-core Trump base?

    So far, De Santis is reassuring donors and primary voters he can be as tough as his record is impressive.

    But Trump is not encouraging the donor class and independent voters that he has learned that melodramas and social media riffs are not his friends.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 18:20

  • Marijuana Industry's Buzz Wears Off As Pandemic Party Over
    Marijuana Industry’s Buzz Wears Off As Pandemic Party Over

    The party is over, and the buzz is wearing off. Mature legal cannabis markets are experiencing a slowdown in sales since the pandemic boom. 

    A new report from cannabis data firm Headset said the industry in established marijuana markets, such as Oregon and Washington, has slowed down from a year ago. For example, Colorado’s market recorded sales that dropped 11.4% in June from a year ago. 

    “What we saw in 2020 was a massive spike in sales tied to the pandemic as people stayed home, had government stimulus money, and not a lot to do,” Chris Wash, CEO of Marijuana Business Daily, told CNBC. 

    Headset noted marijuana sales spiked between March 2020-21, with monthly average year-over-year sales of around 25.8% in Colorado. But sales began sliding last year as people returned to work and stimulus checks ran out. The report found the number of purchases and amount of money people spent declined. 

    In July, customers spent an average of $55.21 per visit at Colorado stores — four dollars less than the average of $59.73 in July 2021, according to the data. 

    “Right now, the Colorado marijuana industry is going through the largest downturn that we’ve ever seen,” Truman Bradley, executive director of the Wheat Ridge-based Marijuana Industry Group, told the local media outlet 9News Denver. 

    Even though marijuana sales are normalizing in mature markets after a pandemic-fueled party, the industry nationwide is expected to grow as new markets come online. Marijuana Business Daily expects US medical and recreational cannabis sales could exceed $33 billion this year, up from $27 billion last year. Forecasts for 2026 are around $52.6 billion. 

    So why are sales slowing in mature markets? Well, these states were the only ones open for business during the pandemic, and when tens of millions of Americans were out of work or forced to stay home because of the government shutdown, there was nothing better to do than sit on the couch, consume marijuana, and watch Netflix. Now that people aren’t stuck at home, they aren’t purchasing as much cannabis, and producers have to readjust production levels lower due to declining demand. 

    One exchange-traded fund tied to the cannabis sector, called ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF (MJ), has plunged more than 84% since the February 2021 peak of $33. 

    The buzz is over. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 18:00

  • Roughly 60% Of Students Fear Expressing Their Views In Higher Education; New Poll Finds
    Roughly 60% Of Students Fear Expressing Their Views In Higher Education; New Poll Finds

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    There is a new poll out and it is strikingly similar to the polls previously featured on this blog on free speech and intellectual diversity in higher education.  The Buckley annual survey found that almost 60 percent of college students fear sharing an opinion in classrooms or on campuses. That tracks other polls by different groups.  Yet, colleges and universities continue to exclude Republican and conservative faculty members and maintain environments of speech intolerance.The poll shows a sharp increase from just last year with 63% reporting feeling intimidated in sharing opinions different than their peers. That is almost identical to the 65 percent found in other polls.

    The poll of over 800 students included many liberal students, as reflected in the 67 percent who would require all professors and administrators to make statements in favor of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Half of students believe “America is inextricably linked to white supremacy” and another 33 percent would prefer to live in a socialist system.

    The poll tracks earlier polls showing a rising view of viewpoint intolerance that now characterizes higher education in America. That intolerance is reflected in the overwhelmingly Democratic and liberal makeup of faculties.

    A new survey of 65 departments in various states found that 33 do not have a single registered Republican. For these departments, the systemic elimination of Republican faculty has finally reached zero, but there is still little recognition of the crushing bias reflected in these numbers. Others, as discussed below, have defended the elimination of conservative or Republican faculty as entirely justified and commendable. Overall, registered Democrats outnumbered registered Republicans by a margin of over 10-1.

    The survey found 61 Republican professors across 65 departments at seven universities while it also found 667 professors identified as Democrats based on their political party registration or voting history.

    While there may be a couple professors missed on either side of this ideological divide, most faculty will privately admit that it is rare to find self-identified Republicans or conservatives on many faculties. Most faculties are overwhelmingly Democratic and liberal. Diversity generally runs from the left to the far left.

    Another survey found that only nine percent of law professors identified as conservative. The virtual absence of Republican or conservative members on many faculties are just shrugged off by many academics.   It is the subject of my recent publication in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. The article entitled “Harm and Hegemony: The Decline of Free Speech in the United States.”

    Notably, a 2017 study found 15 percent of faculties were conservative. This is the result of years of faculty replicating their own ideological preferences and eradicating the diversity that once existed on faculties. When I began teaching in the 1980s, faculties were undeniably liberal but contained a significant number of conservative and libertarian professors. It made for a healthy and balanced intellectual environment. Today such voices are relatively rare and faculties have become political echo chambers, leaving conservatives and Republican students increasingly afraid to speak openly in class.

    The trend is the result of hiring systems where conservative or libertarian scholars are often rejected as simply “insufficiently intellectually rigorous” or “not interesting” in their scholarship. This can clearly be true with individual candidates but the wholesale reduction of such scholars shows a more systemic problem. Faculty insist that there is no bias against conservatives, but the obviously falling number of conservative faculty speaks for itself.

    As discussed earlier, the editors of the legal site Above the Law have repeatedly swatted down objections to the loss of free speech and viewpoint diversity in the media and academia. In a recent column, they mocked those of us who objected to the virtual absence of conservative or libertarian faculty members at law schools.

    Senior editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” based on the fact that liberal views reflect real law as opposed to junk law.  (Patrice regularly calls those with opposing views “racists,” including Chief Justice John Roberts because of his objection to race-based criteria in admissions as racial discrimination). He explained that hiring a conservative academic was akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism (or that the sun orbits the earth) to teach at a university.

    It is that easy. You simply declare that conservative views shared by a majority of the Supreme Court and roughly half of the population are not acceptable to be taught.

    We have previously discussed the worrisome signs of a rising generation of censors in the country as leaders and writers embrace censorship and blacklisting. The latest chilling poll was released by 2021 College Free Speech Rankings after questioning a huge body of 37,000 students at 159 top-ranked U.S. colleges and universities. It found that sixty-six percent of college students think shouting down a speaker to stop them from speaking is a legitimate form of free speech.  Another 23 percent believe violence can be used to cancel a speech. That is roughly one out of four supporting violence.

    This has been an issue of contention with some academics who believe that free speech includes the right to silence others.  Berkeley has been the focus of much concern over the use of a heckler’s veto on our campuses as violent protesters have succeeded in silencing speakers, including a speaker from the ACLU discussing free speech.  Both students and some faculty have maintained the position that they have a right to silence those with whom they disagree and even student newspapers have declared opposing speech to be outside of the protections of free speech.  At another University of California campus, professors actually rallied around a professor who physically assaulted pro-life advocates and tore down their display.

    In the meantime, academics and deans have said that there is no free speech protection for offensive or “disingenuous” speech.  CUNY Law Dean Mary Lu Bilek showed how far this trend has gone. When conservative law professor Josh Blackman was stopped from speaking about “the importance of free speech,”  Bilek insisted that disrupting the speech on free speech was free speech. (Bilek later cancelled herself and resigned after she made a single analogy to acting like a “slaveholder” as a self-criticism for failing to achieve equity and reparations for black faculty and students).

    There are now a wide array of polls and surveys showing a rising sense of viewpoint intolerance and a lack of ideological diversity on faculties. When confronted, faculty often shrug and say that the students are simply wrong about speech intolerance. They also dismiss the importance of labels (even self-reported party affiliations). Few, however, seriously deny that faculties are now overwhelmingly, if not exclusive, Democratic or liberal. Intellectual diversity today on faculties often runs from the left to the far left.

    I frankly do not understand why professors want to maintain this one-sided environment in hiring. I was drawn to academia by the diversity of viewpoints and intellectual challenges on campuses.  However, the lack of diversity works to the advantage of those on the “correct” side of this new orthodoxy. Conversely, those with dissenting views are often targeted or isolated on faculties. They risk the loss of everything that gives an intellectual life meaning from publishing to speaking opportunities. For faculty, the viewpoint intolerance seen by students is magnified a hundred times over for those seeking to enter or to advance in teaching.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 17:40

  • Top EU Parliament Officials Arrested In Huge Qatar-Linked Corruption Probe
    Top EU Parliament Officials Arrested In Huge Qatar-Linked Corruption Probe

    A European Parliament vice president along with a handful of other EU officials and aides has been arrested and brought in for questioning by police in Brussels on Friday, with the AFP identifying that “Belgian police arrested Greek socialist MEP Eva Kaili, a European Parliament vice-president, in connection with an investigation into corruption implicating World Cup host Qatar.”

    Police have further sealed off the European Parliament offices of three MEPs, including Kaili, as well as Belgian S&D group members Maria Arena and Marc Tarabella. “Today’s searches have enabled investigators to recover about 600,000 euros in cash,” the prosecutors said in a statement, after their homes were also raided.

    Greek MEP Eva Kaili

    The evidence is pointing to a large influence-peddling operation which involved an exchange of cash and favors from Qatari officials. The explosive story is grabbing international headlines at the sensitive moment the Qatar-hosted World Cup is headed into the semi-finals on Saturday, down to the final four. 

    Earlier in the day police said that 16 raids in total were launched across Belgium’s capital, and only later on Friday was Qatar named at center of the probe. 

    “Computer equipment and mobile phones were also seized. These elements will be analysed as part of the investigations,” the Belgium-based EU prosecutor’s office stated after it was “suspected a Gulf country (of influencing) the economic and political decisions of the European parliament.”

    It was done “by paying large sums of money or offering large gifts to” prominent figures in the European parliament, according to the official allegation.

    European Parliament Vice-President Eva Kaili has been arrested on suspicion of corruption with Qatar, via ISOPIX/SIPA

    44-year old Kaili has been a European MEP since 2014, and initially rose to visibility as a popular Greek television presenter. According to more via the AP:

    The raids targeted in particular assistants working for EU lawmakers, the statement said. The EU assembly has 705 elected members from the bloc’s 27 member nations. Each lawmaker has a number of assistants.

    Her party PASOK, or the Panhellenic Socialist Movement, moved swiftly to formally expel her, effective Friday evening, following revelation of the corruption investigation.

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

    She is alleged to have been one among a group of European Parliament officials with a “a significant political and/or strategic position” who was bribed by Qatari officials.

    Despite the World Cup having thus far gone relatively smoothly, and Doha celebrating its current ‘success’ – this is sure to put a black eye on its image headed into the World Cup final, also as the story is sure to drive weekend headlines. Qatar has also long been known to engage in significant lobbying efforts in Washington as well, and has an extensive international media reach – funded by its ample oil and gas revenue – which it uses to sow influence abroad.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 17:23

  • Putin Says He's Open To More Prisoner Swaps With US
    Putin Says He’s Open To More Prisoner Swaps With US

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has signaled that more prisoner swaps with Washington might be on the horizon, at a moment the profiles of detained Americans Paul Whelan and Marc Fogel are rising in the wake of Brittney Griner’s Thursday release. There’s greater pressure on the Biden administration to obtain ex-Marine Whelan’s release especially.

    Putin in Friday comments before the press said that “everything is possible” in terms of possible future prisoner exchanges. He recounted that “compromises have been found” that led to the Griner for Bout deal.

    “We aren’t refusing to continue this work in the future,” Putin said. “We didn’t set the task to move from those talks to something else, but they do create a certain atmosphere.”

    Kremlin via Reuters

    The Russian leader acknowledged that the success of the prisoner swap talks was due in part to not taking into consideration other issues, such as the ongoing Ukraine conflict. 

    The White House responded Friday to these remarks of Putin, with National Security Council coordinator for strategic communications John Kirby saying that indeed more prisoner swaps remain “possible” – stressing there are active channels of communication for this but that the US wants further “actions” and not just words out of Moscow.

    Additionally, the US State Dept. said the following responding to Putin’s remarks about future prisoner swaps: “It’s not often we can say that we actually agree with something President Putin said, but today I can say that,” Net Price told CNN.

    “President Putin himself has said that these discussions will continue. These discussions absolutely will continue,” Price added.

    Meanwhile, Russian media continues to celebrate the swap as a huge victory in the Kremlin’s favor, as convicted arms trafficker Viktor Bout receives a hero’s welcome…

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

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 16:40

  • Musk Confirms Political Candidates Were Shadow Banned By Twitter’s Censors
    Musk Confirms Political Candidates Were Shadow Banned By Twitter’s Censors

    Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Elon Musk has confirmed that political candidates were shadow banned by Twitter while running for office, in the latest revelation on the social media giant’s meddling in conversations of public interest, including by putting disfavored users on blacklists and suppressing distribution of their tweets.

    Tesla head Elon Musk talks to the press as he arrives to have a look at the construction site of the new Tesla Gigafactory near Berlin, on Sept. 3, 2020. (Maja Hitij/Getty Images)

    Following the release of the second part of the “Twitter Files,” which revealed the social media giant put users on secret blacklists and used other shadow banning tools, Musk was asked by political commentator Ian Miles Cheong if political candidates were also subject to such censorship.

    “So here’s a question for @elonmusk and @bariweiss: were any political candidates — either in the US or elsewhere — subject to shadowbanning while they were running for office or seeking re-election?’” Cheong asked in a tweet, tagging both Musk and journalist Bari Weiss.

    “Yes,” Musk replied, confirming that Twitter has, as many have alleged, put its finger on the scale of conversations that were of importance to public interest, including in the context of elections.

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

    The Epoch Times has reached out to Twitter for comment.

    Twitter ‘Has Interfered in Elections’

    Musk did not go into further detail but he has previously said that Twitter had “failed” to be impartial in content moderation and “interfered in elections.”

    “The obvious reality, as long-time users know, is that Twitter has failed in trust & safety for a very long time and has interfered in elections,” Musk said in a Nov. 30 post on Twitter.

    In that message, Musk was responding to criticism from Twitter’s former head of site integrity Yoel Roth, who said during a recent interview at the Knight Foundation conference that he didn’t believe safety had improved on Twitter after Musk’s takeover.

    Roth also said that he thinks Twitter blocking the explosive Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 presidential election was a mistake.

    In the run-up to the 2020 election, the New York Post published a story about a laptop abandoned at a computer repair shop that purportedly belonged to Hunter Biden and contained emails suggesting that then-candidate Joe Biden had knowledge of, and was allegedly involved in, his son’s foreign business dealings.

    President Joe Biden has repeatedly insisted he had no knowledge of or involvement in his son’s business operations.

    U.S. President Joe Biden (L) waves alongside his son Hunter Biden after attending mass at Holy Spirit Catholic Church in Johns Island, South Carolina on Aug. 13, 2022. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images)

    ‘Secret Blacklists’

    Weiss, founder and editor of The Free Press, released the second volume of the so-called “Twitter Files” on Dec. 8, revealing the social media platform’s “secret blacklists.”

    Weiss has been working with Musk and independent journalist Matt Taibbi to disclose internal Twitter information regarding censorship.

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

    Twitter’s censorship methods, according to Weiss, included placing specific users on a “Trends Blacklist” or a “Search Blacklist.”

    The popular Libs of TikTok account, as well as Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor of medicine at Stanford University School of Medicine, are among the users who were secretly added to the “Trends Blacklist” by the company.

    Bhattacharya was put on the list because he stated that children would be harmed by COVID-19 lockdowns. This action stopped his tweets from trending, Weiss said.

    Conservative talk show presenter Dan Bongino was also put on a so-called “Search Blacklist,” Weiss disclosed.

    Weiss also noted that conservative activist Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, was put on a “Do Not Amplify” list.

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

    The second installment comes just a week after Taibbi published, with Musk’s endorsement, details about the social media platform’s decision to suppress the New York Post’s report on the contents of a laptop tied to Hunter Biden.

    Republicans had long accused Twitter—and some media outlets—of suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story, which included reporting that bolstered claims that the president lied when he said he had no involvement in his son’s overseas business dealings.

    In order to suppress the Hunter Biden report, Twitter executives marked it as “unsafe,” limiting its spread, and even blocking it from being directly shared via the platform’s direct message function, Taibbi said in comments on the first installment of the disclosures. He also noted that such extreme restrictions were normally reserved for content such as child pornography.

    ‘Shadow Banning’

    Weiss, in comments on the latest Twitter Files release, detailed various ways that Twitter employees acted to suppress speech on the platform.

    “A new #TwitterFiles investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users,” Weiss said on Twitter. 

    “Twitter once had a mission ‘to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.’ Along the way, barriers nevertheless were erected,” she added.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 16:20

  • BlackRock: Prepare For Recession "Unlike Any Other"… And What Worked Before "Won't Work Now"
    BlackRock: Prepare For Recession “Unlike Any Other”… And What Worked Before “Won’t Work Now”

    The world’s largest investment manager has gone all in – and says a global recession is right around the corner. What’s more, the financial tricks deployed by Central Banks in the past ‘won’t work this time.’

    According to BlackRock, the global economy has entered a phase of elevated volatility, and that a recession is imminent due to central banks aggressively boosting borrowing costs to tame inflation. Their actions, according to a team of BlackRock strategists, will ignite more market turbulence than ever before.

    “Recession is foretold as central banks race to try to tame inflation. It’s the opposite of past recessions,” the team wrote In their 2023 Global Outlook (embedded below), which says that the global economy has already exited a four-decade period of stable growth and inflation, and has now entered a period of heightened instability.

    And when things get bad, “Central bankers won’t ride to the rescue when growth slows in this new regime, contrary to what investors have come to expect. Equity valuations don’t yet reflect the damage ahead.”

    “What worked in the past won’t work now,” said the strategists. “The old playbook of simply ‘buying the dip’ doesn’t apply in this regime of sharper trade-offs and greater macro volatility. We don’t see a return to conditions that will sustain a joint bull market in stocks and bonds of the kind we experienced in the prior decade.”

    So what can actually tame inflation? A deep recession, according to the report.

    To navigate the coming storm, BlackRock recommends more frequent portfolio changes and taking a more “granular view on sectors, regions and sub-asset classes.”

    Compounding the issue is aging workforces around the world – which is one key reason that the supply of US labor is struggling to keep up with demand.

    The initial sharp drop was driven by Covid shutdowns: Many who lost their job didn’t look for another one right away given healthcare worries or care-giving responsibilities.

    Some of that drop in the workforce has now unwound. But the yellow line shows that the part not made up is almost entirely down to aging – the increasing share of the population that is of retirement age – rather than pandemic-specific effects. That’s why we don’t expect an improvement in the participation rate from here, and so no material easing of the worker shortage that is contributing to inflation.

    A New World Order – (of course)

    According to BlackRock, “we’ve entered into a new world order,” in which “We see geopolitical cooperation and globalization evolving into a fragmented world with competing blocs.” The team further writes that geopolitical fragmentation is likely to foster “a permanent risk premium across asset classes, rather than have only a fleeting effect on markets as in the past.”

    The warning from BlackRock echoes those from Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Deutsche Bank – which have produced dire predictions ranging from a 20% stock plunges in 2023, to Goldman’s David Solomon seeing a 65% chance of recession.

    “We don’t think equities are fully priced for recession,” said the BlackRock team. “Corporate earnings expectations have yet to fully reflect even a modest recession. This keeps us tactically underweight developed market equities.“

    In short…

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 16:01

  • Stocks, Bonds, & Black Gold Battered In Ugly Week Ahead Of Fed
    Stocks, Bonds, & Black Gold Battered In Ugly Week Ahead Of Fed

    A relatively quiet (but weak) macro week (Jobs weak, inflation hot, surveys slump) and the pre-Fed blackout meant the combination of pre-holiday low liquidity and headline risk chopped market around intraday with stocks hurting (Small Caps and Big-Tech worst), bond yields higher (in the belly of the curve), and a bloodbath in black gold (as WTI fell to one-year lows).

    US Macro Surprise data has drifted sideways for almost three months now – Goldilocks-like perhaps…

    Source: Bloomberg

    But amid the sparse macro data (claims, PPI etc), the market’s expectations for The Fed’s terminal rate was unchanged and the market’s expectations for rate-cuts in H2 2023 also ended unchanged…

    Source: Bloomberg

    All the majors puked lower on the hotter than expected PPI this morning then the machines levitated things for a few hours until Europe was closed. Then the last 15 mins saw stocks puked to the lows of the day…

    Small Caps were the week’s worst performers (down 5%), followed by Nasdaq and S&P and The Dow was the prettiest horse in the glue factory…

    The S&P 500 held above its 100DMA…

    All sectors ended the week in the red with Energy by far the worst. Utes outperformed with a very small loss on the week…

    Source: Bloomberg

    Tech has been outperforming energy stocks since the start of November…

    Source: Bloomberg

    US Treasuries were sold hard today, erasing all of the week’s gains for the long-bond, and leaving the rest of the curve notably higher in yield (belly underperforming)…

    Source: Bloomberg

    The yield curve (2s30s) ended flatter (more inverted) on the week, but barely after a big steepening day today post-PPI…

    Source: Bloomberg

    The dollar ended the week higher, but back in the range from Friday’s payrolls pump and dump)…

    Source: Bloomberg

    Cryptos were broadly unchanged on the week, despite some intraday volatility (BTC up marginally, ETH down marginally)…

    Source: Bloomberg

    Bitcoin ended the week back above $17,000…

    Source: Bloomberg

    Oil prices are down 6 straight days, with WTI ending the week down over 12% with a $70 handle – its worst week since the first week of April – and back at one-year lows (-2% YoY, first decline since Jan 2021)…

    As fund managers abandon black gold…

    Source: Bloomberg

    Gold ended the week unchanged, above $1800, while silver outperformed modestly…

    Finally, will we get a sense of deja vu all over again next week when The Fed hikes?

    Source: Bloomberg

    Would that kind of downsing be enough to tighten financial conditions and allow Powell to lift his boot from the market’s neck?

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 12/09/2022 – 16:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 09

Today’s News 9th December 2022

  • Whitehead: The Constitution Has Already Been Terminated
    Whitehead: The Constitution Has Already Been Terminated

    Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    “That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary.”

    – Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale

    If there is one point on which there should be no political parsing, no legal jockeying, and no disagreement, it is this: for anyone to advocate terminating or suspending the Constitution is tantamount to a declaration of war against the founding principles of our representative government and the rule of law.

    Then again, one could well make the case that the Constitution has already been terminated after years on life support, given the extent to which the safeguards enshrined in the Bill of Rights—adopted 231 years ago as a means of protecting the people against government overreach and abuse—have been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts.

    Consider for yourself.

    • We are in the grip of martial law. We have what the founders feared most: a “standing” or permanent army on American soil. This de facto standing army is made up of weaponized, militarized domestic police forces which look like, dress like, and act like the military; are armed with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment; are authorized to make arrests; and are trained in military tactics.

    • We are in the government’s crosshairs. The U.S. government continues to act as judge, jury and executioner over a populace that have been pre-judged and found guilty, stripped of their rights, and left to suffer at the hands of government agents trained to respond with the utmost degree of violence. Consequently, we are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to “serve and protect.” With alarming regularity, unarmed men, women, children and even pets are being gunned down by the government’s standing army of militarized police who shoot first and ask questions later.

    • We are no longer safe in our homes. This present menace comes from the government’s army of bureaucratized, corporatized, militarized SWAT teams who are waging war on the last stronghold left to us as a free people: the sanctity of our homes.

    • We have no real freedom of speech. We are moving fast down a slippery slope to an authoritarian society in which the only opinions, ideas and speech expressed are the ones permitted by the government and its corporate cohorts. In more and more cases, the government is declaring war on what should be protected political speech whenever it challenges the government’s power, reveals the government’s corruption, exposes the government’s lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices. The ramifications are so far-reaching as to render almost every American who criticizes the government an extremist in word, deed, thought or by association.

    • We have no real privacy. We’re being spied on by a domestic army of government snitches, spies and techno-warriors. This government of Peeping Toms is watching everything we do, reading everything we write, listening to everything we say, and monitoring everything we spend. Beware of what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, and with whom you communicate, because it is all being recorded, stored, and catalogued, and will be used against you eventually, at a time and place of the government’s choosing.

    • We are losing our right to bodily privacy and integrity. The debate over bodily integrity covers broad territory, ranging from forced vaccinations, forced cavity searches, forced colonoscopies, forced blood draws and forced breath-alcohol tests to forced DNA extractions, forced eye scans, and forced inclusion in biometric databases: these are just a few ways in which Americans continue to be reminded that we have no real privacy, no real presumption of innocence, and no real control over what happens to our bodies during an encounter with government officials. The groundwork being laid with these mandates is a prologue to what will become the police state’s conquest of a new, relatively uncharted, frontier: inner space, specifically, the inner workings (genetic, biological, biometric, mental, emotional) of the human race.

    • We no longer have a right to private property. 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.

    • We have no due process. The groundwork has been laid for a new kind of government where it won’t matter if you’re innocent or guilty, whether you’re a threat to the nation, or even if you’re a citizen. What will matter is what the government—or whoever happens to be calling the shots at the time—thinks. And if the powers-that-be think you’re a threat to the nation and should be locked up, then you’ll be locked up with no access to the protections our Constitution provides.

    • We are no longer presumed innocent. The burden of proof has been reversed. Now we’re presumed guilty unless we can prove our innocence beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Rarely, are we even given the opportunity to do so. The government has embarked on a diabolical campaign to create a nation of suspects predicated on a massive national DNA database. Having already used surveillance technology to render the entire American populace potential suspects, DNA technology in the hands of government coupled with artificial intelligence will complete our transition to a suspect society in which we are all merely waiting to be matched up with a crime.

    • We have lost the right to be anonymous and move about freely.  At every turn, we’re hemmed in by laws, fines and penalties that regulate and restrict our autonomy, and surveillance cameras that monitor our movements. Likewise, digital currency provides the government and its corporate partners with a mode of commerce that can easily be monitored, tracked, tabulated, mined for data, hacked, hijacked and confiscated when convenient.

    • We no longer have a government of the people, by the people and for the people. In fact, a study conducted by Princeton and Northwestern University concluded that the U.S. government does not represent the majority of American citizens. Instead, the study found that the government is ruled by the rich and powerful, or the so-called “economic elite.” Moreover, the researchers concluded that policies enacted by this governmental elite nearly always favor special interests and lobbying groups. In other words, we are being ruled by an oligarchy disguised as a democracy, and arguably on our way towards fascism—a form of government where private corporate interests rule, money calls the shots, and the people are seen as mere subjects to be controlled.

    • We have no guardians of justice. The courts were established to intervene and protect the people against the government and its agents when they overstep their bounds. Yet through their deference to police power, preference for security over freedom, and evisceration of our most basic rights for the sake of order and expediency, the courts have become the guardians of the American police state in which we now live. As a result, sound judgment and justice have largely taken a back seat to legalism, statism and elitism, while preserving the rights of the people has been deprioritized and made to play second fiddle to both governmental and corporate interests.

    • We have been saddled with a dictator for life. Secret, unchecked presidential powers—acquired through the use of executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements and which can be activated by any sitting president—now enable past, president and future presidents to operate above the law and beyond the reach of the Constitution.

    Unfortunately, we have done this to ourselves.

    We allowed ourselves to be seduced by the false siren song of politicians promising safety in exchange for relinquished freedom. We placed our trust in political saviors and failed to ask questions to hold our representatives accountable to abiding by the Constitution. We looked the other way and made excuses while the government amassed an amazing amount of power over us, and backed up that power-grab with a terrifying amount of military might and weaponry, and got the courts to sanction their actions every step of the way. We chose to let partisan politics divide us and turn us into easy targets for the government’s oppression.

    Mind you, the powers-that-be want us to be censored, silenced, muzzled, gagged, zoned out, caged in and shut down. They want our speech and activities monitored for any sign of “extremist” activity. They want us to be estranged from each other and kept at a distance from those who are supposed to represent us. They want taxation without representation. They want a government without the consent of the governed.

    They want the Constitution terminated.

    “We” may have contributed to our downfall through our inaction and gullibility, but we are also the only hope for a free future.

    After all, the Constitution begins with those three beautiful words, “We the people.” Those three words were intended as a reminder to future generations that there is no government without us—our sheer numbers, our muscle, our economy, our physical presence in this land.

    As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, when we forget that, when we allow the “Me” of a self-absorbed, narcissistic, politically polarizing culture to override our civic duties as citizens to collectively stand up to tyranny and make the government play by the rules of the Constitution, there can be no surprise when tyranny rises and freedom falls

    Remember, there is power in numbers.

    There are 332 million of us in this country. Imagine what we could accomplish if we actually worked together, presented a united front, and spoke with one voice?

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 23:40

  • Self-Service Kiosks Are Crawling With Fecal Bacteria: Study
    Self-Service Kiosks Are Crawling With Fecal Bacteria: Study

    A new study has found both feces and vomit-inducing pathogens all over the surfaces of self-service checkout kiosks.

    British scientists took swabs from every day items touched by multiple people – and found thousands of bacteria on the frequently used payment machines, according to Study Finds.

    Present on nearly all surfaces was E. Coli, while fecal bacteria and microbes associated with urinary tract infections (UTIs) were also found on the self-service screens.

    A bug commonly found in the vagina, mouth, throat and gut called Candida albicans, which can cause yeast infections, was also discovered on an escalator handrail.

    And shoppers may also be at risk if they share their desk with others at work, as intestinal microbes that can cause a range of infections, including UTIs, were found on computer keyboards. The findings were confirmed by scientists at the Infection Innovation Consortium (iiCON) in Liverpool, England, which led the study. -Study Finds

    According to iiCON chief researcher Dr. Adam Roberts, self-checkouts have a particularly high viral load.

    “The self-checkout samples had one of the highest bacterial loads, as we found five different types of potential disease-causing bacteria surviving on them,” he told the South West News Service. “This included Enterococcus which is found in human feces and, while this is usually harmless, it can of course lead to disease, particularly in those who may have weakened immune systems.

    “This included Enterococcus which is found in human feces and, while this is usually harmless, it can of course lead to disease, particularly in those who may have weakened immune systems,” he continued. “While both exist naturally in feces and intestines, given the right environment, they are able to cause quite severe diseases in humans, so it’s vital that we wash our hands before and after eating when working at the computer.”

    According to Dr. Roberts, shoppers need to minimize risk by washing their hands regularly, especially after using the bathroom.

    Annabel Murphy, an iiCON research Assistant, checks plates for bacteria. (Credit: SWNS)

    “It’s vital to try to minimize their effects in terms of infection prevention and control, so when we touch our mouths or go to the toilet and don’t wash our hands, we’ve likely got bacteria from these places on our hands which can then transfer to other things – and subsequently to other people,” he said. “If those individuals are more susceptible to infection than you are, there may be a problem.”

    Previous research confirms the common suggestion that it’s best to wash your hands for at least 20 seconds to get rid of infectious bacteria. A mathematical model concludes that it takes that long for bacteria to escape from the “valleys” in the surface of the skin that requires a heavy stream of water and fast scrubbing. Other studies suggest only 5.3 percent of people spend 15 seconds or longer washing, rubbing and rinsing, with the average time spent being only six seconds. -Study Finds

    Liverpool Director of Public Health, Matt Ashton, said that those with vulnerable family members should take are to wash their hands. “Our results showed that there are multiple bacteria living on objects that we touch every single day. These bacteria are completely invisible to the naked eye – surfaces may look clean but can be covered in bacteria,” he said. “But there are simple things we can do to prevent the spread of them and stop the transfer completing its cycle”

    “This is particularly important if you are visiting vulnerable relatives in hospitals and care homes, for example. Hospital admissions for illnesses like Norovirus and flu always spike at this time of year, but we can take steps to reduce how quickly germs transfer from one person to another, by simply keeping our hands clean – washing them after going to the bathroom and before and after.”

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 23:20

  • Johnstone: I Don't Want A Sci-Fi Future
    Johnstone: I Don’t Want A Sci-Fi Future

    Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

    I don’t desire a future for humanity like the ones imagined by our culturally designated future-imaginers. I don’t want humans living in Elon Musk Mars colonies or Jeff Bezos space cylinders. I don’t want us to fly out into the stars, to disappear into virtual reality universes, or to move away from our humanness by becoming cybernetic organisms.

    Not yet anyway. Not for a long time. Not until we’ve done what we need to do here first.

    Have you ever noticed that most books, shows and movies set in the future tend to depict a humanity that’s more technologically advanced than our own, but thinks and behaves in basically the same way? In the average sci-fi story people are still waging wars, still fighting, conquering, subjugating, toiling and surviving just like today, except they’re doing it out in space surrounded by a bunch of aliens (who are also oddly entangled in the same egoic patternings as humans in the 21st century).

    In this common vision for the future, we have mastered space travel but still haven’t mastered basic psychological health. Our technology has enabled us to kill, enslave, manipulate and exploit among the stars so that we are no longer confined to killing, enslaving, manipulating and exploiting down here.

    This tendency is partly due to the limits of imagination; it’s easy to imagine more advanced versions of our own technology, but trying to imagine a mindframe that’s very different from your own is like trying to imagine being twice as intelligent as you are. Trying to imagine living in a conscious civilization while your own civilization is deeply unconscious is like a dream character trying to imagine life outside the dream. It’s not hard to extrapolate upon existing patterns, but envisioning the complete dissolution of patterns can be much more difficult.

    This tendency is also due to the fact that science fiction writers are telling stories for an immature civilization full of restless minds who would be easily bored by tales of a peaceful future without any major problems. But that’s the kind of future that I want for humanity. A peaceful one without any major problems. One that wouldn’t make a good Hollywood blockbuster.

    And it’s actually kind of a problem that the future which humanity is mentally pointing itself toward is one in which all our restlessness and dysfunction persists. Our steps into the future will be guided by our collective vision for it, and when those visions are about space colonization, virtual reality and transhumanism, our collective compass is going to be skewed toward dysfunction.

    Right now for example most human innovation goes toward generating profits and/or military dominance, which puts us on a trajectory toward more and more technologically advanced personal doodads to buy at the store and more and more ways of killing large numbers of people at a time. It doesn’t put us on a trajectory toward finding ways to make sure everyone has enough, to helping people have more leisure time, to helping humanity move in harmony with our ecosystem. All of those innovations would do infinitely more to create a more pleasant future for humanity than spaceships and laser guns, but our systems do not give rise to them, because they are not profitable and don’t help increase a government’s military power.

    There are so many assumptions baked in to our collective visions for the future and the systems we’ve set up to carry us there. Assumptions like we’ll never have peace; we’ll always have violence, conflict and domination; we’ll always have poverty and the need for endless toil; we’ll never be able to stop consuming our biosphere to death so we’d better get out into space so that capitalism can keep expanding. All of those assumptions point us away from a healthy and harmonious future.

    And of course that’s what you’d expect from a deeply unconscious species, which is what we still are currently. We’re still largely operating on autopilot like any other animal, whipped about by the forces of conditioning patterns that have been reverberating from the most distant reaches of our evolutionary ancestry. A collective history of trauma and fear combined with our newly evolved capacity for abstract thought has left us confused and disoriented in ways we haven’t yet gained lucidity on; an adolescent species in an awkward transition phase.

    And I can’t help but think how productive it would be if, rather than spending our energy trying to dash off into outer space or bury our heads in virtual reality, our movement into the future was focused more on resolving all that? If rather than feeding into our unconscious restlessness by giving ourselves more and more places to try and escape to, we set about learning to simply be here now?

    What if instead of trying to be anywhere but here, humanity made a mad push for enlightenment? What if instead of spending the next centuries trying to get away from the present reality, our society began emphasizing things like meditation and self-enquiry to help us finally truly meet the present reality? What if our science became less focused on profit and destruction and more on trying to find ways to help people be okay with themselves? What if psychedelic institutions were set up around the world to help everyone explore their inner realms and bring the unconscious into consciousness using skillful methods and entheogenic compounds?

    I mean, most of us can’t even sit still in meditation for an hour without their mind racing all over the place and doing everything except what it’s asked to do. Does that sound natural to you? Does that sound like a conscious, healthy species? Or does it sound like a species that, if handed paradise on a golden platter, would immediately destroy it out of boredom?

    A lot of what we see the most influential minds envisioning for our future just looks like restlessness to me, a relentless compulsion to be anywhere but here, much like the mental fidgeting of an individual attempting to meditate. We don’t even have any evidence that humans can live completely independent of Earth’s biosphere, yet it’s taken as a given that we’ll be running off into the stars so we don’t have to make the drastic changes in ourselves that will be necessary to sustain human life on this planet. The idea of simply settling down and learning to be here sounds unthinkably hellish to a mind enslaved to restlessness, to such an extent that it will concoct unrealistic fictions about the future rather than facing reality.

    Even if we did succeed in colonizing space, it wouldn’t solve any of our problems, and it wouldn’t make our future any more pleasant. We’d just be moving our restless, violent, insatiable, discontented minds offworld, where we’ll immediately recreate all the same problems we created down here except we’ll be doing it in artificial bubbles surrounded by deadly black desert on all sides. I mean, you think Thanksgiving is hell? Imagine cooped up with your family all day every day in what’s essentially a mall that you can never leave. Is your head really ready for that?

    A head rattling with mental chatter would be incapable of experiencing any wonder in space exploration, and would be incapable of experiencing joy in the creation of virtual worlds. A serene mind experiences wonder and joy walking across a parking lot. What we really want is equanimity, not space colonization and VR. Deep down we don’t really want to be somewhere else, we want to be able to truly be here.

    I’d really like to see humanity begin recalibrating its visions for the future away from these pathways toward glorified escapism, and toward the creation of a healthy and harmonious world. It might not sell books and movie tickets (at least not right away), but it will point us toward where we all really want to be in our heart of hearts.

    *  *  *

    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 American husband Tim Foley.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 23:00

  • China Quietly Launches QE: Beijing Orders Large Insurers To Buy Bonds To Contain Selling Panic
    China Quietly Launches QE: Beijing Orders Large Insurers To Buy Bonds To Contain Selling Panic

    At its core, when stripped away of all rhetoric and technicalities, the Fed’s QE is just one big bond-buying operation by the so-called Lender (and Buyer) of Last Resort, an operation meant to stabilize the market and restore order and price transparency even if it means creating an artificial market (as the Fed found out the hard way 12 years of QE will do). And if one goes by that simple definition, last night China – which has so far been against replicating the Fed’s repertoire of market intervention amid concerns it would exacerbate the country’s giant debt bubble – quietly  launched QE.

    According to Bloomberg, Chinese regulators asked the nation’s biggest insurers to buy bonds being offloaded as retail customers pull their cash from fixed-income investments. At a meeting on Wednesday, Chinese regulators told top insurers to backstop the market and buy bonds sold by wealth management units at banks to prevent further volatility. Some banks also proposed to use their proprietary trading desks to scoop up bonds, one source said.

    Of course, in China where virtually every major financial enterprise is a SOE – i.e., state -wned – there is no such thing as “big independent insurers”: they are all essentially government entities, and just one-step removed from official state apparatus to preserve some semblance of a private market (with state characteristics). But at the end of the day, what the regulators just greenlighted is nothing shy of QE, and what’s more, unlike the US where at least there is some pretense of an asset swap as banks exchange bonds for reserves, in China the flow of funds is much simpler: someone, anyone, buys bonds to calm down the market. And since this is a step that is usually taken as a last-ditch resort, one can confidently say that we may have very well seen the bottom in Chinese assets.

    The guidance, handed down at a meeting that was also attended by big (state-owned) banks and lenders, comes as Chinese traders and retail investors have been ditching fixed-income assets and pouring money into stocks on growing economic optimism as China rolls back its strict Covid Zero approach. The turmoil last month, which saw large withdrawals from bond-backed wealth management products, earlier also prompted regulators to ask banks to report on their liquidity situation.

    According to the report, some insurance firms, whose investment products are less vulnerable to short-term redemptions, have already heeded the call and “purchased bonds on a positive market outlook” even before the latest guidance. The biggest insurance firms include China Life Insurance Co. and Ping An Insurance Group of China. The asset management arms of just those two manage a combined 8.74 trillion yuan ($1.3 trillion), according to their websites. Both are, of course, majority state-owned, and thus all that is taking place, is China’s state now actively buying up bonds to stabilize the market.

    Some more background: in an effort to increase transparency of risks and instill more discipline in China’s 29 trillion yuan wealth management market (yes, don’t laugh), authorities had embarked on a multi-year reform to have banks ditch a fixed-return model and move to mark-to-market pricing. However, this spooked investors who for years have been used to steady, guaranteed returns, causing large outflows and forced selling by money managers.

    As a result, China’s benchmark bond yields surged the most in six years on Nov. 14 as signs China is loosening its Covid Zero policies caused a rapid shift into stocks. Yields continued to climb since, before easing a bit on Wednesday as news of the unofficial QE spread. China’s one-year government bond yield has risen to near the highest this year at 2.25%, after a spike of more than 50 basis points since November.

    And, lo and behold, as always happens central bank/state buying of bonds commences, the market immediately stabilized and Chinese bond futures surged on Thursday, posting their biggest gain in two weeks.  Futures contracts on the 10-year note rose as much as 0.4% to 99.855, the most since Nov. 23. Yields on 10-year and one-year notes both declined after having blown out in the past month alongside repo yields.

    Meanwhile, daily redemptions on largely bond-backed wealth management products could have peaked at as much as 200 billion yuan, according to an estimate from Everbright Securities.

    In other words, those insurance giants will be busy. Or may not: after all, the mere hint that the state will buy bonds if they drop enough should be sufficient to prevent further selling: we saw just that in March 2020, and we saw it all again in September, when the BOE scrambled to restart QE following the liability-driven investment crash when all fixed income assets were dumped after the mini-budget fiasco.

    And if that’s not enough, Beijing slapped even more measures to preserve market stability: Banks and asset managers have also moved to limit redemptions. Bank of China, one of the four big state banks, has set a daily quota on what customers can redeem at 10,000 yuan starting mid-December. Suyin Wealth Management and Bank of Guiyang have also capped real-time redemption on some products at 10,000 yuan per day, according to their latest mandates.

    More than 95% of outstanding wealth management products sold by banks and asset managers are marked to market, according to official data as of the end of June. Bonds account for about 68% of the total underlying assets.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 22:40

  • Major Economic Contraction Coming In 2023… Followed By Even More Inflation
    Major Economic Contraction Coming In 2023… Followed By Even More Inflation

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

    The signs are already present and obvious, but the overall economic picture probably won’t be acknowledged in the mainstream until the situation becomes much worse (as if it’s not bad enough). It’s a problem that arises at the onset of every historic financial crisis – Mainstream economists and commentators lie to the public about the chances of recovery, constantly giving false reassurances and lulling people back to sleep. Even now with price inflation pummeling the average consumer they tell us that there is nothing to worry about. The Federal Reserve’s “soft landing” is on the way.

    I remember in 2007 right before the epic derivatives collapse when media pundits were applauding the US housing market and predicting even greater highs in sales and in valuations. I had only been writing economic analysis for about a year, but I remember thinking that the overt display of optimism felt like compensation for something. It seemed as if they were trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public in the hopes that if people just believed hard enough that all was well then the fantasy could be manifested into reality. Unfortunately, that’s not how economics works.

    Supply and demand, debt and deficit, money velocity and inflation; these things cannot be ignored. If the system is out of balance, collapse will set its ugly foot down somewhere and there’s nothing anyone including central banks can do about it. In fact, there are times when they deliberately ENGINEER collapse.

    This is the situation we are currently in today as 2022 comes to a close. The Fed is in the midst of a rather aggressive rate hike program in a “fight” against the stagflationary crisis that they created through years of fiat stimulus measures. The problem is that the higher interest rates are not bringing prices down, nor are they really slowing stock market speculation. Easy money has been too entrenched for far too long, which means a hard landing is the most likely scenario.

    In the early 2000s the Fed had been engaged in artificially low interest rates which inflated the housing and derivatives bubble. In 2004, they shifted into a tightening process. Rates in 2004 were at 1% and by 2006 they rose to over 5%. This is when cracks began to appear in the credit structure, with 4.5% – 5.5% being the magic cutoff point before debt became too expensive for the system to continue the charade. By 2007/2008 the nation witnessed an exponential implosion of credit, setting off the biggest money printing bonanza in US history in order to save the banking sector, at least for a time.

    Since nothing was actually fixed by the Fed back then, I will continue to use the 5% funds rate as a marker for when we will see another major contraction. The difference this time is that the central bank does not have the option to flood the economy with more fiat, at least not without immediately triggering a larger stagflationary spiral. I am also operating on the premise that the Fed WANTS a crash at this time.

    As I noted in my article ‘The Fed Is Taking The Punch Bowl Away – But The Inflation Crisis Will Continue To Grow’, published in May:

    “Mainstream financial commentators want to believe the Fed will capitulate because they desperately want the party in stock markets to continue, but the party is over. Sure, there will be moments when the markets rally based on nothing more than a word or two from a Fed official planting false hopes, but this will become rare. Ultimately, the Fed has taken away the punch bowl and it’s not coming back. They have the perfect excuse to kill the economy and kill markets in the form of a stagflationary disaster THEY CAUSED. Why would they reverse course now?”

    My position is that the central bank has a global agenda that eclipses any national loyalty, and that it requires the decline of the American economy in order to expedite the introduction of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) linked together through the IMF. So far they are getting exactly what they want and they are perfectly aware of what they are doing.

    The Fed is expected to slow rate hikes to 50bps in December, but this is not assured with the jobs market still running hot from $8 trillion in covid stimulus the past two years (mostly lower paying retail and service sector jobs). By the February meeting of 2023 the Fed will be at or very near 5% interest rates, which I believe will help trigger a considerable plunge in markets and mass layoffs.

    There are other factors to consider, though. One lesser known issue is the new 1% excise tax on stock buybacks planted within Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. The measure, which goes into effect in January of next year, will not reduce prices on goods. That said, stock buybacks are still the primary means by which equities are kept afloat by major corporations. Over the past decade, buybacks have been funded by money borrowed from the Fed at near zero interest – essentially free money. Now, the easy money party is about to end.

    The 1% excise tax added on top of a 5% Fed funds rate creates a 6% millstone on any money borrowed to finance future buybacks. This cost is going to be far too high and buybacks will falter. Meaning, stock markets will also stop, and drop. It will likely take two or three months before the tax and the rate hikes create a visible effect on markets. This would put our time frame for contraction around March or April of 2023.

    Inflation is not going anywhere anytime soon, however. The underlying problem of energy prices needs to be considered as they contribute to further supply chain stress.

    Think about this for a moment: The current reduction in oil prices and energy is artificial and government driven, not supply and demand driven. Oil prices in the US are being kept down by Joe Biden’s constant supply dumps from the strategic reserves. Eventually Biden is going to run out of oil to drop on markets and he will have to replenish those reserves at a much higher cost.

    Furthermore, oil and energy prices are being kept down because of China’s suspiciously bizarre Zero Covid policy, which is slowing their economy to a crawl and reducing oil usage to a minimum. With public riots escalating, the CCP will probably seek to ease conditions as a means to placate dissent, playing a game of release the steam valve. A reopening by early next year is on the way, with a number of controls still in place of course.

    As soon as China reopens, oil prices will skyrocket once again on the global market.

    Then, there is the war in Ukraine and the ongoing sanctions against Russia. Europe is about to face the worst winter in decades with natural gas supplies severely limited and the cost of power for manufacturing no longer tenable. Their only hope is for mild temperatures for the rest of the season. If the current trend continues, production in Europe will be throttled, causing chaos in the global supply chain.

    High energy prices and supply chain disruptions will mean ongoing inflated prices in goods and services well into 2023, even with a contraction in jobs markets and stock markets. I will be publishing an article soon with a working theory on how the US could actually stop inflation without crushing the rest of the economy. The model would require cooperation from leaders at the state level, though, along with a number of business interests that focus on necessities. In the meantime, I suggest readers stock provisions whenever possible and organize within their local communities before next April.

    *  *  *

    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
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 22:20

  • New Zealand Takes Baby From Parents Demanding "Unvaccinated" Blood For Heart Surgery
    New Zealand Takes Baby From Parents Demanding “Unvaccinated” Blood For Heart Surgery

    New Zealand’s High Court on Wednesday took custody of an infant whose parents demanded he only receive blood from donors who are unvaccinated against Covid-19 for an urgently needed heart surgery to repair a congenital defect.

    File photo taken outside court last week of the mother speaking to reporters. Photo: RNZ / Mohammad Alafeshat

    “He remains in urgent need of an operation, and every day that the operation is delayed his heart is under strain,” reads the order, citing one of his doctors.

    The parents, Cole Reeves and Samantha Savage, rejected doctors’ assertion that using blood donated from outside normal channels was “impractical” for the child’s circumstance, and that surgery without donated blood was “not an available option.”

    Apparently an unvaccinated volunteer with the same blood type is not ‘an available option.’

    Judge Ian Gault ruled that it was in “Baby W’s best interests” for the court to take temporary custody of him so the surgery could be performed. The infant was placed under the guardianship of the court from Wednesday until he recovers from surgery, but not beyond January 31st, the Washington Post reports.

    The surgery, which is set for Friday morning, is estimated to take 48 hours to complete. Two doctors were appointed as Baby W’s legal representatives for the purpose of consenting to surgery, and Reeves and Savage were appointed as his representatives for “all other purposes.” Doctors said they would “take the parents’ views into consideration” whenever possible — as long as doing so wouldn’t compromise “Baby W’s interests.”

    The decision followed a tense period of several weeks fraught with baseless claims, according to the order. -WaPo

    Reeves and Savage how now tried to stop doctors preparing the infant for the operation on Friday – which the High Court responded to by ordering the parents not to obstruct staff at Starship Hospital.

    Te Whatu Ora has asked for the police to step in and also asked the court if officers are entitled to use reasonable force to remove the baby from the parents.

    In his decision yesterday, Justice Gault also said doctors from Te Whatu Ora had been made agents of the court to carry out the surgery, including the adminstration of any blood products.

    In a minute issued this evening, Justice Gault said he had been informed by the lawyer acting for Te Whatu Ora that the baby’s parents had prevented doctors from taking blood tests, performing a chest X-ray and performing an anaesthetic assessment.

    The lawyer understood the parents had threatened to lay criminal charges against medical staff if they went ahead, Justice Gault said. –RNZ

    “You touch our child and we will press criminal charges against you,” the parents told hospital staff, according to the filing.

    The parents’ lawyer, Sue Grey, petitioned the judge, asking for the opinions of two US doctors to be considered, adding that it would be “extreme overreach” if police were called in to remove the baby from his parents in order to perform the surgery.

    Justice Gault denied the request, saying Grey was effectively seeking to re-open the case he had already ruled on.

    “Baby W urgently requires surgery and, as I concluded in my judgment, an order enabling the surgery to proceed using NZBS [New Zealand Blood Service] blood products without further delay is in Baby W’s best interests,” wrote Gault.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 22:00

  • The Monopoly-Labor "Let It Rot" Death Spiral
    The Monopoly-Labor “Let It Rot” Death Spiral

    Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

    The only rational response to this reality is to opt out, lay flat and let it rot.

    In my previous post, The Bubble Economy’s Credit-Asset Death Spiral, I described the self-reinforcing feedback of expanding credit and soaring asset valuations and how the only possible result of this financial perpetual motion machine was a death spiral of collapsing debt service, collateral and credit impulse.

    But this didn’t exhaust the destructive dynamics of this self-reinforcing wealth-creation machine for the few who own the vast majority of the assets. As longtime correspondent T.D. explains, this concentration of the benefits of financialization in the hands of the few also concentrates political power and the wealth to distort every function of the economy to enrich the few at the expense of the many.

    This concentration of wealth and corruption isn’t cost-free. As I’ve discussed here many times, capital siphoned $50 trillion from labor via hyper-financialization and hyper-globalization:

    The Bill for America’s $50 Trillion Gluttony of Inequality Is Overdue (September 21, 2020)

    Our Phantom Middle Class (December 23, 2020)

    Monopolies and cartels focus on self-enrichment, not social or economic stability. Concentrating wealth and power in the hands of the most self-serving few and their entrenched interests has crushed the ladders of social mobility. Assets such as a family home are out of reach in many locales for all but the few. Inflation, high taxes and the corruption of student loans, etc. have stripped all but the top 10% of any hope of gaining middle-class security.

    The only rational response to this reality is to opt out, lay flat and let it rot: stop the self-exploitation of working to make the already-rich even richer. Direct resistance is easily suppressed by force. But “letting it rot” by withdrawing one’s labor and conformity cannot be reversed with force. Once a critical mass of the workforce opts out of self-exploitation and “lets it rot,” the system of financialization / exploitation of labor can no longer sustain itself and it collapses in a putrid heap.

    Here’s T.D.’s explanation of these dynamics:

    Don’t forget the ‘monopolization effect’ promoted by the cycle you describe.

    Large organizations in any industry use their inflated valuations as leverage to acquire whatever resources are needed to bully their smaller competitors out of the game.

    They can buy off politicians, regulators, talent, and competitors to ensure their market dominance.

    It’s happened in every industry–including healthcare.

    It’s also left every industry dominated by a small number of colluding Potemkin organizations reliant on financialization to generate stakeholder value. They are formidable appearing but bereft of talent and mission. When challenges appear they simply do more of the same, becoming ever more reliant on their financialization to keep their systems churning.

    In healthcare we are left with consolidating providers and payers who deliver just enough ‘care’ to create the simulacrum of a ‘health system’ but in reality they are completely unable to cope with their putative mission.

    Need proof? Imagine what health care would look like if there were no Federal dollars of any kind.

    There would be no more palaces of healing, no indecipherable bills, and no onerous pricing.

    Just a service priced on value as judged by the purchaser.

    Through inflation, speculative price swings, regulatory opacity, and preferential access to capital, the system described in your post is quite intentionally designed to use ever-inflating capital valuations to take the value of labor from the wage-earner and place it in the pocket of those who have the capital.

    That’s why it’s so vulnerable to those who withdraw their labor. They work outside the system, they limit the excess value they create by ‘laying flat.’

    Without the labor, there’s nothing to steal.

    And all the IRS agents in the world won’t change that.

    We’re seeing a huge labor shift in healthcare. Last year the big news was the mass migration of nurses to the Agency model where they could earn 2-3 x their hourly wage–you read that right, wages had been suppressed for so long, a freer market was able to treble them.

    There was significant regulatory pushback, as health systems accused agencies and the nurses they represent of price gouging (heh).

    That didn’t last long though.

    It quickly became clear that those nurses weren’t going to return to their jobs at their previous pay, even if the agency option was regulated away.

    So now, needing those nurses on the floor, the dominant model is a hospital staffed with agency nurses earning far more (and happier!) than they would have as full-time employees

    Through using complexity to capture each industry and reducing the individual rewards of overcoming that complexity, the system you describe has sowed the seeds of the labor shortage which will result in its own destruction.

    And all the anxiety, distraction, and division they sow only accelerates the very thing they seek to prevent.

    And those of us who can see it simply need to prepare, sit back, and watch.

    Well said, T.D. Thank you for the explanation.

    *  *  *

    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, 12/08/2022 – 21:40

  • TSA Plans Nationwide Rollout Of Biometric Machines For Airport Travelers
    TSA Plans Nationwide Rollout Of Biometric Machines For Airport Travelers

    Traversing Transportation Security Administration (TSA) lines is already stressful enough at airports. All travelers are screened during the security process by technology or an invasive pat-down. One such machine currently being tested in more than a dozen airports with a possible nationwide rollout next year is one where travelers look straight into a camera, according to The Washington Post.

    The TSA is quietly testing a biometric machine called the next generation of Credential Authentication Technology (CAT) to verify the identity of travelers via their face. CAT scans the traveler’s photo ID and then compares that with the Secure Flight database. 

    CAT machines are currently at 16 major airports with plans to expand nationwide, according to WaPo, adding, “Kiosks with cameras are doing a job that used to be completed by humans: checking the photos on travelers’ IDs to make sure they’re not impostors.” 

    The controversial tech is currently opt-in for passengers (at the moment). It’s so controversial that several cities, such as San Francisco, have banned it.

    There’s a lot to worry about if TSA is given the green light for a nationwide rollout next year. One thing is, how can anyone trust this federal agency to handle biometric data properly? 

    TSA recently said, “Photos captured by CAT units are never stored or used for any other purpose than immediate identity verification.” But still — with trust in government at low levels, who actually believes that statement. 

    The expansion of biometric verification data for travelers is a sign that the US is following down a terrifying path that China took to become a surveillance nation. 

    So what does this all mean? Well, it’s a warning of the dystopic future where biometrics will be used to identify citizens across all facets of society. Think about Amazon’s palm-reading payment technology that allows customers at some Whole Foods locations to pay with their fingerprints. 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 21:20

  • Call For Investigation Into Mortality Rates As Australia Sees Death-Rate Spike
    Call For Investigation Into Mortality Rates As Australia Sees Death-Rate Spike

    Authored by Victoria Kelly-Clark via The Epoch Times,

    Australia has seen a spike in its mortality rates in 2022, with the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) stating that by the end of August 2022, 128,797 deaths had been registered, which is 18,671 deaths, or 17 percent, more than the historical average.

    In the data release on Nov. 25, the ABS noted that of registered deaths; there had been a rise in the number of Australians dying from dementia (18.9 percent above the baseline average), diabetes (20.8 percent higher than the baseline average), cancer, and COVID-19.

    Karen Cutter, a spokesperson for the Actuaries Institute of Australia (AIA) said in a media release (pdf) that even after the Institute’s COVID-19 Mortality Working Group removed all “from” and “with” COVID-19 deaths, it was not clear why Australians were dying in larger numbers from other diseases such as ischaemic heart disease, cancer, and cerebrovascular disease in 2021 and 2022.

    In an analysis (pdf) from Nov. 3, the AIA noted that 1,200 more Australians had died from ischaemic heart disease than expected, while cerebrovascular disease had 450 more deaths than normal. Meanwhile, mortality rates from diabetes increased by 400 deaths, and dementia saw an extra 800 deaths.

    According to the ABS, between January and August this year, 7,727 Australians died from COVID-19.

    “It is not clear what might be driving this, although we expect that at least part of the excess will be in respect of people who otherwise may have succumbed to respiratory disease in 2020 and 2021,” said Cutter.

    They also said that diabetes deaths have generally been higher than expected throughout the pandemic.

    Cutter noted that the AIA had also noticed that of the excess deaths in the 0-44 and 45-64 age bands were small, and the number of women dying was higher than expected.

    She has called on the federal government to launch an inquiry into the cause of the spike.

    “The differences are worth investigation, although the small numbers mean that there is considerable natural variation,” she said.

    Spiking Mortality Rates a Global Phenomenon

    The spike in mortality rates is being experienced globally, with the UK’s Chief Medical Officer, Sir Chris Whitty, as well as Sir Patrick Vallance, the country’s Chief Scientific Adviser, declaring the country is facing a “prolonged period” of excess deaths after people differed treatment during the initial stages of the pandemic.

    Meanwhile, the UK’s health secretary Steve Barclay said that the government needed to come clean about the excess deaths.

    In a speech to the Spectator Health Summit in London on Nov. 28, Barclay said that the government must share the scale of the COVID backlog, which he estimated was now “around now 7.1 million patients.”

    “We know from the data that there are more 50-to 64-year olds with cardiovascular issues. It’s the result of delays in that age group seeing a GP because of the pandemic and, in some cases, not getting statins for hypertension in time,” he said.

    “When coupled with delays in ambulance times, we see this reflected in the excess death numbers. In time, we may well see a similar challenge in cancer data,” Barclay said.

    COVID-19 Lingering Effects

    The AIA agrees that delayed medical treatment may be a cause behind Australia’s rising death rate.

    In an analysis of the pandemic in 2022, they said that it was highly likely that delays in medical care was a contributing factor to the excess death rates from other diseases.

    “Pressure on the health, hospital and aged care systems, including ambulance ramping and bed block, could lead to people not getting the care they require, either as they avoid seeking help, or their care is not as timely as it might have been in pre-pandemic times,” they said.

    “There is some evidence that this may be affecting cancer deaths. It may also be a factor in higher deaths from other causes, such as ischaemic heart disease, diabetes, and the large ‘other’ category.”

    They also noted that COVID-19 lingering health effects could also be contributing to the increased rates.

    Studies show that coronavirus is associated with increased mortality risks from heart disease and other causes. However, because doctors certifying the death would not necessarily know of the infection if it had occurred months prior, this could demonstrate a causative link several months after recovery from COVID-19.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 21:00

  • Chinese Health Official Admits 80-90% Of Population May End Up With COVID
    Chinese Health Official Admits 80-90% Of Population May End Up With COVID

    After just within the past week China’s government dramatically pivoted from its ultra-harsh ‘zero Covid’ policy – a policy which had triggered unprecedented widespread protests against communist authorities and health officials as in some instances they barricaded whole neighborhoods into strictly controlled quarantine zones – toward what appears a full embrace of a more lax ‘Swedish model’ type approach, national health authorities are prepping the population for the coming Covid wave, which could impact an estimated 80 to 90% of the Chinese population, according to a fresh projection by Feng Zijian, a former deputy chief at China’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

    “It’s going to be inevitable for most of us to get infected once, regardless of how the Covid-fighting measures are adjusted,” Feng said Tuesday during a virtual conference discussing the zero Covid offramp at Tsinghua University in Beijing. As a senior health official, Feng is part of the central government’s task force in implementing new policies which has moved away from the ‘one size fits all’ mentality that guided Beijing’s health response since the pandemic began.

    “Some 60% of Chinese people may be infected in the first wave, before the curve flattens, Feng predicted,” as cited in Bloomberg. “By comparison, about 58% of the US population had been infected by February this year, according to a US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention analysis released in April. That was up from 33.5% in December.”

    Via Associated Press

    So it seems two years too late, China is learning the lessons of a number of countries that embraced a more flexible stance based on understanding herd immunity early, also centered on protecting the most vulnerable demographic, the elderly and the infirm, while not shuttering the economy wholesale.

    Further, as of Thursday morning in China (local time), health authorities are reporting “more than 20,000 new cases a day at the moment, as outbreaks flare from Beijing to the southern manufacturing hub of Guangzhou. That’s up from less than 100 a day in June, and zero for long periods of 2020.”

    But China says it’s ready amid its more localized approach which will seek to prep hospitals, civic authorities, and the citizenry on “proper protective measures” – such as greater deployment of at home rapid antigen test kits. “It is better to direct the flood than block it,” Lu Jiahai, a senior expert at the state drug regulator National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), said.

    As for this approach looking more like a Swedish model policy (though don’t expect anyone in Beijing to call it that), Caixin Global recently captured the following quotes which illustrate an astounding about-face in thinking on the pandemic among Chinese officials: 

    Although there are challenges in the implementation of home quarantine, the infection risks should not be exaggerated, said University of Hong Kong’s Jin.

    “Scientific guidelines should be provided for everyone to follow with a clear accountability mechanism, as there have been many examples that even couples in the same room didn’t infect each other,” said Jin, citing the experience in Hong Kong, where home isolation has been widely adopted after the worst outbreaks hit in the spring.

    One resident in Beijing agreed. “I think it is more important to eliminate the irrational fear of being infected, and at the same time learn how to reduce the risk of cross-infection,” Ma Qiao, who has studied preventative medicine, told Caixin.

    Some of the new measures from the communist government call for isolating asymptomatic or mild Covid cases at home rather than in quarantine camps or hospitals for seven days. Anyone in contact with the infected would have to quarantine at home for five days instead of eight days at a camp and then at home.

    The State Council further disbanded the rule for people to show negative Covid tests before entering public places. As the SCMP summarized of the new approach this week: “The new policy stressed that basic social and medical services need to be provided. People’s movements, work and production should not be restricted in low-risk areas.” 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 20:40

  • Federal Pandemic Program Forgave $809 Million In PPP Loans To White-Shoe Law Firms: Watchdog
    Federal Pandemic Program Forgave $809 Million In PPP Loans To White-Shoe Law Firms: Watchdog

    Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Federal officials forgave $809 million in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans handed out during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 to more than 100 of the nation’s top law firms and another $635 million given to hundreds of elite accounting offices, according to a new analysis of government spending to be made public on Dec. 2.

    A worker protests outside the closed Four Points by Sheraton LAX hotel as they call for an investigation by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) into the use of Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan funds in Los Angeles, Calif., on April 7, 2021. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)

    As described by the Department of Treasury, the PPP was established in 2020 to provide “small businesses with the resources they need to maintain their payroll, hire back employees who may have been laid off, and cover applicable overhead.”

    The program was administered by the federal Small Business Administration, which made $787 billion in federal loans to companies and firms spanning all industries. The vast majority of the “loans” were subsequently turned into grants, which didn’t require repayment.

    An investigation by Open the Books found that hundreds of millions of federal tax dollars went to top law and accounting firms even though most of them didn’t qualify as small businesses and didn’t have to lay off employees.

    Open the Books is a nonprofit watchdog that uses public information laws such as the federal Freedom of Information Act to make government spending public, including “every dime online, in real time.”

    The Epoch Times obtained an advance copy of the investigative report.

    Auditors “found an astonishing $1.4 billion in forgiven PPP loans that flowed to the largest and most successful law and accounting firms across America,” the report stated.

    “Today, it is an open question whether many of the firms needed a taxpayer subsidy to ‘save’ any jobs during the Covid-pandemic. Many racked up record revenues while their equity partners made millions of dollars.

    “For example, in the years 2020 and 2021, we found equity partners individually received $7 million in profits while their law firms received $10 million in forgiven PPP ‘loans.’ The Guam office of Ernst & Young, a Big Three accounting firm with 365,000 employees, took a $750,000 forgiven loan.

    “In 2020, millions of mom and pop businesses on Main Street had to shut down during the forced economic lockdown [occasioned by the pandemic]. So, Congress created the Paycheck Protection Plan (PPP) to compensate those businesses for their economic losses.

    “Firms with 500 employees or fewer met eligibility requirements. However, Congress didn’t anticipate that Biglaw and the largest accounting firms would cash in so profitably.”

    Among the biggest winners was Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, the New York City-based law firm of Democratic superlawyer David Boies, which received a forgiven $10.14 million PPP loan.

    Boies first came into national prominence in 2000, when he headed Vice President Al Gore’s legal team during the Florida presidential election recount. The election wasn’t decided until the Supreme Court’s Bush v. Gore decision, which put Texas Gov. George W. Bush in the Oval Office.

    Boies also gained national notoriety by representing the Department of Justice in its successful prosecution of Microsoft, and he headed a legal team that challenged California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriages. The proposition was approved in 2008 by voters, but the Supreme Court effectively nullified it in a 2013 decision.

    His firm’s PPP debt was forgiven in October 2021 under the Biden administration, even though during the period covered by the loan “the firm’s equity partners earned $4.5 million each in profit compensation—receiving $2.219 million (2021) and $2.283 million (2020). The firm billed clients $480 million during this two-year period,” Open the Books found.

    The second-biggest law firm beneficiary of PPP loans was the Birmingham, Alabama-based Maynard Cooper & Gale, which received $10.13 million under the pandemic relief program. Even so, the firm’s workforce increased from 247 in 2019 before the pandemic, to 260 in 2020 during the pandemic, and 283 in 2021.

    No. 3 among the white-shoe law firms getting tax dollars via the PPP program was the New York-based Kasowitz Benson Torres. The firm’s “revenues grew from $216.8 million (2019), to $219.4 million (2020) and then $238.4 million (2021). In April 2020, the firm received a $10.13 million PPP loan that was forgiven in July 2021—while profit per equity partner averaged $2.418 million (2021),” according to Open the Books.

    Among the big accounting firms getting tax dollars, Prager Metis CPAs in New York City received $10.2 million, which was forgiven in June. Revenues for 2021 reached $139 million, an increase from 2020’s total of $123.9 million.

    Withum’s of Princeton, New Jersey, was next, getting a PPP loan worth $10.1 million that was forgiven in June 2021. Withum’s revenues were $425.3 million in 2021, up significantly from its 2020 total of $257 million, according to Open the Books.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 20:20

  • House Democrat Claims Her Children Had 'Nightmares' About Climate Change
    House Democrat Claims Her Children Had ‘Nightmares’ About Climate Change

    As Nancy Pelosi and other aged House Democrats seem to be backing away from the political stage, a new crop of Dems are trying to make their mark by one-upping the ideological insanity of their predecessors. 

    Incoming House Democrat Whip Katherine Clark claims in a recent interview with NBC that she is politically inspired because she remembers her middle child “waking up with nightmares” about climate change, and her family going to movie theaters with the expectation and fear that a mass shooter would appear.

    One’s immediate reaction to these claims, if one has common sense, is to laugh. 

    Children don’t have nightmares about climate change or worry about mass shooters unless their parents or other adults have conditioned them to obsess over such things. 

    Climate change is a non-issue, with the Earth’s overall temperature increasing by less than 1°C in the past 100 years.

    While mass shootings are highly publicized by the media (unless they end up involving an ethnic minority or a member of the LGBT community and then the story disappears), such events make up only 0.4% to 0.8% of all gun related deaths in the US according to RAND Corporation.

    This kind of commentary is built on agenda and exaggeration, to be sure, but it tells us a lot about the Democrats in that their political and social policies are rooted in a foundation of irrational fear.  Everything they do is motivated by a need to quell these fears in themselves or to inspire those same fears in the public (and our children) in order to gain more power. 

    Clark goes on to suggest that the GOP is going to “take down the economy” by opposing budget initiatives.  She does not explain why a constantly growing federal budget should have anything to do with the overall economy, likely because she does not understand the basics of the issue.  Massive government spending (and Federal Reserve money printing) is in fact a key trigger for the ongoing inflationary crisis. 

    The national debt doubled in the eight years Barack Obama was in the White House, with the central bank creating tens of trillions in fiat to artificially prop up “too big to fail” banks.  Inflation in the US today is a direct result of this historic spending blitz, along with the $8 trillion in covid money injected into the system over the past two years.  The Democrat solution to the problem is even more spending.

    Another interesting new narrative is also touched on in terms of the DNC being tied up with the FTX scandal, including over $40 million donated to the party in preparation for the 2022 mid-term elections.  The latest argument from Democrats is a direct parallel to the argument used by central banks and globalist institutions, which is that the fall of FTX should be used as a springboard for government regulation of the crypto space (leading to CBDCs).  Clark ignores the fact that money stolen by FTX flooded into Democrat campaign coffers and distracts from the bigger question.

    The outgoing Dem House is seeking to pass as many bills as possible before they exit in January, with even more funding for Ukraine and the passage of the NDAA at the top of their list.  The NDAA in particular is about to become a central House issue with Republicans saying they will not provide more military funding until the Pentagon abandons their covid vaccine mandates for soldiers.  The Dems will be a House minority after a number of losses in the mid-terms, making Clark and her cohorts a political footnote for at least the next two years.      

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 20:00

  • THE TWITTER FILES, PART II – Twitter's Secret Blacklists
    THE TWITTER FILES, PART II – Twitter’s Secret Blacklists

    After nearly a week’s delay on the second installment of “THE TWITTER FILES” – Twitter’s internal correspondence surrounding their decision to censor the New York Post‘s Hunter Biden laptop story – Journalist Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) has begun releasing more information via Twitter.

    The second installment – which was released days after Musk fired former deputy General Counsel James Baker for ‘filtering’ the first release, is titled: “Twitter’s Secret Blacklists“

    2. Twitter once had a mission “to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.” Along the way, barriers nevertheless were erected.

    3. Take, for example, Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) who argued that Covid lockdowns would harm children. Twitter secretly placed him on a “Trends Blacklist,” which prevented his tweets from trending.
     

    4. Or consider the popular right-wing talk show host, Dan Bongino (@dbongino), who at one point was slapped with a “Search Blacklist.”

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

    5. Twitter set the account of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) to “Do Not Amplify.”
     
    7. What many people call “shadow banning,” Twitter executives and employees call “Visibility Filtering” or “VF.” Multiple high-level sources confirmed its meaning.
     
    8. “Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool,” one senior Twitter employee told us.
     
    9. “VF” refers to Twitter’s control over user visibility. It used VF to block searches of individual users; to limit the scope of a particular tweet’s discoverability; to block select users’ posts from ever appearing on the “trending” page; and from inclusion in hashtag searches.
     
    10. All without users’ knowledge.
     
    11. “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.
     
    12. The group that decided whether to limit the reach of certain users was the Strategic Response Team – Global Escalation Team, or SRT-GET. It often handled up to 200 “cases” a day.
     
    13. But there existed a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company’s policy on paper. That is the “Site Integrity Policy, Policy Escalation Support,” known as “SIP-PES.”
     
    14. This secret group included Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust (Vijaya Gadde), the Global Head of Trust & Safety (Yoel Roth), subsequent CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.
     
    15. This is where the biggest, most politically sensitive decisions got made. “Think high follower account, controversial,” another Twitter employee told us. For these “there would be no ticket or anything.”
     
    16. One of the accounts that rose to this level of scrutiny was

    @libsoftiktok

    —an account that was on the “Trends Blacklist” and was designated as “Do Not Take Action on User Without Consulting With SIP-PES.”

    17. The account—which Chaya Raichik began in November 2020 and now boasts over 1.4 million followers—was subjected to six suspensions in 2022 alone, Raichik says. Each time, Raichik was blocked from posting for as long as a week.

    18. Twitter repeatedly informed Raichik that she had been suspended for violating Twitter’s policy against “hateful conduct.”

    19. But in an internal SIP-PES memo from October 2022, after her seventh suspension, the committee acknowledged that “LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy.” See here:

    20. The committee justified her suspensions internally by claiming her posts encouraged online harassment of “hospitals and medical providers” by insinuating “that gender-affirming healthcare is equivalent to child abuse or grooming.”

    21. Compare this to what happened when Raichik herself was doxxed on November 21, 2022. A photo of her home with her address was posted in a tweet that has garnered more than 10,000 likes.

    22. When Raichik told Twitter that her address had been disseminated she says Twitter Support responded with this message: “We reviewed the reported content, and didn’t find it to be in violation of the Twitter rules.” No action was taken. The doxxing tweet is still up.

    23. In internal Slack messages, Twitter employees spoke of using technicalities to restrict the visibility of tweets and subjects. Here’s Yoel Roth, Twitter’s then Global Head of Trust & Safety, in a direct message to a colleague in early 2021:

    24. Six days later, in a direct message with an employee on the Health, Misinformation, Privacy, and Identity research team, Roth requested more research to support expanding “non-removal policy interventions like disabling engagements and deamplification/visibility filtering.”

    25. Roth wrote: “The hypothesis underlying much of what we’ve implemented is that if exposure to, e.g., misinformation directly causes harm, we should use remediations that reduce exposure, and limiting the spread/virality of content is a good way to do that.”

    26. He added: “We got Jack on board with implementing this for civic integrity in the near term, but we’re going to need to make a more robust case to get this into our repertoire of policy remediations – especially for other policy domains.”

    27. There is more to come on this story, which was reported by @abigailshrier @shellenbergermd  @nelliebowles @isaacgrafstein and the team The Free Press @thefp. Keep up with this unfolding story here and at our brand new website: thefp.com.
     
    /Fin

    And some replies:

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

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

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

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

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

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 19:51

  • Judge Orders Pro-Life Flight Attendant Re-Hired At Southwest Airlines
    Judge Orders Pro-Life Flight Attendant Re-Hired At Southwest Airlines

    Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A Texas federal judge has ordered Southwest Airlines to reinstate Charlene Carter, the flight attendant who made headlines after a jury ruled that she was unlawfully fired for expressing pro-life views and for criticizing her union.

    Charlene Carter, who worked for Southwest Airlines as a flight attendant for 21 years before she was fired, holds her former Southwest Airlines flight attendant’s uniform at her home in Aurora, Colo., on Aug. 30, 2022. (Michael Ciaglo for The Epoch Times)

    In a decision filed on Dec. 5, five months after a jury decided in Carter’s favor, Judge Brantley Starr remarked, “Bags fly free with Southwest. But free speech didn’t fly at all with Southwest in this case.”

    Starr granted Carter $300,000 in compensatory and punitive damages from Southwest; $300,000 in compensatory and punitive damages from the flight attendants’ union, Transport Workers Union of America Local 556; $150,000 in back pay, and $60,180.82 in prejudgment interest.

    Although the jury voted that Carter deserved more than $5 million, laws and rules limit the amount that can be awarded in such cases.

    “The jury also awarded front [or future] pay, but Carter would rather have her job back,” the judge wrote. “The Court reinstates Carter to her former position … If the Court opted for front pay over reinstatement, the court would complete Southwest’s unlawful scheme. Reinstatement is appropriate.”

    Further, the judge explicitly ordered Southwest and Local 556 to share the jury’s verdict and Starr’s decision with all members of the union via email and to post the documents in conspicuous places for a 60-day period.

    Starr’s order also forbids both the company and the union “from discriminating against Southwest flight attendants for their religious practices and beliefs, including—but not limited to—those expressed on social media and those concerning abortion.”

    Southwest and Local 556 are required to inform employees that federal law prohibits such discrimination.

    Both entities also must “reasonably accommodate Southwest flight attendants’ sincerely held religious beliefs, practices, and observances,” Starr wrote.

    The judge’s rulings and rationale are contained in three documents totaling 43 pages in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.

    Carter, who now lives in Colorado, fought for five years after she was fired. As The Epoch Times previously reported, Carter had become an outspoken opponent of abortion after she suffered physical and emotional effects from terminating a pregnancy years earlier, when she was 19.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 19:40

  • Remote-Work Revolution Has Wiped Out $453 Billion In Commercial Real Estate Value
    Remote-Work Revolution Has Wiped Out $453 Billion In Commercial Real Estate Value

    Leading up to the Covid-19 pandemic, roughly 95% of commercial office space was occupied across the United States, according to US National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) – a nonprofit, non-government organization. By March 2020, occupancy plummeted to 10%, and has only recovered to 47%, according to a new NBER report which claims $453 billion in office commercial real estate value has been wiped out in an “office real estate apocalypse.”

    Around the US, that resulted in a 17.5 percent decrease in lease revenue between January 2020, and May 2022, and not only because fewer offices were being occupied, but also because those that are being rented are going for shorter terms, lower prices per month, and a lot less floor space is needed as staff are told they can work from home for most or all the week.

    Prior to the pandemic, 253 million square feet were rented per year; as of May 2022, just 59 million square feet had been rented, NBER’s data indicates. “This indicates a massive drop in office demand from tenants who are actively making space decisions,” NBER said. –The Register

    What’s more, while vacancy rates have hit a 30-year high, 61.7% of in-force commercial leases haven’t come up for renewal since the pandemic – meaning that “rents may not have bottomed out yet.”

    What this means is that commercial real estate – a popular choice for pension fund managers and investors alike – may not be the best idea for the foreseeable future, given the continuing work-from-home options adopted by corporate America.

    A common method used to invest in office real estate is commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), which are managed and traded via commercial mortgage-backed indexes (CMBX) made up of pools of CMBSes. 

    According to NBER, more recent CMBXes tend to include a higher percentage of office collateral than earlier vintages. Those newer, office-heavy CMBXes, NBER said, are what’s losing the most money. -The Register

    NBER says that in 2019, commercial real estate assets topped $4.7 trillion – offices being the largest component.

    Read the report below:

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 19:20

  • The Ongoing COVID Deceptions: How Ruling Elites Lied About Masks And Mask Mandates
    The Ongoing COVID Deceptions: How Ruling Elites Lied About Masks And Mask Mandates

    Authored by Lipton Matthews via The Epoch Times,

    The mishandling of the covid-19 pandemic by global elites has severely eroded confidence in expert opinion. New information is emerging that senior officials doubted policies that were foisted upon the American public. By sharing the results of his deposition with Dr. Anthony Fauci, Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt exposed Fauci’s advocacy of face masks as insincere:

    Another tidbit from the Fauci depo: In Feb 20 he emailed a friend advising her that masks were ineffective.

    Confirmed again on Mar 31.

    On April 3 he’s adamant masks should be worn even though he couldn’t cite a single study to prove it.

    Mandates followed—Lives ruined.

    Numerous studies disputed the efficacy of face masks, yet mask mandates rose to national prominence. During the apex of pandemic hysteria, the American Institute for Economic Research ran a series of scathing articles debunking the usefulness of face masks. In fact, one prominent 2020 study boldly admitted that mask use is primarily symbolic:

    We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes…

    The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflective reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.

    Not even children were spared from the covid-19 hysteria. Masks became commonplace in schools across America and the wider world, despite the large volume of research arguing that they could harm minors. One study from Germany noted that parents raised concerns about mask use having adverse effects on children. Moreover, evidence suggests that mask use limits the expressive capacity of children. Reading the facial expressions of teachers and peers aids a child’s language development, but unfortunately, masks were even required during intergroup conversations.

    A recent paper published in the journal Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications argues that mask use has hindered face recognition abilities in children. The researchers posited that impaired face recognition abilities have negative consequences for the emotional development of children, saying that “changes in face recognition performance and alteration in the processing of partially occluded faces could have significant effects on children’s social interactions with their peers and their ability to form relationships with educators.”

    Widespread mask mandates failed to benefit children, and instead of averting covid-related deaths, they led to people dying. According to Dr. Zacharias Fogen of Germany, “Mask mandates actually caused about 1.5 times the number of deaths or [approximately 50 percent] more deaths compared to no mask mandates.” Dr. Fogen theorized that the re-inhalation of hyperconcentrated droplets caught by masks led to worse ailments and fueled fatality rates.

    The scandal of covid-19 has demonstrated that elites deliberately misinformed the public at every corner. Citizens were scolded for ignoring mask mandates, even though the evidence was clear that they don’t work. The vilification of those who refused to endorse covid-19 vaccines was even more egregious.

    Vaccines are usually successful, but covid-19 vaccines were imposed on the public without proper research. Contrary to the claims of politically motivated actors, the latest research on covid-19 vaccines is astoundingly negative. Scientific research shows that rates of myocarditis are higher among the vaccinated and that natural immunity offers great protection against the virus. Moreover, there is overwhelming evidence that the highly touted lockdowns were a disaster. After the ruling elite’s orchestrated deception of the public, we would be foolish to trust their proposals.

    The pandemic has rightly taught us that governing elites will fabricate evidence and misuse data to promote their agenda at our expense, and it is unlikely that they will ever be able to regain our trust.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 19:00

  • Xi Inks Tens Of Billions In Deals With Saudis, From Huawei Cloud-Computing To Expanded Military Ties
    Xi Inks Tens Of Billions In Deals With Saudis, From Huawei Cloud-Computing To Expanded Military Ties

    On the first full day of his visit wherein he was lavishly greeted and given full red-carpet treatment after arrival in the kingdom (clearly more so that Biden’s summer trip to Jeddah), Chinese President Xi Jinping met with King Salman and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on Thursday, and wide-ranging economic and tech trade agreements were signed to the tune of tens of billions of dollars, along with pledges to expand military cooperation. 

    Among the commercial deals made, one name that featured prominently is sure to raise eyebrows in Washington, given the blanket ban and years-long controversy in the states: Huawei. Among the over $29 billion in agreements signed, The Wall Street Journal reports the Saudis are “setting up a Huawei cloud-computing region, building an electric-vehicle manufacturing plant in Saudi Arabia and supplying green hydrogen batteries for a futuristic smart city the prince wants to build.”

    Image source: Saudi Royal Palace, via AFP/ Getty Images

    Little in the way of official statements fully detailing the process of the discussions and joint agreements have been issued as talks with Xi and his top aides have occurred entirely behind closed palace doors.

    The WSJ continues, “Missing from the leaders’ public statements was any mention of the more controversial aspects of a relationship that have raised the hackles of U.S. officials—such as advanced military sales, expansion of 5G and 6G telecommunications networks and pricing some Saudi oil sales in yuan, which accelerated this year.”

    Among other areas of cooperation include urban development, housing construction, high tech complexes, as well as health, environmental, and energy-saving building projects, all related to the Saudi Vision 2030 and Beijing’s Belt and Road initiative.

    Concerning the latter area, the WSJ details that “One of the agreements involves a top Saudi renewable energy company, Acwa Power, and the Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd.—China’s largest commercial bank, which is a direct participant in CIPS, the Chinese version of SWIFT—hinting at deepening financial cooperation between the countries.”

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

    It goes without saying that the China-Saudi summit is being held against the backdrop of strained Saudi relations with Washington, also as Saudi officials likely increasingly see America as a superpower in decline. This theme has also been on display with apparent cozier coordination with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, despite the Ukraine war, which has seen MbS firmly rebuff Biden’s pleas to produce more oil.

    Meanwhile, there’s been a lot of media commentary in the West over just how “lavish” Xi’s reception in the kingdom has been, and for good reason. The below greeting included much more than a fist bump…

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

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 18:40

  • State Attorneys General Say FedEx And UPS Help Feds Track Gun Sales
    State Attorneys General Say FedEx And UPS Help Feds Track Gun Sales

    Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, together with 17 other state attorneys general, has demanded that shipping companies UPS and FedEx explain their newly implemented policies to track and record Americans’ firearms purchases, and disclose whether these policies have been coordinated with the Biden administration.

    A FedEx truck hauling three trailers was a common sight on the Interstate 15 in Utah, on June 29, 2022. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)

    In letters sent on Nov. 29 to FedEx CEO Raj Subramaniam and UPS CEO Carol B. Tomé, Knudsen and co-signers wrote that the shipping companies’ policies “allow your company to track firearm sales with unprecedented specificity and bypass warrant requirements to share that information with federal agencies.”

    “What both of these companies are saying is that they’re doing this so they can better cooperate with law enforcement,” Knudsen told The Epoch Times. “That’s all fine and well, until you find out that that’s a violation of federal law.”

    Based on reports from gun stores, Knudsen’s letter states, FedEx and UPS are now requiring Federal Firearms License holders (FFLs) to provide details of each shipment to the shipping companies, including the contents and recipient, allowing them “to create a database of American gun purchasers and determine exactly what items they purchased.

    Citing the new policies, the letter states: “Perhaps most concerning, your policies allegedly allow FedEx [and UPS] to ‘comply with … requests from applicable law enforcement or other governmental authorities’ even when those requests are ‘inconsistent or contrary to any applicable law, rule, regulation, or order.’ In doing so you—perhaps inadvertently—give federal agencies a workaround to federal law, which has long prevented federal agencies from using gun sales to create gun registries.”

    “The ATF is hoping they’re not going to have a warrant problem,” Knudsen said. “They could just go get this information from UPS and FedEx.”

    FedEx and UPS’s new gun-tracking policies follow on the heels of efforts by Visa, Mastercard, and American Express to also monitor purchases from gun stores, with the intention of handing this information over to federal law enforcement. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the federal government from conducting searches of U.S. citizens without a warrant and “probable cause” that a crime was committed. Increasingly, however, banks, credit card companies, and now shipping companies are conducting those searches on the government’s behalf.

    The letter demands that the shipping companies respond within 30 days, clarifying their policies and explaining whether or not they acted in coordination with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), or any other government agency. It also asks them to clarify a reported “gag order” under which they directed gun shops not to disclose the terms of this policy to the public.

    Is There Possibly Collusion?

    The two attorneys general letters to UPS and FedEx were virtually identical because the policies the two shipping companies implemented appear to be strikingly similar, raising the additional issue of possible collusion between companies that hold an oligopolistic position in shipping. Collusion in restraint of trade has long been illegal under U.S. antitrust laws, including the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.

    “It’s either collusion, they’re working together, or what I suspect is, it’s probably originating out of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, or the Biden administration,” Knudsen said. His letter recommends that the shipping companies “consider taking actions to limit potential liability moving forward, including the immediate cessation of any existing warrantless information sharing with federal agencies about gun shipments.”

    If the shipping companies don’t answer his questions within 30 days, Knudsen said, “I’ll probably start with an actual formal civil investigative demand where we’ll ask for some some documentation. That’s short of a subpoena and an actual lawsuit,” he said, “but, ultimately, if they don’t want to cooperate, a lawsuit is where we’re going to end up.”

    In response to the letter, FedEx issued a statement to The Epoch Times that “FedEx is aware of the letter from the state attorneys general. We are committed to the lawful and safe movement of regulated items through our network.”

    UPS responded that it “has not bypassed any laws to provide customer information to the Biden administration or federal agencies related to the shipment of firearms. UPS will only provide information about our customers or shipments when required to do so by law, such as in response to a subpoena or a warrant.”

    UPS added that it “will respond to the letter sent by several state attorneys general to answer their questions and clarify misinformation. UPS will continue to abide by all applicable laws in providing service for firearm shipments.”

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 18:20

  • House Passes Record $858 Billion Defense Policy Bill
    House Passes Record $858 Billion Defense Policy Bill

    Update(1358ET): On Thursday the House passed the massive, record-setting annual defense authorization bill, which will now see the $847 billion measure go to the Senate, which has to be voted on before the year-end deadline. 

    It passed in a vote of 350-80 along largely bipartisan lines. According to The Hill, “It was approved under suspension of the rules, an expedited process to pass legislation in the House that requires a two-thirds majority.”

    One interesting measure which will be welcomes across the Department of Defense is a 4.6% pay raise for both military members and the DoD’s civilian workers. 

    * * *

    As Dave DeCamp of AntiWar.com previously detailed, the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday narrowly voted down a bill that would audit the tens of billions of dollars that Congress has approved to spend on the war in Ukraine. The bill was rejected by the Democrat-led panel in a vote of 26 to 22. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and a small group of Republicans who oppose US aid to Ukraine, but it received strong support from more hawkish Republicans.

    Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (KY), Matt Gaetz (FL), Barry Moore (AL), and Andrew Clyde (GA) cosponsored Greene’s bill. Greene has said that she will reintroduce the measure in the next Congress when Republicans have a majority in the House. “It’s official the Democrats have voted NO to transparency for the American people for an Audit for Ukraine,” Greene wrote on Twitter after the vote. “But we take over in January! This audit will happen!”

    Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz and Thomas Massie. Via AP

    Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), who is expected to head the House Foreign Affairs Committee in the next Congress, has come out in favor of the audit bill. “The era of writing blank checks is over,” McCaul said, according to The Washington Post.

    McCaul has been critical of the Biden administration for not sending longer-range weapons to Ukraine and wants to encourage Ukrainian strikes on Crimea despite the risk of escalation. But he represents the mainstream Republicans who want to keep arming Ukraine but agree there should be more oversight.

    Democrats have been critical of the growing Republican calls for more oversight of the Ukraine aid. Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the head of the House Armed Services Committee, even dismissed the concerns as “Russian propaganda” and said the calls from Republicans to increase oversight “makes me a little crazy.”

    Meanwhile also on Tuesday night, Congress unveiled the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), worth $858 billion, $45 billion more than what President Biden requested for the military spending bill. The House is expected to vote on the legislation this week, and it could be brought to the floor as soon as Thursday. Once the House approves the bill, it will be sent to the Senate, then to President Biden’s desk for his signature.

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

    The massive $858 billion bill represents an 8% increase from the 2022 NDAA, which was also larger than what Biden requested. The $858 billion includes $817 billion for the Pentagon, and the remaining funds go toward military spending for other departments.

    Notable amendments packed into the NDAA include $10 billion in military aid for Taiwan that will be dispersed over five years. The aid is in the form of Foreign Military Financing, a State Department program that gives foreign governments funds to purchase US-made military equipment.

    The NDAA also includes $800 million in the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, a program that allows the US government to purchase weapons for Ukraine. But the vast majority of spending on the Ukraine war will come through emergency funding, and the White House is hoping Congress approves a new $37.7 billion tranche of Ukraine aid during the lame-duck period.

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

    The NDAA includes $11.5 billion in new investments for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, a program to build up in the Asia Pacific to confront China. The Pentagon has identified China as its main focus, and the NDAA includes investment in new technology research and development that US military leaders say is meant to counter Beijing.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 12/08/2022 – 18:11

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 08

Today’s News 8th December 2022

  • The WEF Isn't A Cabal, It's A Cult
    The WEF Isn’t A Cabal, It’s A Cult

    Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

    World Domination in An Age for Lucifer

    “This book explores a strange new spirituality about to enter into competition with other established religions. My purpose here is to convince you that its emergence is probable, if not inevitable.

    I begin this exploration with an unproven assumption based on Darwinian evolutionary principles: a new predator will appear on our planet, an evolutionary prototype designed to prey on humans. Another assumption then follows: this predator will evolve gradually and incrementally from humanity, just as we apparently evolved from lower forms to prey on them.

    A further assumption suggests that these predators have already appeared as evolutionary prototypes, as new humans with advanced methods of survival and new forms of spiritual expression and religious organization designed to support and advance their predation.“

    — Robert C Tucker, An Age For Lucifer: Predatory Spirituality & The Quest for Godhood

    Robert C. Tucker was a Canadian psychologist who worked with an organization called COMA – Council On Mind Abuse (not to be confused with his namesake, an American political scientist who covered the Soviet Union and wrote a biography of Stalin).

    Our Tucker worked with “adult survivors and child victims of ritual abuse“ and spent time interviewing self-described “Satanists”. His book was more of a thought experiment, which tried to identify an impelling idea behind the ideology of a cult:

    “with destructive cultism, however, I sensed something else animating these stories of Satanic activity and ritual abuse, something familiar yet unspoken. Satanism was a puzzle behind which it hid, or a myth beneath which it lived. Like cultism, Satanism seemed to point at something beyond itself“.

    Tucker’s book is not about Satanism: it’s about a theorized class of spiritual predators he called Luciferians. In later chapters, Satanists are almost dismissed as cartoonish, lower order predators. They would be shunned by truly elite Luciferians. “Distant cousins”, at best.

    Where Satanists pursue unrestrained ego and impulse gratification, Luciferians play the longest game of them all, and seek to attain Godhood itself. Pure power.

    Tucker posits that this type of impulse would emerge out of evolutionary imperatives and that it would begin to form its own psycho-spiritual framework among participants – possibly on a subconscious level.

    COMA spent much of its existence waging legal battles with the cults they sought to protect the public from. However, after a protracted lawsuit from the Church of Scientology, Tucker announced COMA’s dissolution in 1992.

    But there is something in Tucker’s book, particularly how he ‘described the merging goals of cults and corporations:

    “We have to recognize that cults are successful organizations with techniques now being borrowed by other successful organizations”’

    Arguably one of the most successful organizations in existence today, is the World Economic Forum. World leaders are known to emerge from annual conclaves chanting the same mantra, nation states actively fund them, the WEF boasts of having penetrated the world’s governments and even the UN seems to take its cues from Davos.

    In past articles, I’ve been looked at the thin scab of elites that sits atop the global cap table.

    Class structure, now and future

    And the story so far is:

    While many view the Davos elites as a global, all-encompassing cabal, which Controls Everything™, I could never quite bring myself to accept that description. The fact is, the world is inherently uncontrollable.

    We can stipulate that people and groups can acquire outsized influence, then use it to do morally bankrupt things in order to further their own aims. We can further agree that the higher up the sociopolitical hierarchy from where these agendas originate, the more likely it is that the consequences  are borne most heavily by the plebes. Most of the time, those whose machinations were responsible for catastrophic outcomes, escape being held to account for it.

    I said most of the time

    But the world we live in today is proof positive of one thing: nobody is in control of anything.

    However, like Tucker, I look at agendas like Stakeholder Capitalism, The Great Reset or The Great Narrative (or whatever it’s being called these days), and sense something behind it. “Something that points beyond itself”.

    Years ago, in what feels like another life-line (a.k.a “Before Covid”), I was supposed to be writing  a book about the dangers of techno-utopianism. In it, I was already recognizing transhumanism as a kind of religion, and deemed it one of the four ideological pillars of techno-utopianism (the other three being: AI, technocracy and fully automated luxury communism).

    Very early in my work on that, I concluded that techno-utopianism was ultimately a Luciferian construct. Not necessarily literally Lucifer, but that the aspiration to “usurp God” was Luciferian in character (the plan was for the final section of the book to propose a counter-framework called “techno-realism”, based on humanity’s hyper-adaptability as a superior approach to central planning).

    When we seek to shape the world through technocracy – not to mention reality itself through transhumanism and AI – we are pursuing a uniquely eschatological event known as “The Singularity”: a point in time when our technology becomes the base layer of reality.

    It is probably not the first time we thought we were capable of leveraging our gizmos into Godhood. The legend of Babel hints at a prior iteration, one that didn’t end well. We don’t know for sure where mythology borders pre-history, but whatever happened most certainly left deep grooves in our collective psyche.

    When you consider the positioning and branding of the WEF, with their certitude and paternalism, it all makes a lot more sense when viewed  as a cult instead of a cabal. Cultists know all, they have the inside track – and most importantly, they claim moral authority over us all by Divine Right.

    The stated objectives of the World Economic Forum:

    From their institutional report “to stakeholders”, the WEF pursues  three Phases of Interaction:

    Our activities drive communities through three phases of interaction, each resulting in increased impact:

    1) stimulating dialogues and generating insights;

    2) shaping agendas and developing influence; and

    3) catalysing initiatives and generating impact.

    …which in that characteristically banal WEF-speak, is a dog whistle for world domination.

    They feel no compunction about it.  An Age for Lucifer posits the emergence of a type of human whose beliefs hold the adherents to be higher up the spiritual food chain than everybody else. Literally a breed above.

    The key component of Luciferian metaphysics is predation.

    “reality is layered from the physical to the spiritual. Pure power thrums only in the higher reaches of the spiritual domains. The higher dominates the lower. Spirit determines matter, not the reverse… Elitism is of the essence here; only powerful spiritual adepts and Luciferian masters deserve to occupy the higher realms and to enjoy the the benefits found only there.”

    If we replace all instances of “spiritual” in the above passage with “intellectual”, then we have an accurate model for the ideological framework of “Davos Man”, because the entire elite ontology (or what passes for it) rests upon radical material reductionism.

    And materialism, at its core, is pure nihilism.

    There is no spirit. We have no souls. There is only matter, and lower humans are merely “hackable animals”.

    Everyone has likely seen this montage, but it does capture “The Essential Harari”, who I personally think talks about all this in more of a descriptive than prescriptive timbre. But he is undeniably a Davos darling and when you get him going, he has that pronounced Dr. Strangelove-style glee.

    Through the utter domination of what is intellectually permissible – and with expert technocratic oversight – matter can be subjugated to models …and elites can ascend to Godhood. All in a metaverse of their own making.

    Cabals are self-serving and mundane. And while Davos Man is certainly that, a cabal is missing that essential element that makes for full-throated commitment – that thing that “points beyond itself”. Participants in a cabal will abandon it the moment it ceases to serve their interests… but cultists will double-down. They will burn themselves alive and eat their children. They are ideological berserkers.

    What is this thing “that points beyond itself?”

    I frequently say that the reason I think Bitcoin ultimately prevails, and industrial-era central planning fails, is because the former has sprung forth from a higher order of intellectual abstraction than the hierarchical, centrally-planned one.

    This is all part of an inexorable progression, an unfolding, if you will. It distinguishes itself from a techno-utopian singularity, in that it is not something we’ve seized control of and are expertly managing, it’s something coursing through us. Impelling us, in fact all living things, forward.

    I’ve never found a great word to describe this “thing beyond itself” that runs through everything; obviously it’s the inspiration for spiritual movements throughout the ages, for mythological constructs.  I’ve always just called it “The Great Externality”. It’s the indescribable (“the Tao which can be explained is not The Tao”), and ineffable. It can be experienced as “I am”, but if you try to put that into a Ted Talk it’ll probably stiff.

    When I talk about how the architecture of intellectual abstraction has shifted from centralized to networked, that’s just a surface attribute. I’ve never really done an adequate job of explaining the fundamental change in the level of intellectual abstraction and how important that is. Jean Gebser called it the aperspectival world in “Ever Present Origin”, his exhaustive study of the evolution of consciousness itself.

    “The condition of today’s world cannot be transformed by technocratic rationality, since both technocracy and rationality are apparently nearing their apex; nor can it be transcended by preaching or admonishing a return to ethics and morality, or in fact, by any form of return to the past.

    We have only one option: in examining the manifestations of our age, we must penetrate them with sufficient breadth and depth that we do not come under their demonic and destructive spell.

    We must not focus our view merely on these phenomenon, but rather on the the humus of the decaying world beneath, where the seedlings of the future are growing, immeasurable in their potential and vigor”

    Gebser wrote Ever Present Origin in 1949; it wasn’t translated into English until 1985. He understood that crises of modernity were brought about not by differing political views or even economic incentives, but in collisions between successive iterations of consciousness itself. Humanity, according to Gebser, arced over three broad phases of Unperspectival (we could barely differentiate our own minds from the wider experience of the world), Perspectival (linearity and rationality) and into Aperspectival (what comes next – a level that integrates those which came before).

    Perhaps one way to make the analogy is to frame it as the layering of dimensional orders:

    In the Unperspectival world, our minds basically merged with reality; we were largely undifferentiated as self-aware creatures. It was a zero-to-one dimensional existence:

    ‘The initial, archaic structure is zero-dimensional; it is thus spatial and temporal, although our present mentality, if it grasps this at all, will see this in a paradox. It is origin; only in a terminological sense is it a “first” structure emanating from that perfect identity existing “before” (or behind) all oneness or unity which it initially might have represented. It is akin, if not identical, to the original state of biblical paradise: a time where the soul is yet dormant, a time of complete non-differentiation of man and the universe.’

    Over the Perspectival Era, we became self-aware and to underwent individuation, straddling two-to-three dimensional constructs. I’ve mentioned before W R Clement’s “Quantum Jump”, which described the Enlightenment as a leveling up in mental abstraction. The discovery of perspective in art both impelled and signified this jump.

    The fiat, technocratic era, is essentially the tail end of this Perspectival mindset – and what comes next contains yet another higher-order dimension, an axis into an Aperspectival construct… like a hypercube.

    How high does the dimensional ladder go?

    String theory posits a universe existing in ten dimensions.

    A ten dimensional hypercube? Who in their right mind comes up with this stuff.

    Anyway, this thing that points beyond itself isn’t arising from within the 3D construct that materialists assume forms the edges of existence. It comes from one level beyond.

    There are phenomena that exist in this larger, super-reality that when experienced here, from within the perspective of our limited awareness, we struggle to contain within our senses. We may experience them as egregores or morphic fields, even a zeitgeist.  The Russian mystic Vedim Zeland’s concept of “The Pendulum” has aspects of both absorbing and channelling thought energy:

    An energy pendulum is created when a group of people begin to think in a certain way and then:

    “their thought energy finally unites into a single current. When this happens, as if in the middle of an entire ocean of energy, a separate, independent energy-information structure is created which is referred to as an energy pendulum. Eventually this structure begins to live its own life and subjugate to its laws the very people who created it.

    The structure is referred to as a pendulum because the more people-adherents that feed it with their energy, the more powerfully it sways”
    — from Vadim Zeland’s ‘Transurfing’

    A pendulum is self-perpetuating with a single imperative: to draw as much energy into itself as possible. More importantly, it is agnostic about the energy charge – it doesn’t matter if people are in harmony with the pendulum or opposed to it. Both poles create the energy that the pendulum craves.

    This is why the New Thought philosopher Neville Goddard’s advice about the need to renounce evil rather than resist it, is so important.

    There is a great difference between resisting evil and renouncing it. When you resist evil, you give it your attention; you continue to make it real.

    When you renounce evil, you take your attention away from it and give your attention to what you want.

    Now is the time to control your imagination and give your energy to what you want.”

    — Neville Goddard, The Power of Awareness

    Pendulums can be benign or malevolent – the conditions that bring them forth make it so.

    The world’s great religions can be seen as super-pendulums. Movements and cults could be minor ones.  In any case, once the pendulum has formed, active opposition to it only has one effect: to give it more energy and amplify it.

    Techno-communism as typified by the WEF, and crypto-anarchism as embodied by Bitcoin, are both pendulums.

    This is why taking up arms against the WEF doesn’t hurt the WEF – it strengthens it. And this is also why Bitcoin is an anti-fragile honey badger.

    Pendulums feed on the energy of both their adherents and opponents, but their centre of gravity forms an axis through our experiential world and anchors them into The Great Externality.

    The WEF pendulum is distinctly Ahrimanic. 

    Ahriman is traditionally an evil spirit of chaos from Zoroastrianism, however I’m drawing on the work of the Austrian mystic Rudolf Steiner, who had been trying to warn us of the coming Age of Ahriman almost exactly a century ago.

    From lecture GA 191 delivered on 1 November 1919, Dornach (excuse the length):

    Whenever preparation is being made for incarnations of this character, we must be alert to certain indicative trends in evolution. A Being like Ahriman, who will incarnate in the West in time to come, prepares for this incarnation in advance. With a view to his incarnation on the earth, Ahriman guides certain forces in evolution in such a way that they may be of the greatest possible advantage to him….

    The right stand can be taken only by recognising in one or another series of events the preparation that is being made by Ahriman for his earthly existence. And the time has now come for individual men to know which tendencies and events around them are machinations of Ahriman, helping him to prepare for his approaching incarnation.

    It would undoubtedly be of the greatest benefit to Ahriman… if the vast majority of men were to regard these preparations for the Ahriman-incarnation as progressive and good for evolution. If Ahriman were able to slink into a humanity unaware of his coming, that would gladden him most of all. 

    Here’s the punch line:

    One of the developments in which Ahriman’s impulse is clearly evident is the spread of the belief that the mechanistic, mathematical conceptions inaugurated by Galileo, Copernicus and others, explain what is happening in the cosmos.

    Pure materialism. Pure reductionism. Pure Harari.

    Steiner warns that:

    “The consciousness of those human beings whom I have called devourers of soul and spirit is in a condition of dimness…; for by not accepting the spiritual into their human nature, they drive straight into the Luciferic stream everything they introduce … What men eat and drink without spirituality goes straight to Lucifer!”

    Here Steiner is talking about spiritual predation and warning those who think they’re the predators, are actually the prey for the egregores they serve. (Ahriman and Lucifer were two separate incarnations in Steiner’s cosmology, yet they worked in concert across the three thousand years that separate their physical incarnations in earthly terms).

    This materialist undercurrent that forms the basis of our conventional paradigm is anchored in this, and it cleaves our earthly existence away from our souls. Is it any wonder why reductive, technocratic impulses and hyper-normality increasingly permeate our elite institutions?

    “Too little attention has been paid to the fact that politics lures disordered, Messianic personalities into positions of power”.
    — Rees-Mogg & Davidson, The Sovereign Individual 

    It isn’t so much  cognitive incoherence afflicting the psyches of those both attracted to and ensnared within the corridors of power, as aperspectival madness – a term coined by Ken Wilber, the integral theory philosopher who has picked up the baton from Gebser here in the West.

    Wilber used the phrase in his 2017 ‘Trump in a Post-Truth World’, which is arguably a book from the left about excessive wokery and Trump Derangement Syndrome. We’re seeing these types of infections of the psyche play out in escalating waves, going under different names:

    Hyper-normality; TDS; …apersepectival madness.

    “Mass Formation Psychosis” being most recent.

    Of course, our expert overlords are having none of it…

    Some day they will inform us that “Experts say there is no higher-order reality” (string theory having been stricken down by MSM fact checkers).

    But this soul sickness that threatens to overrun the world is the result of ignoring these higher order constructs, and of attempting to pack reality into a 3-dimensional, materialist box. Everything has to warp just to attempt to fit it all in there.

    Pick Your Pendulum

    The Party at Davos is increasingly being regarded as a malevolent and controlling force on society, and with ample justification.

    Yet they seemingly wield so much power and wealth; how can one hope to counter their influence?

    By actively going out there and resisting the WEF, you are giving your energy to it.

    The key is to put your energy into what you want, not what you don’t want.

    The counterbalancing pendulum to the Luciferian-inspired fully automated luxury communism of the WEF  is a distinctly Promethean construct – an impulse that had been building for decades, perhaps longer, and then revealed itself during the Global Financial Crisis.

    Via TheBitcoinTimes

    That emergent impulse manifested in Bitcoin. I’ve described elsewhere the seemingly preternatural circumstances behind its emergence and the mind-boggling synchronicities I’ve personally experienced around it.

    That trend has continued.

    We’ve already had certain warnings  of the similarities between CBDCs and Revelations-style “number of the Beast” prophecies even before the freakishly numbered WIPO Patent 2020/060606 which described implantable digital-currency systems:

    (Owned by Microsoft, btw.)

    That previous article put me in touch with someone who made me aware of Revelations 2:17:

    “Anyone with ears to hear must listen to the Spirit and understand what he is saying to the churches. To everyone who is victorious I will give some of the manna that has been hidden away in heaven. And I will give to each one a white stone, and on the stone will be engraved a new name that no one knows except the one who receives it.”

    You mean everybody gets their own private key? Kinda sounds like it.

    So on one side, we have an implant or a mark on the hand or head “without which one cannot buy or sell or conduct business of any kind” – while on the other there’s this group of the victorious who have possession of their own private keys.

    As I said in the other article, I don’t subscribe to Biblical prophesy in the literal sense that it predicts the future. What I do believe is that we exist in a multi-faceted reality that transcends the material, 3-D reduction, which conventional thought insists upon. These mythologies attempt to describe something glimpsed in hyper-dimensional constructs from beyond linear time.

    Sidebar: Life is but a dream

    (Here’s an analogy for how I look at these concepts: think of a dream. My guess is whatever is happening in them, is happening at light-speed. The reason why is because you can experience a dream in which you seemingly pass hours, or even a lifetime – and then your snooze goes off, again. Turns out it’s been 10 minutes.

    Then in that dream, something starts to happen, usually a sound but maybe it manifests in other ways, and when you wake up and you realize that your dream was reacting to something external to it, something happening in your waking world, like the doorbell ringing or a loud truck driving by.

    When we wake up we have a hard time parsing what we experienced in the dream state – my theory there is because we dream in at least one additional dimensional axis – so of course it would be near impossible to unpack what happened in the hypercube back into 3D experience.)

    I went on that tangent because I often suspect something like that is happening with synchronicities. Even prophesies or premonitions may be akin to this: an incursion into our waking world from some stimulus originating from a higher dimensional order outside of our conventional state. It would be exceptionally hard to make any sense of it because we’re missing a dimensional axis when we even try to think about it.

    Our collective thought energies are responding to higher-order impulses, and we create or join pendulums. Those pendulums are further shaped by larger, underlying morphic fields and act as filters or bridges to The Great Externality. We gravitate into benign, healthy pendulums or malevolent self-defeating ones.

    If we persistently engage in contemplative or spiritual practices, we may garner enough self-awareness to recognize these larger currents and make conscious decisions about which ones to put our energy into.

    Conventional material reductionism would have it that our minds are just something our brains are gassing off, and there’s nothing more to it. But there is more to it than that, a lot more – and we aren’t consciously choosing what to think or how to steer our own evolution, as much as we’re akin to iron filings arranging ourselves in line with one magnetic field or another.

    If we’re really aware, we can make a conscious decision around which one to align with. The majority of people just go with whatever ones they get swept up in.

    Digesting it all

    There will never be path function where the WEF either loses their power or reforms their ideals. The only option is irrelevance (which is why I’ve always told the cancel-culture and deplatforming crazies that the one, true magic bullet for killing a truly indefensible idea, is indifference).

    The Party at Davos is under the impression that they are the vanguard of neo-Darwinist evolution – when it’s looking instead like they are functionaries of a larger morphic field that is distinctly Luciferian or Ahrimanic in character. This field encapsulates transhumanism, techno-Marxism, technocracy and social credit.

    The antidote in our age is to choose a life path of radical sovereign individuality, and to embrace the Promethean impulse that gave rise to Bitcoin, public cryptography, and decentralization. This field is expressed through crypto-anarchy and network societies, yet with a grounding in spiritual expression, contemplative practices, family, community and tribes.

    So when the next Davos meeting comes around, don’t bother picking up a placard and demonstrating in the streets; stack some sats and orange-pill your friends, family, neighbours and colleagues. That’s how we win.

    I cover macro tensions between the globalists and sovereign-individual extensively in The Bitcoin Capitalist Letter, along with a tactical focus on CBDCs, pending legislation, digital assets and crypto stocks. Get the overall investment / macro thesis free when you join the Bombthrower mafia. Follow on Twitter here,  Gettr, or join the Bombthrower Telegram

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 23:40

  • G-7 Offers $15 Billion To Vietnam, Up From $2 Billion, To Transition To Renewables Months After Country Snubbed Climate Ambassadors
    G-7 Offers $15 Billion To Vietnam, Up From $2 Billion, To Transition To Renewables Months After Country Snubbed Climate Ambassadors

    You know the old saying: when bribery doesn’t work…just bribe using more money…

    Such is the unfolding case in Vietnam, where G-7 nations have made a $15 billion offer to the country to try and wean it off of its reliance on coal, according to a report by Reuters. The country is among the top 20 coal users in the world and had previously turned down or ignored prior offers, the report notes.

    Vietnam had already agreed to sign up for an “energy transition partnership with G7 nations” at a global climate summer this November, but high-level talks “broke off” before the meeting, the report says.

    To bring the country back to the bargaining table, the EU and Britain are leading negotiations on behalf of the West, who have offered a financial package that includes $7.5 billion in loans from the public sector and loans totaling about the same amount from the private sector. 

    Sources told Reuters this was the West’s “final offer” from the G7 before a December 14 deadline, when a summit of EU and Asian nations will take place. As Reuters notes, this $15 billion offer has grown from an “initial pledge” that was just $2 billion in public funds. 

    Despite the bigger offer, it “remains unclear whether Vietnam would be prepared to accept the increased offer”, Reuters wrote. 

    Vietnam had previously asked for more grants instead of loans, because the country is “traditionally opposed” to taking on loans. Sources indicated the chance of a deal getting done was at “50/50”, while others said talks are ongoing. 

    After Vietnam walked from talks in November, its authorities cancelled a planned meeting with US and EU climate ambassadors and instead drafted a new long-term power plan that actually increased the country’s use of coal. 

    The country is left to consider how much of its energy security could be put at risk during a switch to renewables, the report says. A transition “may result in power shortages in the booming nation without a credible backup in the event of low power output from wind farms or solar panels”. 

    Personally, if we’re Vietnam, we hold out for $100 billion. At the pace with which the G-7 keeps upping its offer, it should only take a couple of weeks…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 23:20

  • Philly Or Fallujah? Gas Station Owners Hire Militarized Security, City Imposes Curfew
    Philly Or Fallujah? Gas Station Owners Hire Militarized Security, City Imposes Curfew

    It’s no secret Philadelphia is a dangerous city.

    In 2019, the murder rate was 22.47 per 100,000 residents according to FBI data, with 331 homicides that year. Fast forward three years, and there have been 480 murders year-to-date.

    Screenshot via phillypolice.com

     Most affected are black males between the age of 18 and 45.

    Screenshot via comptroller.phila.gov

    According to city statistics released in September, overall shootings have increased by 3% over last year, while violent crime is up 7%. Robberies involving guns are up 60%, while rapes are down more than 25%. Property crimes are up over 30%. Businesses getting hit particularly hard – with commercial burglaries up a staggering 50%, according to Axios Philadelphia. What’s more, the city’s drug crisis is spiraling further out of control with a new drug called “Tranq” – an anesthetic and pain reliever used to treat horses and cattle, and which turns people into zombies.

    Crime is so out of control that the Philadelphia City Council recently approved a 10 p.m. curfew for anyone under the age of 18 – making a temporary summertime law permanent.

    To combat the crime wave, Philadelphia gas station owners have turned to hiring heavily armed guards.

    “They are forcing us to hire the security, high-level security, state level,” said Karco gas station owner, Neil Patel, who has recruited Kevlar-clad S.I.T.E. agents packing AR-15s or shotguns. “We are tired of this nonsense; robbery, drug trafficking, hanging around, gangs,” Fox5 reports.

    The final straw for Patel after his business was reportedly vandalized by young people who stole an ATM machine. His car has also been a casualty of crime, according to the report.

    “We wear Kevlar, we are trained, my guards go to training every other week, they’re proficient with [their guns] and with their taser, they know the law,” said police chief Andre Boyer.

    A realtime online poll on Fox5‘s website reveals that 93% say they feel safer with guards who have AR-15s at gas stations:

    When asked about residents who are concerned over the gun-toting guards, Patel said: “I listen to them, but according to some people, violent people, they carry the guns, they’re not afraid of them? This is the protection for the neighborhood and the customers.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 22:40

  • Transgender Activists Attack Feminists Protesting Men In Women's Prisons
    Transgender Activists Attack Feminists Protesting Men In Women’s Prisons

    Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times,

    Women protesting the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison were attacked outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5.

    The women, representing mainly feminist and lesbian groups, said they are opposed to a California law that allows male inmates who self-identify as women to request to be housed in women’s prisons.

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

    One hooded assailant was caught on video, obtained by The Epoch Times, throwing an egg into the group of women and also seen striking one with an umbrella, while another attacker in all black garb with red armbands on a bicycle plowed into the women from the opposite direction.

    Women protesting the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison were attacked outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5, 2022. (Courtesy of Women’s Declaration International, U.S.A.)

    The women, who wore sashes reading “Woman Adult Human Female,” and carried signs saying “No Men In Women’s Prisons” and “Dana Rivers Is A Man,” were also pelted with pies in the video.

    Rivers, born David Warfield, was convicted last month on three counts of first-degree murder and felony arson. He was found guilty in the 2016 slayings of lesbian couple Charlotte Reed and Patricia Wright, and their teenage son, Benny Diambu-Wright, as well as setting their home in Oakland on fire.

    According to multiple news reports, Rivers shot Reed multiple times and stabbed and bludgeoned her. He also shot Wright twice and the teen in the heart.

    A hearing to determine Rivers’ mental competency at the time of the murders began Dec. 5. If found “insane,” Rivers is expected to be sent to a mental hospital for part of or all of his impending sentence.

    Rivers waived his right to a jury for the insanity plea phase of the trial.

    If the judge overseeing the trial determines Rivers was sane when he committed the murders, it is unclear if he will be sent to a women’s or men’s prison.

    Several sources told The Epoch Times he is currently being held in protective custody in the women’s section of the Santa Rita Jail in Dublin, Calif., in Alameda County.

    “We are firmly opposed to housing any men in women’s prisons under any circumstances, including Dana Rivers,” Kara Dansky, president of Women’s Declaration International, told The Epoch Times preceding the protest. “All men are male, regardless of any administration of hormones and/or surgeries, and our view is that women’s prisons ought to be for female inmates only, which is in alignment with the principles of international law.”

    Dansky said the women had planned the peaceful protest to demand justice and stand in solidarity with lesbians and incarcerated women.

    Women protesting the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison are attacked outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5, 2022. (Courtesy of Women’s Declaration International, U.S.A.)

    Women protesting the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison are attacked outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5, 2022. (Courtesy of Women’s Declaration International, U.S.A.)

    Women protesting the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison are attacked outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5, 2022. (Courtesy of Women’s Declaration International, U.S.A.)

    Women protesting the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison were attacked outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5, 2022. (Courtesy of Women’s Declaration International, U.S.A.)

    In 2020, the California State Legislature passed Senate Bill 132, The Transgender Respect, Agency and Dignity Act, authored by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

    The law, which was enacted on Jan. 1, 2021, allows prisoners who identify as transgender, non-binary, and intersex “to request to be housed and searched in a manner consistent with their gender identity,” according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

    There are currently 1,657 incarcerated people in California prisons who identify as transgender, non-binary and intersex,” according to the corrections and rehabilitation department. The agency additionally reports 342 men requested transfers to women’s jails since the end of November. Of those, 47 have been approved for transfer, 19 were denied, and 31 changed their minds. The remaining requests remain under review.

    Women protest the possible transfer of convicted killer Dana Rivers—a biological man who identifies as female—to a women’s prison outside of the Alameda County Superior Courthouse in Oakland, Calif., on Dec. 5, 2022. (Courtesy of Women’s Declaration International, U.S.A.)

    “It’s happening in numerous other states. We just rarely hear about it because the media doesn’t like to talk about it,” Dansky said. “We know that the state of Washington also houses male prisoners in the women’s prison on the basis of their so-called female gender identity. We know that it’s happening in New Jersey on the basis of a settlement that was entered into between the state and the ACLU.”

    Danksy, who is also the author of “The Abolition of Sex: How the ‘Transgender Agenda Harms Women and Girls,” said her chapter of the organization has more than 5,000 U.S. signatories supporting its declaration, “ to advance women’s sex-based rates in law and throughout society all over the world.”
    Lierre Keith, of the Women’s Liberation Front, a group that is suing the state over the issue of biological males in women’s prisons, said female inmates are “living in terror” of violent male prisoners entering women’s facilities.

    “Right now, in California, any man can simply declare he is a woman and get transferred to a women’s prison—even if he’s murdered two women, even if he stabbed a woman 28 times in the face,” she said.

    Jesika Gonzalez of TERF Collective, a group “working to end the international campaign of female erasure that is transgender ideology,” also spoke at the protest.

    “In California … even the most dangerous men are moved to women’s prisons upon request. Dana Rivers is the kind of man that proves the need for single-sex prisons,” Gonzalez said.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 22:20

  • Feds Probing Bankman-Fried's Manipulation Of TerraUSD, Luna… Which Eventually Crushed FTX
    Feds Probing Bankman-Fried’s Manipulation Of TerraUSD, Luna… Which Eventually Crushed FTX

    Oh the irony…

    While questions remain over what was known and by whom about commingled FTX client funds being used to fill a vast and leaking bucket of a balance sheet at Alameda, it appears, based on a report from The New York Times (NYT), that the catalyst for this whole debacle could have been none other than the world’s (second) greatest Democrat donor and (ineffective) altruist – Sam Bankman-Fried.

    NYT reports that federal prosecutors are investigating whether FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried and his hedge fund orchestrated trades in a way that led to the collapse of two cryptocurrencies in May – TerraUSD and Luna.

    Specifically, Manhattan prosecutors (US attorney for the Southern District of New York) are examining the possibility that Bankman-Fried steered the prices of two algorithmically-interlinked currencies to benefit entities he controlled, including FTX and Alameda Research.

    According to two people with knowledge of the matter, NYT reports that the focus on possible market manipulation adds to the legal storm brewing around Mr. Bankman-Fried.

    It is illegal for an individual to knowingly stage market activity designed to move the price of an asset up or down.

    TerraUSD was a so-called stablecoin, but unlike other stablecoins, its value wasn’t backed directly by the U.S. dollar. Rather, it maintained its value from a second coin called Luna through a complex set of algorithms. Traders within the digital ecosystem could mint these coins, the prices of which would fluctuate based on how many were in circulation. Anytime the price of TerraUSD fell, the supply of Luna would increase, as traders created more Luna to try to capitalize on the difference.

    In May, major cryptocurrency market makers — exchanges or individuals who arrange for buyers and sellers to be matched — noticed a flood of “sell” orders coming in for TerraUSD, said one person with knowledge of the market activity.

    The orders were in small denominations, but they were placed very quickly, the person said.

    The sudden jump in sell orders for TerraUSD overwhelmed the system, making it hard to find matching “buy” orders for them. Under normal conditions, any sell orders that remained unfulfilled for too long would be matched with buy orders at a lower price.

    The longer the orders lingered without being matched, the more they forced down the price of TerraUSD and caused a corresponding drop in Luna prices because of the way the two coins were linked..

    The exact causes of the collapse of the two cryptocurrencies remain unclear. However, the bulk of the sell orders for TerraUSD appeared to be coming from one place: Sam Bankman-Fried’s cryptocurrency trading firm, which also placed a big bet on the price of Luna falling, according to the person with knowledge of the market activity.

    [ZH: Note the action in late January, early February, when pressure to the downside on Luna saw a positive reaction (flight to safety perhaps) into FTX’s Token (FTT). Did Bankman-Fried and his girlfriend think the same would happen when they tried to pressure Luna lower in May?]

    Had the trade gone as expected, the price declines in Luna could have yielded a fat profit.

    Instead, the bottom fell out of the entire TerraUSD-Luna ecosystem.

    The collapse caused more trouble in the cryptocurrency industry, sending several prominent companies into bankruptcy and erasing about $1 trillion in value from the crypto market.

    The ripple effects from the Luna crash ultimately contributed to the collapse of Mr. Bankman-Fried’s business empire.

    Bankman Fried reportedly told NYT that he was “not aware of any market manipulation and certainly never intended to engage in market manipulation.”

    “To the best of my knowledge, all transactions were for investment or for hedging,” he added.

    NYT does note that the investigation in early stages and that it is unclear if prosecutors have determined any wrongdoing by Bankman-Fried. All of which would be glorious for the screenplay of this whole farce as the ‘smartest man in the room’ – having been trained on ‘arbing’ such assets for ‘months’ – suddenly fell victim to the first lesson learned in any veteran arb-trader’s risk management book – volatility wounds but liquidity kills – just ask the Nobel-prize winners at LTCM.

    Not realizing that the interlinked and levered chaos that his Luna short’s success could cause is perhaps the greatest sin of someone who – for all intent and purpose – could see almost the entire market (positioning, inter-linkage, leverage, and liquidity) through his two toys – FTX and Alameda.

    And don’t forget that FTX is also under investigation for violating U.S. money-laundering laws that require money transfer businesses to know who their customers are and flag any potentially illegal activity to law enforcement authorities (but we are sure Bankman-Fried had no knowledge of any of that).

    On Tuesday, Binance Chief Executive Changpeng Zhao called Bankman-Fried a “master manipulator” and “one of the greatest fraudsters in history.”

    Still, we are sure that Maxine Waters will ask him all about this during the hearing next week.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 22:00

  • Cosco Pulls China-Canada-US Express Service
    Cosco Pulls China-Canada-US Express Service

    By Martina Lu of Container-News

    COSCO Shipping Lines has withdrawn its express China-Canada-US intermodal service that was launched in October 2021, as carriers continue to trim capacity to respond to falling demand.

    Container News was informed that the CEN-EXPRESS service had its last sailing when the Xin Ying Kou arrived at Prince Rupert on 29 November.

    The service used five 4,250 TEU ships to move containers from Qingdao and Shanghai in China to Prince Rupert in Canada, from where the containers were railed from DP World’s terminal in Prince Rupert port, via the Canadian National Railway, to Chicago in the United States.

    The ships have since been redeployed to COSCO’s Pacific Northwest services.

    At the time it was launched, CEN-EXPRESS was marketed as an alternative way for shippers to move boxes from China to the US West Coast; at the time, the lane was suffering unprecedented congestion due to Covid-19 restrictions. Since then, however, the situation has reversed, as global economic uncertainties and inflation affects consumption.

    Freight rates have fallen to almost the low levels seen before the pandemic, and carriers have been blanking sailings as a result.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 21:40

  • Loudoun School Officials 'Dropped The Ball' Over Transgender Bathroom Rape: Report
    Loudoun School Officials ‘Dropped The Ball’ Over Transgender Bathroom Rape: Report

    Loudoun County Public School officials put their own interests above that of their students in their handling of two sexual assaults committed by the same transgender student, according to a 24-page grand jury report released on Monday.

    Superintendent Scott Ziegler addresses media members Oct. 15, 2021, following news that a student already accused of rape in May assaulted a second student in October.

    “LCPS administrators were looking out for their own interests instead of the best interests of LCPS. This invariably led to a stunning lack of openness, transparency, and accountability both to the public and the special grand jury,” reads the report, after the grand jury uncovered evidence that the district was aware of multiple sexual assaults that occurred on two high school campuses in 2021 – yet failed to inform community members about them over ‘privacy concerns.’

    On May 28, 2021 a transgender teenage boy raped another student in a bathroom at Stone Bridge High School in Ashburn. The rapist, 15, was convicted on one count of forcible sodomy and one count of forcible fellatio, both felonies, local media reported. The boy was found guilty of sexual assault in October, 2021 by a Virginia judge.

    After the incident, Scott Smith, the father of the 15-year-old victim, says he was told by school officials that there had been a ‘physical altercation.’ After he arrived on scene, he learned that she had actually been raped. According to Smith the school staff said they wanted to handle the situation ‘internally,’ and chose not to call the police.

    Smith became furious and challenged their decision, after which officials called Loudon County Sheriff’s deputies.

    “I went nuts. I called the principal a pussy. Six cop cars showed up like a fucking SWAT team,” said Smith, adding that he had “exploded with rage.”

    Smith and the family’s attorney say a rape kit and other tests prove a sexual assault occurred. After presenting the evidence to the police, a case was opened.

    “Thank God that I drew enough attention to it, without getting arrested, that we got an escort to the hospital and they administered a rape kit that night,” he said.

    Two months after the incident, the boy was arrested for forced sodomy along with other counts, according to the family’s attorney.

    Three weeks after the alleged rape, Smith attended a school board meeting on June 22, where a discussion on a proposal to protect transgender students was on the agenda. After he was dragged out of the meeting, he was ridiculed on social media, and painted as a right-wing anti-trans bigot by the left.

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

    “My wife and I are gay- and lesbian-friendly,” Smith told the Daily Wire. “We’re not into this children transgender stuff. The person that attacked our daughter is apparently bisexual and occasionally wears dresses because he likes them. So this kid is technically not what the school board was fighting about. The point is kids are using it as an advantage to get into the bathrooms.”

    Cover-up

    During the June 22, 2021 meeting, school board member Beth Barts claimed not to know of any assaults happening in bathrooms or locker rooms during the trans student discussion. Superintendent Scott Ziegler echoed that sentiment, saying “To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms,” adding “the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist.”

    He went on to quote Time magazine research that he said disproved the notion transgender kids might sexually attack cisgender kids, and said: ‘I think it’s important to keep our perspective on this, we’ve heard it several times tonight from our public speakers but the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist.’ 

    Smith said he became irate. He started arguing with another woman at the meeting, labeling her a ‘b***h’ after she allegedly denied his daughter’s claim. 

    He was then charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. –Daily Mail

    Smith told the Wire that he was attacked by an activist who insisted his daughter was not assaulted, during which an officer came over.

    “The next thing I know, I’m getting touched from all over the place. I didn’t know who was touching me, who was grabbing me. I turn around, the police are grabbing me and next thing I know, I’m tackled to the ground. I’m just shocked and horrified,” Smith told Fox News.

    Dropped The Ball

    According to the Grand Jury, “LCPS dropped the ball in this instance in alerting the community about this incident,” reads the report.

    The jury noted there were several instances where senior division administrators, including the superintendent, could have been transparent and could have avoided the sexual assault at Broad Run High School.

    The jury stated in the documents they believed the Oct. 6 abduction and sexual assault “could have and should have been prevented,” saying administrators were ultimately to blame for the second assault.  –LoudounNow

    “Had any one of a number of individuals across a variety of entities spoken up or realized a serious problem was brewing regarding earlier incidents at BRHS then the sexual assault most likely would not have occurred. But nobody did,” they wrote, adding “Not a single person with knowledge of the student’s history or of this current action stepped in to do anything. Instead, discipline was left to the BRHS principal, who did nothing more than issue him a verbal reprimand.”

    The grand jury made eight recommendations based on its investigation, according to LoudonNow:

    • Increase transparency and foster better communication and recommended the school division include as much information as reasonably possible when informing the public about significant events happening on school property, a bus or a school sponsored event.
    • Re-examine its transfer process and create a formalized protocol emphasizing better communication.
    • Greater involvement from the division’s director of safety and security in situations that threaten the safety and security of students, faculty and staff. 
    • The School Board should tighten polices about the apps available to students on their school-issued devices.
    • The School Board should limit the degree to which legitimate matters and information of public concern are shielded from the public under the cloak of attorney-client privilege.
    • Improved communication, cooperation and coordination across all agencies when addressing criminal conduct by students, faculty and staff. 
    • Strengthen support and advocacy for faculty and staff who are faced with challenging scenarios that could be dangerous.
    • The superintendent’s recommendation for the non-renewal of a teacher’s contract should be the subject of a separate agenda item and not placed on the School Board’s consent agenda. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 21:20

  • Border Patrol Agents Eviscerate Biden For Saying He's Got "More Important Things" To Worry About
    Border Patrol Agents Eviscerate Biden For Saying He’s Got “More Important Things” To Worry About

    Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

    Joe Biden declared Tuesday that he has “more important things” to worry about than visiting the border, despite the fact that he was in Arizona anyway for an appearance.

    It started with the White House attempting to avoid the issue altogether:

    Then Fox News reporter Peter Doocy outright asked Biden why he wasn’t going to check on the border despite being only a few miles away.

    Watch:

    Biden skipped checking out the border, instead visiting visit a computer chip plant.

    Here is the “more important thing” Biden was referring to. A thing Biden clearly has zero understanding of:

    As we have repeatedly highlighted, there is an all our crisis on the border that is about to get even worse:

    Border patrol agents were not impressed, with one commenting to the Daily Caller “MORE IMPORTANT THINGS? This is HIS disaster, he created this catastrophe. The border crisis is a total breach of National Security. Give me a fucking break…I can’t wait for this clown to be out of office.”

    Another Border agent charged that Biden’s comments betray “another example of how delusional he is.”

    “It’s in their narrative to downplay the destabilization of the U.S. What could possibly be more important than criminals and terrorists infiltrating the country and tens of thousands of fentanyl overdoses, mostly being young adults,” the agent added.

    National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd added “The President’s most fundamental job is the safety and security of the American people. He’s failing. With a record number of people and dangerous drugs flowing across our borders, the President owes it to this country to go to the border and develop a strategy of security.”

    “Unfortunately, President Biden’s record speaks for itself. He cares more about politics than American lives,” Judd asserted.

    *  *  *

    Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

    In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 21:00

  • US Targets Illicit Pakistan Nuclear Activity As Part Of Russia-Related Sanctions Blacklist
    US Targets Illicit Pakistan Nuclear Activity As Part Of Russia-Related Sanctions Blacklist

    The Biden administration has unveiled a sanctions blacklist of two dozen companies and other entities accused of supporting Russia militarily, as well as who have violated sanctions on Iran. But perhaps most surprising is that among the 24 companies also includes entities charged with illicit activities related to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. 

    The US Commerce Department identified companies based in Latvia, Pakistan, Russia, Singapore and Switzerland, including Russia’s AO Kraftway Corporation, considered among the country’s largest IT companies. 

    Fiber Optic Solutions in Latvia is named as well as Russian AO Scientific Research Center for Electronic Computing, LLC Fibersense, and Scientific Production Company Optolin, AO PKK Milandr; Milandr EK; Milandr ICC JSC; Milur IS; Microelectronic Production Complex (MPK) Milandr; and Ruselectronics JSC and Swiss based Milur SA, according to a press release.

    Regarding the Iran-related sanctions, “The Commerce Department also added four trading and supply companies in Singapore for supplying or attempting to supply an Iranian electronics company, Pardazan System Namad Arman,” which as Reuters recounts was initially subject of US Treasury sanctions in 2018 following the Trump administration’s pullout of the Iran nuclear deal.

    While over the past many months sanctions on Russia and Iran have become a normative thing in Washington, the Pakistan-related development is what’s most interesting. As Reuters explains:

    The Biden administration also added 10 companies in Pakistan and UAE that it says pose unacceptable risks of using or diverting items for Pakistan’s unsafeguarded nuclear activities or are involved Pakistan’s “nuclear activities and missile proliferation-related activities.”

    AFP/Getty Images

    Pakistan, it must be remembered, is a nuclear-armed ally of Washington, but one which has always made US officials incredibly nervous given the alarming possibility of nukes ‘falling into the wrong hands’. Of course some of the world’s most notorious Islamic terror groups have had a significant presence inside Pakistan and especially along the Af-Pak border for decades.

    Following the Taliban reconquering of Kabul in the wake of the US pullout from the country, the Brookings Institution warned of the following: 

    The president will not have to look too far. Bordering Afghanistan, now again under Taliban rule, is Pakistan, one of America’s oddest “allies.” Governed by a shaky coalition of ineffective politicians and trained military leaders trying desperately to contain the challenge of domestic terrorism, Pakistan may be the best definition yet of a highly combustible threat that, if left unchecked, might lead to the nightmare of nightmares: jihadis taking control of a nuclear weapons arsenal of something in the neighborhood of 200 warheads.

    Wednesday’s fresh US Commerce sanctions apparently have the above unpredictable nature of the Pakistani political and security landscape still fresh in mind. Currently Pakistan has the sixth largest nuclear arsenal in the world.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 20:40

  • 4 Takeaways From Sen. Johnson's Panel On COVID-19 Vaccines
    4 Takeaways From Sen. Johnson’s Panel On COVID-19 Vaccines

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

    Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) held a panel on COVID-19 vaccines in Washington on Dec. 7, featuring experts including Dr. Robert Malone and Dr. Peter McCullough.

    Experts discussed vaccine development, vaccine composition, data from insurance and adverse event systems, and other topics.

    Here are four takeaways from the panel.

    Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) speaks during a hearing in Washington on Jan. 24, 2022. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

    Insurance Experts Record Jump in Excess Mortality

    Edward Dowd, a former BlackRock analyst now with the Humanity Project, showed data from the Society of Actuaries 2021 Group Life Insurance survey that showed a jump in excess mortality among young and middle-aged adults starting around the time the vaccines began being administered.

    The only thing that changed at the time, Dowd said, was “vaccines and mandates.”

    He pointed out that Denmark and the United Kingdom, among other countries, have stopped recommending or entirely halted vaccination of young, healthy people because of growing concerns over side effects like heart inflammation that can lead to death.

    “Why are our health authorities still pushing this vaccine if other countries are backing off?” Dowd asked.

    Representatives from major U.S. health agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), were invited to the discussion but did not attend.

    Josh Stirling, an insurance analyst, presented an analysis of data from the United Kingdom that concluded death rates were higher among the vaccinated as of May 2022.

    Doctors Report Increase in Heart Inflammation Since Pandemic Started

    Several vaccines have been linked to side effects such as myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation that can turn deadly.

    Doctors testifying during the panel said they’ve seen an increase in patients with the inflammation.

    “It’s been very high,” Dr. Reneta Moon, a clinical associate professor at the Washington State University College of Medicine.

    Moon said she saw a handful of cases in her 20 years of practicing before the pandemic. The number has jumped since the pandemic started, she said.

    Dr. Kirk Milhoan, a pediatrician based in Hawaii, said he’s also seen more cases.

    Milhoan said that the research that’s emerged shows myocarditis and a related condition, pericarditis, are caused by the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.

    Moderna and Pfizer have not responded to requests for comment on heart inflammation.

    The studies show that the spike protein, which the vaccines cause the body to make, is “cardiotoxic and cause the heart to be inflamed,” Milhoan said. “Let that sink in, the current public health plan is asking our own body to make a cardiotoxin.”

    COVID-19 can also cause myocarditis, according to some studies, though other research has challenged that view.

    Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, in New York on July 7, 2022. (Bao Qiu/The Epoch Times)

    Young People at Little Risk From COVID-19

    Dr. Harvey Risch, a professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, presented data from the CDC that show young people face little risk from COVID-19.

    The share of infection among those aged 0 to 17 that led to death, for instance, was just 0.01 percent through September 2021, while the share was 0.05 percent among those 18 to 29.

    “When you have such low or nonexistent mortality in these low age groups, the potential severe adverse effects of the vaccine will surmount the nonexistent mortality of these age groups and therefore, what we’ve been told, that everybody has to be vaccinated … had no reason to be there in the first place, because there was no mortality they were trying to prevent,” Risch said.

    The share was much higher among older people. Among those 85 and older, for example, the share was 24.6 percent.

    Because vaccines have little to no impact on transmission or infection, the only point of getting vaccinated is for treatment, but most young people “had no reason to choose that when mortality from infection is orders of magnitude is much less than from vaccination,” Risch said.

    No Strong Trials

    As the vaccines have performed worse and worse against infection, health officials say they should still be taken to protect against severe disease.

    But McCullough, chief scientific officer of The Wellness Company, said that no randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial has shown the vaccines reduce hospitalization or death.

    Such trials, known as RCTs, are generally considered the highest form of evidence for a drug.

    Both the emergency authorization and approval for the vaccines have been on the basis of preventing infection. In fact sheets, prospective recipients are told the vaccines “have been shown to prevent COVID-19.” There’s no mention of severe illness or death.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 20:20

  • End Of An Era: Final Boeing 747 Rolls Off Assembly Line
    End Of An Era: Final Boeing 747 Rolls Off Assembly Line

    The last Boeing 747 jumbo jet rolled off the production line at the company’s factory in Everett, Washington, on Tuesday night, marking a close to a significant chapter in aviation history. 

    Aviation historians call the 747 the original jumbo jet was first produced in 1967. Three years later, Pan Am started flying the double-decker jumbo jet that could haul over 500 passengers worldwide. 

    “For more than half a century, tens of thousands of dedicated Boeing employees have designed and built this magnificent airplane that has truly changed the world. We are proud that this plane will continue to fly across the globe for years to come,” Kim Smith, Boeing vice president and general manager, 747 and 767 programs, wrote in a press release. 

    Last night, the 1,574th 747 rolled out of the Everett factory. 

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

    The 747 was once the premiere choice of aircraft for airlines and has since been replaced with a twin-engine, wide-body aircraft that is more fuel-efficient. Still, 341 of these jumbos are in use but only as freighters. 

    “The 747-8 is an incredibly capable aircraft, with capacity that is unmatched by any other freighter in production,” UPS wrote in a statement in 2020 when Boeing said production of the jet would end in late 2022. 

    “With a maximum payload of 307,000 lbs., we use them on long, high-volume routes, connecting Asia, North America, Europe and the Middle East,” the shipper continued. 

    The last 747 was sold to air freighter Atlas Air which will use the aircraft to haul goods worldwide. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 20:00

  • A Big Theory Of Boom And Bust
    A Big Theory Of Boom And Bust

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

    Our times of boom to bust are the perfect illustration of the credit cycle first presented in its fullness in the 1920s. Why then? Because this was the first decade after most countries created central banks. They caused some very odd behavior that made 19th-century-style economics seem to have less explanatory power.

    That was when a few economists working in Vienna put together a model for understanding how business cycles work in a modern economy. Their names were Friedrich von Hayek and Ludwig von Mises. They drew on their theoretical knowledge based on the following inputs:

    Richard Cantillon (1680–1734) observed that when governments inflate the money supply, the effects are unevenly distributed among economic sectors, affecting some more than others and in different ways.

    Adam Smith (1723–1790) explained that a critical element of rising wealth is embedded in the division of labor, in which individuals specialize in tasks and cooperate across firms and those firms cooperate with each other.

    Carl Menger (1840–1921) saw money as an organic market creation, not an invention of the state, which implies that it should be produced like any other good or service.

    Knut Wicksell (1851–1926) demonstrated that interest rates function as a price mechanism to allocate investment decisions over time, which is why the yield curve exists. Manipulation of the interest rate disturbs the natural allocation of resources.

    Eugen von Boehm-Bawerk (1851–1914) explained the structure of production as consisting of far more than just consumer and capital goods. Capital itself is heterogeneous in that investment decisions include a forecast of time expectations, and the interest rate is crucial to coordinating them.

    You can put all those pieces together to come up with a mental model of a well-functioning economy as described by Jean-Baptiste Say (1767–1832) who saw the alignment of supply and demand as a law of economics, which is to say that a market economy is inherently stable.

    The Central Bank

    One can see, then, how a central bank messes everything up. By lowering the interest rate, the central bank fuels the creation of new bank credit that otherwise would not exist. An artificially lowered interest rate acts like fake savings.

    Savings are resources drawn from deferred consumption. They serve as the basis for sustainable investment. But artificially low rates signal the existence of savings that are not there.

    Not only do low interest rates create fake savings, but they actually draw real savings away from short-term projects toward longer-term projects, thus distorting the production structure as described above. They create a kind of subsidy toward capital products that would not exist had the interest rate stayed at its natural market-based level.

    Massive Distortion

    The result then is not just inflation, as the monetarists would describe it. It is also a distortion of the production structure.

    Capital gets a subsidy over consumption goods, and not only that, but longer-term projects get a boost over shorter-term projects.

    Bottom line: The last 14 years of zero-interest rates have created a paradigmatic case of the Austrian business cycle theory. It has massively distorted interest rates, more so than ever before. This was Ben Bernanke’s wonderful innovation. Many people thought his move in 2008 would generate inflation but he found a workaround.

    Bernanke paid the banks to keep their new and faked resources locked away in the vaults of the Fed. This kept the hot money off the streets and kept prices stable. But that only solved one problem. It created another: It created huge malinvestments in a whole series of sectors in tech and media and housing yet again!

    What resulted was a disgustingly overbuilt tech world replete with Zoom-class employees with college degrees earning six figures without limit. Central bank credit caused the creation of an overclass that eventually caused all sorts of mischief, economic and cultural. They invented idiotic ideas like ESG, DEI and woke philosophy in general.

    None of this nonsense had anything to do with reality but in Bernanke’s world, reality didn’t matter anymore. This sector got so huge that it became a critical number to push lockdowns under the slogan “Stay home, stay safe.” These privileged elites forced the working classes to serve them food at their doorsteps and face the virus while they luxuriated in their fancy apartments pretending to work on laptops.

    The Chart That Reveals All

    So that we understand the radical nature of this experiment, please study the following chart carefully. This is the federal funds rate adjusted for inflation. What we see is the longest period of production distortion in American history. This chart goes from 1950s to the present.

    This whole policy becomes unsustainable once the value of the dollar begins to fall due to price inflation. At some point, the central bank has to turn things around. When things become shaky or prices start to shift and the central bank starts to back off its pillaging policies, the house of cards starts to fall apart, as resources are drained from long-term speculation to shorter-term consumption and the restarting of real savings.

    That’s precisely where we’re in the cycle. Long-term projects are falling apart. Consumers and investors are turning away from the long parts of the yield curve to make money in the short term. Resources in general are going through a massive shift in terms of time allocation as interest rates shift.

    The Yield Curve

    That the yield curve has dramatically inverted is hardly a surprise. It is a sign that the ship of production is turning very slowly, and investors are unconvinced yet that the Fed will keep this up.

    But that point is that the Fed must keep this up if it intends to get inflation rates back to the target. The federal funds rate will have to enter back into positive territory in real terms. That means 6%, 8% or even 10%, pushing long yields far into the double-digit range.

    To be sure, we should all in a macroeconomic sense look forward to a new age of more honest finance. The disaster of zero-interest rate policy is finally coming to an end. Former Fed chief Ben Bernanke’s Nobel Prize notwithstanding, this policy massively distorted capital allocation in the economy and around the world for the better part of 14 years. With its end, we’re going to get a taste of some economic and financial rationality.

    We might even be able to save money without losing money. So in that sense, the man who bears the main responsibility for inflation, current Fed Chair Jerome Powell, is the same guy who will finally fix what Bernanke broke all those years ago. Remember those days when everything seemed too good to be true? There was a financial crisis that the Fed magically fixed with no downside.

    Except that there was a huge economic, cultural and social downside. Frugality and prudence gave way to massive excess and a level of craziness in culture that we never imagined we would experience.

    What made this preposterously unjust system possible was the Fed with Bernanke at the helm. Quantitative easing turns out to mean upending all normal life and paying the horrid price for this a decade and a half later.

    Someday historians will look back at our times as a great turning point. We’ve been through calamity, and it worsens by the day. Will we enter into a new Dark Age? Or find the light and crawl our way toward it before it’s too late?

    If we find our way, it will be because the Austrian economists of old will guide us.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 19:40

  • San Francisco Backpedals On Killer Cop Bots
    San Francisco Backpedals On Killer Cop Bots

    One week after San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted to give police the ability to use lethal, remote-controlled robots, wisdom has prevailed.

    Following heavy criticism from civil liberties groups, and anyone with a brain, the Board of Supervisors thought twice about giving cops the ability to ‘take down’ suspects at the push of a button. After sending the measure to committee for further review, the city reversed course.

    The vote came following a new California law requiring city police forces to keep inventories of military-grade equipment and seek approval for their use.

    Dr Catherine Connolly, from the group Stop Killer Robots, told the BBC the move was a “slippery slope” that could distance humans from killing.

    Protesters and several dissenting board members gathered on the steps of city hall to call for the city to reverse its decision. –BBC

    Opponents also said the robots would lead to the further militarization of the police force.

    The original proposal will need to be completely revamped, or entirely scrapped.

    Advocates for the killer robots say they would only be used in ‘extreme’ circumstances, with a spokesperson for the SFPD saying that “robots could potentially be equipped with explosive charges to breach fortified structures containing violent, armed, or dangerous subjects.”

    Under the original proposal, “Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when [1] risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and [2] officers cannot subdue the threat after using alternative force options or de-escalation tactics options, **or** conclude that they will not be able to subdue the threat after evaluating alternative force options or de-escalation tactics. Only the Chief of Police, Assistant Chief, or Deputy Chief of Special Operations may authorize the use of robot deadly force options.”

    But as the EFF‘s Matt Guariglia noted last week; The “or” in this policy (emphasis added) does a lot of work. Police can use deadly force after “evaluating alternative force options or de-escalation tactics,” meaning that they don’t have to actually try them before remotely killing someone with a robot strapped with a bomb.

     

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 19:20

  • On-Chain Data Shows 'Potential Bottom' For Bitcoin But Macro Headwinds Remain
    On-Chain Data Shows ‘Potential Bottom’ For Bitcoin But Macro Headwinds Remain

    Authored by Dylan LeClair and Sam Rule via Bitcoin Magazine Pro,

    Bitcoin has seen significant capitulation from its all-time high and many on-chain indicators suggest the worst may be behind us. Yet, significant macro challenges remain. Is the bottom truly in?

    On-Chain Data Trends

    November was a painful month. By looking at on-chain realized profit and loss data, we can see that this was true for many forced-sellers of bitcoin. Before any bitcoin price bottom, a hallmark sign that you want to see is extended periods of forced selling, capitulation and rise in realized losses. One way to view this is by looking at the sum of realized profit and loss for each month relative to bitcoin’s total market cap. We saw these bottom signals in November 2022, and similarly in the July 2022 Terra/LUNA crash, March 2020 COVID fear and December 2018 cycle bottom capitulation events.

    Looking at the raw profit and loss numbers without normalizing to market cap, we saw $17.85 billion in realized losses over the last 30 days, which is fairly significant this cycle, but less than LUNA crash losses of $26.68 billion.

    Looking at the 2018 cycle, the end was marked by excess realized losses, although this was much different with the forced liquidations and cascades of private balance sheet leverage and paper bitcoin unwinding that we saw this year. 

    We’ve talked about the current drawdown in bitcoin’s price and how that compares to previous cycles many times over the last few months. Another way to look at cyclical drawdowns is to focus on bitcoin’s realized market capitalization — the average cost basis of the network which tracks the latest price where each UTXO moved last. With price being more volatile, realized price is a more stable view of bitcoin’s growth and capital inflows. The realized market capitalization is now down 17.33% which is significantly higher than 2015 and 2018 cycles of 14.13% and 16.51%, respectively.

    Bitcoin looks to be monetizing in phases or cycles, and by using the realized price metric which converts the exchange rate/market capitalization into much more precise metrics, we can evaluate the bitcoin monetization cycles using the rate of change in the realized price. The chart below shows the 30-day rate of change in the realized price.

    As for duration, we’re 176 total days into the price being below bitcoin’s realized price. Those aren’t consecutive days as price can temporarily go above realized price, but price trends below realized price in bear market periods. For context, trends in 2018 were short-lived at around 134 days and the trends in 2014-15 lasted 384 days. 

    On one hand, bitcoin’s realized market capitalization has taken a significant hit in the previous round of capitulation. That’s a promising bottom-like sign. On the other hand, there’s a case to be made that price being below realized price could easily last another six months from historical cycles and the lack of capitulation in equity markets is still a major headwind and concern. 

    In both charts below, you’ll see annotations for the ratio between price and realized price: market-value-to-realized-value ratio (MVRV).

    If you standardize the MVRV metric, bitcoin is in the 6th percentile of historical readings in terms of its market exchange rate relative to its average cost basis.

    As per the net-unrealized-profit/loss (NUPL) ratio, we are firmly in the capitulation phase. NUPL can be calculated by subtracting the realized cap from market cap and dividing the result by the market cap, as described in this article authored by By Tuur Demeester, Tamás Blummer and Michiel Lescrauwaet. 

    There is no denying it: For bitcoin-native cycles, we are firmly in the capitulation phase. Currently, only 56% of circulating supply was last moved on-chain in profit. On a two-week moving average basis, under 50% supply was last moved above the current exchange rate, which is something that has only ever happened in the depths of previous bear-market lows.

    When thinking of the bitcoin exchange rate, the numerator side of the equation is historically cheap. The Bitcoin network continues to produce a block approximately every 10 minutes in an unabated fashion, as hash rate ticks higher and as the ledger offers an immutable settlement layer for global value. The speculation, leverage and fraud of the previous cycle is washing to shore and bitcoin continues to exchange hands.

    Bitcoin is objectively cheap relative to its all time history and adoption phases. The real question over the immediate future is the denominator. We have talked at length about the global liquidity cycle and its current track. Despite being historically cheap, bitcoin is not immune to a sudden strengthening in the dollar because nothing truly is. Exchange rates are relative and if the dollar is squeezing higher, then everything else will subsequently fall — at least momentarily. As always, position sizing and time preference is key for all. 

    As for the catalyst for a surge higher in the dollar denominator of the bitcoin exchange rate (BTC/USD), there are 80 trillion possible catalysts…

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

    *  * *

    Thank you for reading Bitcoin Magazine Pro, we sincerely appreciate your support! Please consider leaving a like and comment if you enjoyed this piece. As well, sharing goes a long way toward helping us reach a wider audience!

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 19:00

  • A New Drug Called "Tranq" Is Worsening Philadelphia's Already Out-Of-Control Drug Problem
    A New Drug Called “Tranq” Is Worsening Philadelphia’s Already Out-Of-Control Drug Problem

    As if Philadelphia didn’t have a big enough problem on its hands with its “zombie streets” in the Northeast lined with drug users…

    …a new drug is making its way out into the city. Philly Voice published a new piece this week detailing the veterinary sedative xylazine, also known as “tranq”, which is now being “pervasive” in the drug scene and is mixed with fentanyl. 

    It is responsible for “more complex overdoses and painful skin wounds,” the report says. The drug is a “anesthetic and pain reliever” that “is used by vets to treat horses and cattle”. The appeal of mixing it with Fentanyl is that it can extend the perception of a person’s high. 

    It has been found in 90% of dope samples that the city tested last year, the report says. Last year, it was found in 44% of Fentanyl overdose deaths in the city and was found in 34% of all overdose deaths. It marks a 39% increase from the year prior. 

    Jennifer Shinefeld, a field epidemiologist for the Philadelphia Department of Public Health, commented: “Xylazine was initially added into the drug supply because a heroin high lasts for 6-8 hours, but a fentanyl high lasts from 1-2 hours.”

    “The tranquilizer was being added to mimic a traditional heroin high, but also to allegedly prolong the effects.”

    Fentanyl is already responsible for the lion’s share of the city’s overdoses, the report notes:

    Among Philadelphia’s 1,276 fatal overdoses in 2021 — the city’s deadliest year on record — fentanyl was linked to 71% of fatalities. The drug was present in 94% of fatal overdoses in which opioids were found, showing the extent to which fentanyl has supplanted heroin as the predominant opioid.

    And now using xylazine as an additive is “further complicating drug interactions in people who use these substances, requiring urgent changes to Philadelphia’s public health response”.

    In other words, Philadelphia’s drug crisis has (once again) taken a turn for the worse – and the city is being labeled “ground zero” for the new drug, which made its way from Puerto Rico:

    Xylazine first emerged as a recreational drug in Puerto Rico during the early 2000s, years before fentanyl became a staple of the U.S. drug supply.

    “It was seen among folks who were residing in towns where there was higher veterinary use of it,” said Jewell Johnson, a substance use epidemiologist in Philadelphia’s health department.

    As fentanyl spread first in the Northeast, then westward over the last decade, xylazine came to be seen by drug suppliers as an appealing substance to offset the shorter run of a fentanyl high. The drug doesn’t make opioids last any longer, but it prolongs the mental state of being on a drug.

    Philadelphia, long an epicenter of the nation’s opioid epidemic, became an ideal place for tranq dope to flourish.

    “Outside of Puerto Rico, for lack of a better word, Philadelphia is ground zero for xylazine,” Shinefeld said.

    Shinefeld concluded: “Xylazine is the primary adulterate (in the drug supply), I say that because we no longer consider fentanyl a primary adulterate, but (rather) the primary component. Fentanyl started to take over the drug supply in 2010. There’s not very much heroin left. There are certain areas where you can still get it, but all of the bags that we’ve ever tested that had actual heroin also had fentanyl present in them.”

    You can read Philly Voice’s full report on the drug here. 

     

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 18:40

  • Ted Cruz On Twitter Files Revelations: "This Was All About Weaponizing Big Tech"
    Ted Cruz On Twitter Files Revelations: “This Was All About Weaponizing Big Tech”

    Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

    Republican Senator Ted Cruz has weighed in on the revelations in Elon Musk’s ‘Twitter Files’ publication, urging that it is “evidence of corruption that goes to the highest level of government.”

    Appearing on Fox News, Cruz asserted that the effort to crush the Hunter Biden laptop story went “to the highest level of the FBI. And it goes to the highest level of Big Tech.”

    “We’ve known for a long time that big tech is censoring conservatives,” Cruz said, adding that “what Elon did here is he just laid naked all of the lies that the corporate media has told.”

    “It’s clear during the 2020 election, over and over and over again, the Biden campaign and the DNC would reach out to their buddies at Twitter and say, hey we don’t like this, and their response is ‘handled,’ and they’d take it down, over and over and over again,” Cruz stated.

    He continued, “And in particular, all of the exchange back and forth when the Hunter Biden laptop story broke, it was evidence that the leadership at Twitter knew within hours that their ridiculous, fake excuse that it was hacked was a ridiculous fake excuse.”

    “Even James Baker, who…had been the FBI’s general counsel and then was at Twitter — even he acknowledged well, gosh, we don’t have the evidence on this, but it doesn’t matter, Let’s block it anyway,” Cruz noted, referring to the now fired Twitter Fed, who continued to try to censor Musk’s data dump.

    Cruz further highlighted that in “one of the exchanges back and forth they reveal the reason, which is they say we want to avoid — we want to avoid what happened in 2016, Donald Trump winning.”

    “This was all about weaponizing big tech. It is absolutely corrupt. And what is amazing is the Democrats were fully in on it,” Cruz charged, adding “The corporate media was fully in on it, and Elon’s released the receipts, which shows all of them are willing to abuse power to stay in power.”

    * * *

    Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

    In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 18:20

  • Senate Committee To Subpoena SBF If He Does Not Testify Voluntarily
    Senate Committee To Subpoena SBF If He Does Not Testify Voluntarily

    Update (8:20pm ET): Following a tidal wave of disgust, outrage and loathing at corrupt politicians, Maxine Waters took to twitter to slam the earlier CNBC report that she wouldn’t subpoena SBF as a “lie” even though just one sentence lower in her tweet she confirms that she has, in fact, not done anything yet and that a “subpoena is definitely on the table.”

    Furthermore, she notes that SBF has “been requested to testify” even though as everyone knows by now, he turned down said “request” and unless he is compelled (i.e., issued a subpoena) he won’t go. But it’s cool: “A subpoena is definitely on the table.” The question is whether the check to Maxine clear and it stays there or someone actually signs it and delivers it to the prominent Democratic donor.

    The responses suggest that America’s corrupt politicians no longer fool anyone.

    And while Maxine counts her inbound wire transfers and donations from SBF for a cost-benefit analysis of what the humiliated rep should do next, at least two US senators have no such qualms, and the two highest rated members of the Senate Banking Committee told Sam Bankman-Fried they expect him to appear before them next week in person to discuss the collapse of FTX, and will subpoena him if he does not appear voluntarily, a letter from its leaders said Wednesday.

    As Coindesk first reported, Senators Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), respectively the chair and ranking member of the committee, wrote a public letter to Bankman-Fried, who resigned from the exchange the same day it filed for bankruptcy last month. The committee is holding a hearing on Wednesday, Dec. 14, a day after the House Financial Services Committee holds its own hearing on the exchange.

    “FTX’s collapse has caused real financial harm to consumers, and effects have spilled over into other parts of the crypto industry. The American people need answers about Sam Bankman-Fried’s misconduct at FTX,” the lawmakers said in a prepared statement. “The Committee has requested that he testify at our upcoming hearing on FTX’s collapse, and will consider further action if he does not comply.”

    Normally witnesses appear voluntarily, the lawmakers said in the letter. If Bankman-Fried does not confirm his participation by Thursday, “I am prepared, along with Ranking Member Pat Toomey, to issue a subpoena to compel your testimony,” the letter signed by Brown said.

    He now faces a number of investigations, including an investigation by federal prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York, who are investigating whether Bankman-Fried may have tried to manipulate the price of TerraUSD and Luna, which collapsed in their own dramatic fashion earlier this year, according to the New York Times.

    * * *

    Just when you thought House Democrat, and easily one of the smartest people in Congress, Maxine Waters couldn’t humiliate herself and outrage the peasantry any further with her white-glove treatment of Sam Bankman-Fried, whose fraud was behind the largest ponzi scheme since Bernie Madoff, she has bested herself once more.

    Waters, the House Financial Services Committee Chair, is not planning on subpoenaing Sam Bankman-Fried, or is that Sam Bankman-Freed – to testify at the upcoming December 13th Congressional hearing about the collapse of FTX. 

    “Waters informed committee members of her decision at a private meeting Tuesday with Securities and Exchange Commission chair Gary Gensler on Capitol Hill,” CNBC reported late in the day on Wednesday. 

    Waters apparently said “she wants committee staff try to convince Bankman-Fried to voluntarily testify”.

    And if he disagrees? Well… oops, but that’s what all those tens of millions in donations to Democrats were for. Or is that billions?

    For those still confused, one month after the historic implosion, Bankman-Fried appears to be getting away with one of the most blatant heists in history and still has not been held to account by any regulatory agency, other than what appeared to be some perfunctory palm greasing that may have taken place in the Bahamas. 

    Baffled by why there has been no consequences for Bankman-Fried, even while Democrats and the Biden administration perpetually rail against billionaires and the upper class? Well, there’s the small detail that Bankman-Fried and FTX associates gave $300,000 to the very same House Committee members that are investigating him, per the Washington Free Beacon:

    Bankman-Fried and his co-founders at FTX contributed $300,351 to nine members of the House Financial Services Committee, according to Federal Election Commission records. Some of the largest contributions were to Democrats on the committee’s Digital Assets Working Group, which worked on regulation of the crypto industry. 

    Recall that Maxine Waters has been already widely lampooned and ridiculed for the gentle treatment she has given Bankman-Fried thus far.  In an endearing sounding Tweet to SBF on December 2, 2022, asking him to testify in front of Conrgess, she wrote: “We appreciate that you’ve been candid in your discussions about what happened at FTX. Your willingness to talk to the public will help the company’s customers, investors, and others. To that end, we would welcome your participation in our hearing on the 13th.”

    The public was not amused by Waters’ approach.

    “If you don’t arrest him I will have lost all faith in our government being the tiniest bit of just,” bitcoin advocate Dan Held responded to Waters. 

    “Rep. Waters, we appreciate that you’re holding a hearing on the 13th, and we look forward to substantive fact-finding about what happened at FTX. I am certain that factfinding will show that SBF has not, in fact, been candid in his discussions. He committed fraud, full stop,” commented Lawyer Jake Chervinsky.

    And then Bankman-Fried himself humiliated Waters by publicly shunning her offer to testify, telling Waters he wasn’t sure if he’d be able to testify on December 13th. 

    “Once I have finished learning and reviewing what happened, I would feel like it was my duty to appear before the committee and explain,” he wrote to her on Twitter. 

    And to think, SBF dodging the question of an appearance before the House on December 13 came even after Waters blew Bankman-Fried a kiss…

    We guess the ole’ Willie Brown treatment doesn’t quite work with the charm it used to. Maybe Maxine can have Kamala Harris stand in for her next time. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 18:00

  • Russia's Oil Exports Nosedive Following Price Cap
    Russia’s Oil Exports Nosedive Following Price Cap

    By Alex Kimani of OilPrice.com

    Russian crude-oil exports have taken a serious hit since new sanctions and a price cap came into force earlier in the week, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that figures from two data providers on Russian crude both show a big fall, though their magnitudes differ. 

    According to one commodity-analytics firm Kpler, Russia’s seaborne exports fell by nearly 500,000 barrels per day on Tuesday, a 16% decline from the November average of 3.08 million bpd. 

    Meanwhile, TankerTrackers.com, which tracks sea vessels using signals and satellite images, has reported that Russia’s crude exports fell by nearly 50%. With shipments from the Black Sea and Baltic ports accounting for most of the fall.

    According to Samir Madani, cofounder of TankerTrackers.com, this is a notable drop rather than a blip, “Russian exports have been moving steadily up until now. The two biggest visible snags are in the Black and Baltic seas. Pacific and Arctic regions remain unaffected, at least for now”.

    Analysts at StanChart have predicted that Russia’s crude production is set to fall sharply in the coming year, noting that the key unknown is whether Russia can transport oil to its major consumers (including providing adequate insurance) without using EU or other G7 services. 

    According to StanChart, Russia has acquired a large enough ‘shadow’ tanker fleet since its invasion of Ukraine that it can use to move most of the displaced volumes; however, the analysts note that the insurance aspect is likely to cause significant issues. This situation leads analysts to predict that Russian crude output is likely to fall by 1.44 million barrels per day in 2023 thanks to a progressive shortage of high-quality equipment and a lack of access to international service companies.

    At the same time, we are seeing a traffic jam of more than a dozen oil tankers stuck in the Turkish Straits thanks to a dispute between maritime insurers and the local authorities due to the new sanctions and price cap.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 17:40

  • China Confirms It Is "Mystery" Massive Gold Buyer With First Official Purchase In 3 Years
    China Confirms It Is “Mystery” Massive Gold Buyer With First Official Purchase In 3 Years

    One month ago, we sparked a frenzy across precious metals circles when we reported that a “mystery” buyer had bought some 300 tons of gold, roughly three quarters of what would be a record 399 tons of central bank gold purchases in the third quarter.

    While regular readers already know the details (which we laid out here), here again is the bigger picture: Central banks bought a net 399.3 tonnes of gold in the July-September period, more than quadrupling on the year, according to the November report by the World Gold Council. The latest amount marks a steep jump from 186 tonnes in the preceding quarter and 87.7 tonnes in the first quarter, while the year-to-date total alone surpasses any full year since 1967.

    Buyers such as the central banks of Turkey, Uzbekistan and India reported purchases of 31.2 tonnes, 26.1 tonnes and 17.5 tonnes, respectively. The problem, as we calculated at the start of November, is that those amounts only add up to roughly 90 tonnes – “meaning it is unclear who bought the remaining roughly 300 tonnes net.”

    And while we clearly had one name as the most likely suspect behind the residual buying, it wasn’t until a report two weeks later by Japan’s Nikkei that said name emerged front and center.

    According to the Nikkei, which paraphrased verbatim what we had previously said, with central banks snapping up gold this year amid uncertainty which ones are behind most of that shopping spree, “speculation emerged that China is a big player.” And citing analysts, the Nikkei then goes on to suggest that seeing how Russia has been hit by monetary sanctions by the West, “China and some other countries must be hurrying to reduce dependence on the dollar.“

    “Seeing how Russia’s overseas assets were frozen after its invasion of Ukraine, anti-Western countries are eager to accumulate gold holdings on hand,” said Emin Yurumazu, a Japan-based economist from Turkey.

    Those familiar with China’s gold buying patterns are all too aware that Beijing has made similar moves in the past. After keeping radio-silent since 2009, Beijing shocked the market in 2015 when it disclosed it had boosted gold holdings by about 600 tonnes. It has not reported any activity since September 2019.

    “China likely bought a substantial amount of gold from Russia,” added market analyst Itsuo Toshima. According to Toshima, the People’s Bank of China likely bought a portion of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation’s gold holdings of over 2,000 tonnes.

    * * *

    Fast forward to today when while we still don’t know if Russia sold some of its gold to China – all we know is that Russia did sell some gold in recent months after its holdings hit a record in 2020…

    … what we do know for a fact is that China was indeed loading up on gold.

    We know this, because overnight the PBOC officially reported an increase in its gold reserves for the first time in more than three years, confirming that the world’s most populous country was indeed the mystery buyer in the bullion market.

    In keeping with a time-honored practice of masking its purchases for years (the “dormant” period between 2009 and 2015 when China did not reveal any purchases, and then suddenly reported a 57% jump in reserves being the most famous) and then only gradually letting on how much it had purchased, on Wednesday the Chinese central bank raised its holdings by 32 tons in November from the month before and really from the last official update in Sept 2019, according to data on its website.

    That brought its total to 1,980 tons (or 63.67m fine troy ounces) the sixth-biggest central bank bullion hoard in the world, but similar to previous disclosures it is likely that China has purchased far more in the past three years but will only reveal just how much in coming months. That said, China has a long way to go for its gold holdings to catch up to the US (which may or may not have the gold it represents), and even if combined with Russia’s holdings, the two countries would still not be the world’s largest gold holder.

    Why now? Well, as Bloomberg reports, echoing Nikkei above, “for China, the need to find an alternative to dollars, which dominate its reserves, has rarely been greater.” Tensions with the US have been high since measures taken against its semiconductor firms, while Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated Washington’s willingness to sanction central bank reserves. In other words, now that the US has shown it is ready to weaponize the dollar, any USD reserves held by the Fed, Western banks or any other counterparty, could and will be promptly confiscated if China does something unpalatable… like invading Taiwan. Which is why China is desperately seeking money without counterparty risk. Here it has just two choices: crypto or gold. For now, it has picked the latter.

    Others echoed this dedollarization thesis which we have been pushing for years: according to UBS analyst Giovanni Staunovo, the PBOC’s purchases may be part of a plan to diversify its reserves away from the dollar: “Gold holdings in China as part of the total reserves are still very low, so there is probably room for further purchases down the road.”

    As regular readers are well aware, China has previously gone long periods without disclosing changes in its gold holdings. When the central bank announced a 57% jump in reserves to 53.3 million ounces in mid-2015, it was the first update in six years. It took another breather from the end of October 2016, before resuming reporting purchases in December 2018.

    While central bank buying rarely drives sustainable gold rallies, it can provide an important pillar of support when prices fall. The precious metal has been under pressure this year from the Federal Reserve’s aggressive monetary tightening, though it has held up relatively well against moves in the dollar and Treasury yields.

    “As deglobalisation accelerates, the non-G-10 nations are expected to ‘re-commoditize’ and ramp up gold holdings,” said Nicky Shiels, head of strategy at MKS PAMP SA.

    Meanwhile, as Zoltan Pozsar wrote yesterday in a must-read note, the role of gold may be changing as first Russia, then other countries (China) seek to force out the petrodollar and replace it with petrogold, a move which would finally lead to substantial price upside for the yellow metal which has gone nowhere in the past 2 years.

    Gold rose to $1,782 an ounce by 12:30pm ET. Bullion had a shortlived rally back above $1,800 on Friday, and is down about 3% this year.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/07/2022 – 17:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 07

Today’s News 7th December 2022

  • The Real Reason Behind China's "Zero-COVID" Policy
    The Real Reason Behind China’s “Zero-COVID” Policy

    Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

    Most of the Western world is no longer in lockdown, some vaccine mandates are being loosened, mask wearers are distinctly the minority everywhere you look.

    For now at least, and for want of a better phrase, we have largely “gone back to normal”…except, you know, now with a totally broken economy, more centralised financial power, dozens of alarming precedents set up for future deployment and millions upon millions of people injected with poison under false pretences.

    But on the lockdown front at least, we’re normal…mostly.

    Lockdowns are quickly becoming one of those embarrassing things that were only ever supported by other people, like wearing flares or voting for Thatcher. Politicians are feverishly passing the buck back and forth, claiming to have never wanted lockdowns in the firstplace.

    …but not in China.

    As the rest of the world “lives with Covid”, people in Chinese cities are still subject to dystopian levels of control and surveillance. Up to and including being welded inside their own homes.

    Why?

    Well, we can certainly rule out a few mainstream “explanations”:

    • We know it’s not because Covid is a real disease or uniquely dangerous in any way whatsoever. The data has spoken on that.

    • We know it’s not because lockdowns work to protect the health of the public or prevent disease outbreaks. The data has spoken on that too.

    • We know it’s not because the Chinese government holds the lives of their citizens as more precious than their Western counterparts.

    • And we know it’s not because they were the victim of some bio-engineered viral attack by the West. That idea was always absurd.

    …so what’s the real explanation?

    Well, there are really several answers to that, all of which come back to our old friend the fake binary.

    1. HEEL VS FACE

    If you accept that the Covid “pandemic” was in fact a global psy-op, carried out by most of the governments of the world working in concert at the behest of supra-national financial, corporate and political interests, then it de facto follows that any apparent differences in approach or attitude between those co-operating governments serve a role in the narrative.

    In short, someone has to play “the bad guy”.

    In this case, China’s brutal “zero-Covid” approach allows the Western governments to claim the “moderate” label simply by virtue of not being so cartoonishly “evil” as China.

    Of course, this works in both directions.

    “The West” can say to their citizens, “look how brutal China’s lockdown was, we would never go that far, because we care about your rights”.
    Meanwhile, China can say “look how lax and disorganized the West’s Covid response was, we would never be that careless, because we care about your health”.

    It is – and here’s that phrase again – a fake binary.

    Each side serves as the good guy in their own narrative, and the bad guy in the other, and in that fashion they actually support each other whilst corralling each other’s dissidents into a controlled “alternative opinion”.

    2. PROMOTING VACCINES

    In The Guardian two days ago, the now-ubiquitous Devi Sridhar actually defended China’s “tough decisions” on Zero Covid, coming at it from the angle that China has to be that harsh because their vaccines don’t work as well as ours do:

    China’s population has a lower vaccination rate, with vaccines that appear less effective, than in most other countries. And many people don’t have any immunity gained from a previous infection either. If China gives up on containment and allows a large wave of infections, the country will take a huge loss of life given current vaccination levels

    The entire column is really just a way of shilling “safe and effective” mRNA vaccines (as well as other agenda we’ll deal with below):

    Rising concerns about the low effectiveness of the non-mRNA Chinese vaccines were also a concern: studies indicated that protection faded fast and was undetectable after six months […] China takes, it needs to improve its vaccines. But to do this it will need access to mRNA technology, and this has been stuck at an impasse. Moderna has refused to transfer its technology to Chinese firms for manufacturing, instead eager to sell directly to a large market. China has instead worked to develop a homegrown mRNA vaccine but this has caused delays in rollout […] China need to get mRNA vaccines to the biggest priority groups quickly

    Again, the twin-sided narrative.

    The West says, “see, we don’t need these brutal lockdowns, because we’ve got magical vaccines”, with the inevitable unspoken corollary of this being “we’ll need to go into lockdowns if you don’t get vaccinated enough” .

    Meanwhile, China gets to lay the blame for their own lockdowns on Western selfishness, “the only reason we have these lockdowns is the mean selfish Western companies won’t share their technology”. This neatly turns ALL pro-Chinese voices in Western alternate media voices into pro-vaccine voices too.

    3. FEEDS THE LIE THAT “LOCKDOWNS WORK”

    Lockdowns do not work to halt the spread of diseases and, before 2020, were never suggested or used in that manner.

    Then, in the spring of 2020, almost every world government seemingly simultaneously took the unprecedented decision to go into lockdown to fight Covid. To justify this the mainstream narrative was in need of some evidence lockdowns work.

    Enter China.

    Over and over and over again you will read apparent “condemnation” of China’s lockdowns alongside the qualification of their supposedly low Covid death numbers.

    In mainstream sources, the clear implication is left unspoken, but prominent alternative voices are happy to say it out loud: “These lockdowns may appear unethical, but they saved millions of lives.”

    Since ALL Covid “cases” are entirely the product of PCR testing programs, and ALL “Covid deaths” are subject to ludicrously tortured definitions, we can conclude China’s Covid statistics are a contrivance designed to sell the idea that lockdowns actually work.

    More than just lockdowns, an undercurrent of the pandemic narrative has been a softening of the public attitude to authoritarian governence in general, usually through compliments to China.

    As early as March 2020 we had “experts” on Channel 4 praising China’s approach, we had Neil Ferguson lamenting the UK government didn’t have the power to follow China’s gameplan, we had western news outlets claiming China had “triumphed” over Covid.

    The message was clear, and not at all subtle: “Man, obviously having no regard for individual rights is bad, but that approach really does seem to work, doesn’t it? Clearly, we would never do that, but you can’t deny it’s effective, can you?”

    That messaging still carries on today, and it has nothing to do with China per se, and everything to do with the slow-burn legitimisation of tyranny by virtue of the ends justifying the means.

    CONCLUSION

    To sum up, China’s “zero covid” approach forms a vital piece of the overall pandemic narrative, working in conjunction with Western governments as a deliberately stark contrast:

    1. It promotes the idea that vaccines work and helped prevent further lockdowns here.

    2. It shines a flattering light on Western governments, who appear less draconian by comparison.

    3. It serves as an argument for the effectiveness of lockdowns and other authoritarian measures.

    Perhaps most importantly, the supposed difference works to corral and control public debate.

    Traditionally leftwing critics of Western capitalism are forced to defend vaccines and lockdowns by their ideological loyalty to China.

    Conversely, right-wingers have China’s “socialist” practices to point their fingers at, whilst praising Western capitalist pharmaceutical innovation for saving us from the need for tighter lockdowns.

    Each side is controlled by their ideology, not realising their loyalties are being used to position them inside the permissible spectrum of opinion.

    All the while, both sides claim the virus is real and dangerous, both sides use the same PCR tests and both sides shill vaccines made by the same companies. The superficial “differences” serve only to sell their many points of agreement.

    In other words, the divide over Covid tactics is as real as the fight over Ukraine. It all serves the same purpose, promoting the great reset and the global technocratic government. A system neither communist nor capitalist, but absorbing the worst vices of whilst purging the virtues.

    Zero Covid is just China working as the other side of the scissors.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 23:55

  • Texting Is Alive And Well At 30
    Texting Is Alive And Well At 30

    30 years ago, on December 3, 1992, the English software engineer Neil Papworth used his computer to send a message to Vodafone director Richard Jarvis. The message simply read “Merry Christmas” but it became known as the first SMS message ever sent, because Jarvis received the slightly premature Christmas greetings on his clunky Orbitel 901 cell phone. He never replied.

    As Statista’s Martin Armstroing notes, it took a while for text messages to really take off, but in the early 2000s texting really hit the mainstream and became a very lucrative side business for mobile carriers around the world.

    At the time, operators typically charged a fee of $0.10 to $0.20 per SMS, which, considering the 160 character limit, quickly piled up for more chatty users.

    As Armstrong shows in the chart below, text messaging (including MMS) in the United States peaked in 2011, when U.S. cell phone users sent a total of 2.4 trillion messages, up from 162 billion five years earlier. Over the proceeding few years however, the popularity of text messages, at least in the form of SMS, began to wane.

    Infographic: Texting Is Alive and Well at 30 | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    These days, smartphone users mainly text each other using free SMS alternatives such as iMessage or WhatsApp.

    That said, the good old-fashioned SMS is still clinging on to its relevance, with somewhat of a reprisal in recent years in the U.S. and a solid 2 trillion sent last year.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 23:35

  • The "Crazy, Right-Wing Shooter" Myth
    The “Crazy, Right-Wing Shooter” Myth

    Authored by John Lott Jr via RealClearPolitics.com,

    If you only read the New York Times editorials, you’d believe that political violence in America is a “right-wing” problem. The Times has been warning of violence from the right for years, but on Nov. 19 and 26, they wrote two long editorials making these claims. The violence stems from the lies “enthusiastically spread” by Republican politicians. Democrats’ only complicity was their $53 million in spending on “far-right fringe candidates in the primaries.” The fringe candidates, it was hoped, would be easier to beat in the general election. 

    Both editorials mention the mass murderer in Buffalo, New York, as a political right-winger. But they have been doing that all year. In May, the Times claimed he was of the right because he was racist and listened to a video on a “site known for hosting right-wing extremism.” 

    The headline in the Times announced:

    “Replacement theory, espoused by the suspect in the Buffalo massacre, has been embraced by some right-wing politicians and commentators.”

    You wouldn’t know it from reading the Times, but the Buffalo killer was yet another mass murderer motivated by environmentalism. 

    In his manifesto, the Buffalo mass murderer self-identifies as an “eco-fascist national socialist” and a member of the “mild-moderate authoritarian left.” He expresses concern that minority immigrants have too many children and will damage the environment. “The invaders are the ones overpopulating the world,” he writes. “Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by doing so save the environment.”

    The murderer argues that capitalists are destroying the environment, and are at the root of much of the problem.

    “The trade of goods is to be discouraged at all costs,” he insists.

    Overpopulation and the environment are hardly signature conservative issues.

    It’s certainly not something you’ll hear Donald Trump talk about at his rallies. And while some Republicans believe in limiting international trade, it’s certainly not for environmental reasons.

    The Buffalo murderer’s manifesto has word-for-word similarities to those of the mass shooters in 2019 at a New Zealand mosque and at an El Paso Walmart. 

    But the New York Times has consistently referred to the New Zealand mosque attacker as “far-right,” and tried to link the murderer to President Donald Trump’s supposedly racist language. The Times describes the El Paso murderer as having “echoed the incendiary words of conservative media stars” who have spoken out against illegal immigration.

    But conservatives don’t usually declare that “conservatism is dead” and that “global capitalist markets are the enemy of racial autonomists.” Nor do they call themselves “eco-fascist” and profess that, “The nation with the closest political and social values to my own is the People’s Republic of China.”

    The El Paso murderer had the same sentiments.

    “The decimation of the environment is creating a massive burden for future generations … The next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can become more sustainable.”

    All three of these deranged killers made minorities their principal target. But they’ve done so out of a crazy environmentalist determination to reduce the human population by whatever means necessary. 

    The news media and politicians who constantly warn about the world’s imminent end can’t bring themselves to acknowledge the environmentalist connection, even though climate activists time and again agree that overpopulation is part of the problem. “It does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question: Is it okay to still have children?” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in 2019. She also warned that the “‘world will end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.”

    Similarly, President Biden fans the flames of alarmism when he claims that “climate change poses an existential threat to our lives … this is code red.”

    Of the 82 mass public shootings from January 1998 to May 2021, 9% have known or alleged ties to white supremacists, neo-Nazis, or anti-immigrant views.

    But many of those, such as the Buffalo murderer, are environmentalist authoritarians.

    Another 9% of mass public shootings are carried out by people of middle eastern origin, despite them making up only 0.4% of the US population. Whites and Hispanics are underrepresented as a share of the population. Blacks, Asians, and American Indians commit these attacks at a slightly higher rate than their share of the population.

    Seventy-one percent of mass public shooters have no identifiable political views.

    Even violence against pro-life people and organizations this year has been over 22 times more frequent that violence against pro-choice groups.

    The New York Times, like the Washington Post and other news outlets, is intent on construing any racist as a conservative, right-winger. But they aren’t. And if there’s any ideological cause that really is sparking violence, it’s environmental extremism.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 23:15

  • Walmart CEO Warns Retail Thefts Will Lead To Price Hikes, Store Closures
    Walmart CEO Warns Retail Thefts Will Lead To Price Hikes, Store Closures

    Walmart CEO Doug McMillon told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that the massive wave of retail thefts at company stores will lead to higher prices or closed stores if the problem persists. 

    “Theft is an issue. It’s higher than what it has historically been,” McMillon told Squawk Box’s hosts. 

    “We’ve got safety measures, security measures that we’ve put in place by store location. I think local law enforcement being staffed and being a good partner is part of that equation, and that’s normally how we approach it,” he continued.

    Squawk Box’s Rebecca Quick then pointed out how certain cities have changed shoplifting rules, making it harder for police to prosecute criminals. She asked McMillon: “Does that matter?” 

    He responded: “If that’s not corrected over time, prices will be higher, and/or stores will close.” 

    Besides Walmart, Target complained last month about an organized retail crime wave, resulting in a massive hit on profits this year. The retailer employed theft-deterrent merchandising strategies, but that wasn’t enough to stop criminals from running off with everything on the shelves. 

    Target’s latest earnings report revealed gross profit margins were reduced by $400 million this year due to shrinking, the industry’s term for theft and product loss.

    Target CFO Michael Fiddelke said, “We know we’re not alone across retail in seeing a trend [crime wave] that I think has gotten increasingly worse over the last 12 to 18 months.” 

    Organized retail crime has exploded under the Biden administration while progressive-run cities implement social justice reform. Such policies have backfired and fueled a nationwide crime wave. 

    Walmart and Target blame thefts on organized crime gangs. Stores have deployed on/off duty police and shatterproof glass cabinets to guard high-value items. 

    US retailers have demanded Congress do something. The US Chamber of Commerce has described the looting as a “national crisis.”  

    Walmart could follow Walgreens Pharmacy’s playbook and begin closing stores in Democrat-controlled cities to mitigate theft. 

    Here’s the full interview:

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 22:55

  • Democrat Warnock Beats Walker To Win Georgia Senate Runoff
    Democrat Warnock Beats Walker To Win Georgia Senate Runoff

    Update (2245ET): With 95% of votes counted, a number of mainstream media outlets have called the Georgia Senate Runoff election for incumbent Democrat Raphael Warnock.

    Well over 1 million people went to the polls Tuesday. That followed record-breaking early voting in the runoff, in which about 1.85 million in-person and mail-in votes had been tallied by Dec. 2, the last day of early voting.

    Mr. Warnock’s victory means that Democrats will control the Senate 51-49 starting in January, slightly increasing their hold on the chamber they have controlled since early 2021, when Mr. Warnock was first elected, along with his Georgia Democratic colleague Sen. Jon Ossoff.

    The win means Democrats will have control of Senate committees outright and will no longer have to adhere to a power-sharing agreement with the GOP.

    *  *  *

    Georgia voters will head to the polls on Tuesday to settle the final Senate contest in the country between Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock and football legend Herschel Walker, following a four-week runoff that has attracted a flood of outside spending.

    The outcome of Tuesday’s vote will determine whether Democrats will have a 51-49 Senate majority, or will maintain the 50-50 control of the chamber which often resulted in the party kowtowing to centrist Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ).

    Atlanta voters were greeted Tuesday morning with 40-degree weather with rain.

    The contest between Walker and Warnock pits the state’s first black senator and senior minister against Walker, who has the support of former President Donald Trump. If Warnock wins, it would solidify Georgia’s status as a battleground state heading into the 2024 election, AP reports. If Walker wins, it would reflect limited Democratic gains in the state – particularly in light of Republicans marking wide-ranging victories across the state in last month’s midterm elections.

    In that election, Warnock led Walker by about 37,000 votes out of almost 4 million cast but fell shy of a majority, triggering the second round of voting. About 1.9 million votes already have been cast by mail and during early voting, an advantage for Democrats whose voters more commonly cast ballots this way. Republicans typically fare better on voting done on Election Day, with the margins determining the winner.

    Last month, Walker, 60, ran more than 200,000 votes behind Republican Gov. Brian Kemp after a campaign dogged by intense scrutiny of his past, meandering campaign speeches and a bevy of damaging allegations, including claims that he paid for two former girlfriends’ abortions — accusations that Walker has denied. -AP

    On Monday Walker campaigned with his wife, Julie, where he thanked supporters and backed off the attacks on Warnock.

    “I love y’all, and we’re gonna win this election,” he told supporters at a winery in Ellijay, adding “I love winning championships.”

    As far as campaign spending, Warnock’s has spent around $170 million vs. Walker’s $60 million or so, according to federal disclosures. Their respective party committees have spent more, according to the report.

    During the campaign Warnock attacked Walker’s rocky past – claiming the ex-NFL star paid for two former girlfriends abortions, while Walker was forced to admit during the campaign that he fathered three children out of wedlock whom he had never publicly acknowledged.

    Walker, a multi-millionaire and successful businessman, has campaigned on his business achievements and philanthropic activities – though he was caught exaggerating, saying he employed hundreds of people and grossed tens of millions of dollars in sales, when in fact he employed eight people and had around $1.5 million in average annual sales.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 22:48

  • Biden's Climate Change War Picks Up Steam In More Ways Than One
    Biden’s Climate Change War Picks Up Steam In More Ways Than One

    By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

    US allies are steaming mad at Biden for his climate change war. Let’s discuss who fired the first shot and who is escalating the war.

    The Wall Street Journal comments Biden Starts a Climate Trade War

    Wasn’t President Biden going to end Donald Trump’s destructive trade wars against allies? Apparently not. His “super aggressive” climate protectionism—to quote French President Emmanuel Macron—is infuriating U.S. friends and may set off a subsidy and tariff war.

    U.S. allies are upset about the Inflation Reduction Act’s generous subsidies for domestically manufactured green technologies. In his trip to Washington last week, Mr. Macron said the U.S. subsidies may “perhaps fix your issue but you will increase my problem.” They’re really a problem for everybody.

    The dispute involves tax credits for electric-vehicle and battery production. The IRA’s $7,500 consumer tax credit are restricted to EVs assembled in North America. Most foreign auto makers make EVs abroad and export them because the global and U.S. markets are still small.

    The law also offers generous tax credits for domestic EV battery production, including a $35 per kilowatt-hour credit for U.S.-made battery cells, plus $10 per kilowatt-hour for domestically produced modules. These credits are expected to shave the cost of producing an EV battery by 30% to 40% and reportedly prompted Tesla to reconsider plans to make battery cells in Germany.

    A Toyota spokesman in Canada spoke the truth: “While the IRA is being presented in many quarters as key legislation to fight climate change, in reality it is an act of trade protectionism.” The Canadian Steel Producers Association has warned that U.S. steel producers would also indirectly benefit from the climate subsidies without incurring carbon costs.

    WTO Subsidy Violations 

    Under WTO rules, Biden is offering illegal subsidies.  The EU’s game is illegal tariffs. 

    EU Tries to Convince Trading Partners Its Carbon Tax is Not a Tax

    Please recall my July 6 post EU Tries to Convince Trading Partners Its Carbon Tax is Not a Tax

    The EU wants to stop “carbon leakage”. Supposedly a carbon tax will do the trick.

    In order to keep profits up in the EU, the EU resorted to CBAM, a carbon border adjustment mechanism designed to cut emissions by creating financial incentives for greener production and by discouraging “carbon leakage.” 

    The US way of doing business was to hand out subsidies to favored union businesses, especially GM. 

    Since direct handouts are more efficient at graft than tariffs, the EU is now steaming mad. 

    Inflationary Practices

    Trump started trade wars with most of the world. Biden has escalated them. 

    Both the EU’s CBAM initiative and Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act are inflationary. They raise prices on the end consumer by shutting out foreign competition. 

    De-carbonization and deglobalization are both very inflationary. The Fed will have to kill a lot of demand to make up for competing idiotic trade and energy policies. 

    For more on the IRA please see my November 30 post The EU is Very Worried About Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 22:35

  • US Army Selects Bell's V-280 To Replace Black Hawk Helicopters
    US Army Selects Bell’s V-280 To Replace Black Hawk Helicopters

    Late Monday evening, the US Army awarded Textron Inc’s Bell unit with the contract to build the next-generation helicopter, ending years of fierce competition between Lockheed Martin Corp.-Boeing Co. to replace the aging fleet of Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks by 2030. 

    The Army’s “Future Vertical Lift” award went to Bell’s V-280 Valor tiltrotor aircraft, similar to the V-22 Osprey. The new aircraft can take off and land vertically like a helicopter but rotate massive props to fly like a fixed-wing aircraft at impressive speeds. 

    “The V-280’s unmatched combination of proven tiltrotor technology coupled with innovative digital engineering and an open architecture offers the Army outstanding operational versatility for its vertical lift fleet,” Bell said in a statement.

    “We are honored that the US Army has selected the Bell V-280 Valor as its next-generation assault aircraft.

    “We intend to honor that trust by building a truly remarkable and transformational weapon system to meet the Army’s mission requirements. We are excited to play an important role in the future of Army Aviation,” Scott C. Donnelly, Textron’s chairman and chief executive officer, said in a statement. 

    Shares of Textron jumped significantly on the news, back at their highest since April…

    Textron didn’t release the terms of the contract. However, Bloomberg noted the contract was worth up to $1.3 billion, with development expected to take approximately 19 months. 

    The Army said V-280 will “provide transformational increases in speed, range, payload, and endurance to replace a portion of the Army’s current assault and utility aircraft fleet.”

    Douglas Bush, Army assistant secretary for acquisition, told reporters at the Pentagon Monday that the selection of the V-280 “is our chance to move to the next step in this vital program.” Army officials said if all contract options were exercised, it could rise to $7 billion, including the first initial low-rate production of the next-generation helicopter. 

    The Army has been testing and evaluating another aircraft besides the V-280: A coaxial lift compound rotor helicopter called Defiant X, built by the Lockheed-Boeing team.

    Lockheed-Boeing group released a statement that the fight to win the contract wasn’t over: 

    “We remain confident Defiant X is the transformational aircraft the US Army requires to accomplish its complex missions today and well into the future,” the group said. “We will evaluate our next steps after reviewing feedback from the Army.”

    Rapid modernization efforts are underway for the US military. Last Friday, the Air Force unveiled the next-generation bomber called the B-21 Raider. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 22:15

  • FTX Crypto Fraudsters Targeted Poor Black Neighborhoods In PR-Lobbying Effort
    FTX Crypto Fraudsters Targeted Poor Black Neighborhoods In PR-Lobbying Effort

    Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Substack,

    Father of FTX CEO, Stanford Professor Joseph Bankman, oversaw intertwined philanthropic and regulatory efforts…

    In the spring of 2022, Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, made Chicago its U.S. headquarters, drawing the applause of the city’s mayor.

    “This is a mechanism and a tool to bring traditionally underrepresented and ignored populations into the world of crypto so they can take ownership and control of their own financial destiny,” said Mayor Lori Lightfoot at the ribbon-cutting ceremony at the opulent, 9,000 square foot FTX headquarters in May.

    “I think the sky is the limit.”

    The reason FTX.US chose Chicago was, in part, to use the city to pilot a cash giveaway program aimed at poor African American residents.

    FTX was essentially contributing to two ”guaranteed basic income” programs, one run by a nonprofit called Equity And Transformation (EAT), and the other by the city.

    Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot cuts the balloon at FTX headquarters in Chicago. Next to her is Richard Wallace, founder of the Equity and Transformation (EAT) nonprofit which aimed to give cash to poor people of color.

    Ostensibly a charitable exercise, the program, which FTX also ran in Florida, expanded the market for FTX’s app, and appears to have been a crucial part of a public relations and lobbying effort aimed at winning the support of Democrats for FTX’s agenda to effectively regulate itself.  

    Bankman-Fried was the second largest donor to both President Joe Biden in 2020 and to Democrats in 2022, after George Soros.

    There is abundant evidence that Bankamn-Fried’s donations bought influence.

    After Bankman-Fried testified in May to a Congressional committee chaired by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), she blew him a kiss.

    The episode is a cautionary tale about how powerful financial interests use progressive social justice ideology to advance their business interests at the expense of the communities they claim to be helping. 

    “We, like most nonprofits, are shocked by this because they presented this ‘effective altruism’ model to everyone and seemed to push for racial equity,” said Richard Wallace, the co-founder and executive director of EAT, one of the cash-giveaway initiatives.

    The whole strategy was overseen by Bankman-Fried’s father, Joseph Bankman, a Stanford Law professor.

    I am the first to report that Bankman had been working for FTX from the very beginning.

     “From the start [of FTX], whenever I was useful, I lent a hand,” said Bankman.

    Bankman went on to describe the cash giveaway scheme.

    “Like all FTX app users,” he explained, “you get a bank account with your app, if you want it. So in Chicago, for example, we’re working with justice-impacted families. A lot of poor families, especially people of color, have had family members spend time in prison. That’s what we mean by ‘justice-impacted.’ Almost none of these people have bank accounts.”

    The connections between the Bankman-Fried family and Democrats ran deep…

    Subscribers can read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 21:55

  • FBI Investigates Gun Attack On North Carolina Power Grid
    FBI Investigates Gun Attack On North Carolina Power Grid

    The FBI joined state and local law enforcement officials to investigate deliberate attacks on two power substations in North Carolina.

    Shelley Lynch, a spokesperson for the FBI field office in Charlotte, told The Washington Post that agents are on the ground at the substations in Moore County. They’re investigating the “willful damage” of power systems brought down by gunfire on Saturday night. She declined to provide further details.

    Duke Energy personnel inspect power systems damaged by bullets. 

    About 36,000 customers of Duke Energy in southeastern North Carolina were without power early Tuesday morning. Officials estimate service repairs could take several days to complete. 

    A state of emergency was declared over the weekend, with a countywide curfew from 9 pm to 5 am. Schools will remain closed for a second day. 

    North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper told reporters in a news briefing on Monday, “this kind of attack raises a whole new level of threat.” He added safeguarding critical infrastructure must be a “top priority.”

    “The person, or persons, who did this knew exactly what they were doing … not sure why they targeted Moore County,” Sheriff Ronnie Fields said at a news conference on Sunday. 

    Fields said the FBI was working with local authorities to determine who was responsible, adding someone rode up and “opened fire on the substation, the same thing with the other one.” There was no word on the type of weapon or caliber used in the incident. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 21:35

  • Army Plans 'Dramatic' Hike In Ammo Production
    Army Plans ‘Dramatic’ Hike In Ammo Production

    Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

    The US Army is planning a “dramatic” increase in the production of 155mm artillery rounds as the US has sent a staggering amount of ammunition to Ukraine over the past eight months.

    According to a Pentagon fact sheet released at the end of November, the US has sent Ukraine 924,000 155mm artillery rounds to Ukraine since February 24. The US currently makes 14,000 155mm rounds each month, but the Army is set to ramp that up.

    US Army image

    “Funding is already in place, contracts are underway to basically triple 155mm production,” Doug Bush, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, told Defense News. “There’s funding on the Hill, in the supplemental, to more than double that again. That would take a period of years.”

    Bush said that the US wants to increase the amount of ammunition it has to higher than the levels it had before Russia invaded Ukraine. “We want to be able to build our stocks not just where we started the war, but higher. We’re posturing for a pretty ― over a period of three years ― a dramatic increase in conventional artillery ammunition production,” Bush said.

    Bush said that the plan will use aid that has already been authorized for Ukraine but will require new funding that’s part of the $37.7 billion aid package the White House has asked Congress to approve.

    Congress is also working to include an amendment to the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act that would give the Pentagon wartime purchasing power to accelerate arms production. Among other things, the authority would allow the Pentagon to offer multi-year contracts for purchases that are typically reserved for larger equipment, such as warplanes and naval vessels.

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

    According to Defense News, the Army has awarded contracts to three private companies to help in the production of 155mm artillery, including General Dynamics, American Ordnance, and IMT Defense.

    The US policy of shipping tens of billions of dollars worth of weapons to Ukraine, led by former Raytheon board member Lloyd Austin, has been a boon for defense contractors. Last week, Raytheon was awarded a $1.2 billion contract to produce air defense systems for Ukraine.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 21:15

  • Polestar Charges $17.50 Per Horsepower For Boost Package As Microtransactions Invade Car Industry
    Polestar Charges $17.50 Per Horsepower For Boost Package As Microtransactions Invade Car Industry

    We’ve come across what could be another automotive company intentionally detuning engines so it can offer performance packages to customers via an over-the-air update. 

    Swedish EV car company Polestar, a subsidiary of Volvo and Geely, is charging customers $17.50 per horsepower in an over-the-air software update for the long-range, dual-motor variant of the 2, reported Autoblog. 

    The upgrade adds 68 horsepower and 15 pound-feet of torque that boosts the 2’s dual-motor powertrain from 408hp and 487 lb-ft of torque to 476hp and 502 lb-ft. It will cost a one-time fee of $1,195.

    What is intriguing about Polestar’s performance boost package blocked behind a paywall is that the power is already there and may suggest the company is intentionally detuning the vehicles to milk the customer for every last cent. 

    Polestar isn’t the only one doing this. Just weeks ago, Mercedes-Benz unveiled the “Acceleration Increase” package for its EV Mercedes-EQ models, which costs $1,200 for a yearly subscription and will boost horsepower. 

    And it gets worse. BMW recently sparked social media uproar by charging an $18 monthly subscription in some countries for owners to use heated seats already installed in the vehicle. 

    So far, Polestar, Mercedes, and BMW have embraced microtransactions, which force customers to make in-car purchases to enhance or unlock features. 

     

     

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 20:55

  • Can A Deeply Unserious America Fix Its Economy?
    Can A Deeply Unserious America Fix Its Economy?

    Authored by Jeff Deist via The Mises Institute,

    Does America simply lack the political will to face economic reality?

    In the teeth of the Depression, Treasury secretary Andrew Mellon famously told President Herbert Hoover to “liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate farmers, liquidate real estate”—in other words, to resist bailing out any industry through state intervention. This was a tough sell even in those days, and of course Hoover succumbed to politics and took the opposite approach, greatly and needlessly damaging the US economy for decades to come.

    Less often quoted are Mellon’s follow-up words to Hoover: Liquidation would “purge the rottenness out of the system,” so “people will work harder” and “live a more moral life.”

    Mellon, having lived most of his life in an America without a central bank, understood economic recessions as necessary cures rather than ills to be avoided. But he also understood the human price that would be paid in the aftermath of a period of phony economic prosperity. Only hard work and personal sacrifice, person by person and town by town, could get America out of its economic mess. Fiscal and monetary policy would provide no free lunch, as millions of Americans learned the hard way in the 1930s.

    Fast-forward to 2022, and it’s hard to imagine Janet Yellen calling for liquidation or telling Americans to improve their moral fiber. Nobody votes for austerity or personal responsibility, and any politician or bureaucrat or central banker who even suggests it is doomed today.

    Yet this mythology of austerity persists, that a stingy federal Treasury and reticent central bank don’t intervene enough in economic crises. Consider this howler from Paul Krugman back in 2011, apparently delivered with a straight face: “One thing is clear: Mellon-style liquidationism is now the official doctrine of the G.O.P.” Keep in mind he wrote this several years into the most “extraordinary” monetary intervention in the history of the world—one which ultimately saw the US Fed purchase several trillions’ worth of Treasury debt from the “market”! Yet for Krugman, it is never enough.

    As the bruising midterm elections recently demonstrated, America is a deeply unserious country. A serious political discussion at the federal level would center on existential structural problems of war and peace, debt and the dollar, and entitlements. But these issues can be addressed only by real austerity and real pain. So instead, we distract and divert ourselves worrying about whether Donald Trump should be allowed on Twitter. We argue over flu viruses, guns, transgenderism, climate, and abortion (none of which the federal government has the slightest jurisdiction over) rather than the material standard of living we will leave our grandchildren.

    This is possible only because millions of Americans, maybe a majority, are simply economics deniers. They either don’t believe economic laws exist or think economics can be overcome by legislation, regulation, or central bank actions. And there are plenty of deniers among the ranks of professional economists! The profession does itself no favors when it cheerleads for politics, providing an intellectual veneer for interventionism. Human nature makes us want to believe untrue things, but economics should help disabuse Americans of political fantasies.

    Let’s face it: the US is not a free-market economy because we don’t much believe in markets, despite our lip service. Most Americans, and virtually all political, media, academic, corporate, and banking elites, believe economic intervention (fiscal and monetary stimulus) form the basis of our economy—not production and saving.

    So, what would a serious America do to correct our disastrous economic path? This may seem like an academic or rhetorical question, but it’s worth laying out the actual steps necessary to build a real economy rather than a fake one dependent on monetary or fiscal interventionism. As Dr. Mark Thornton recently explained, these steps may be conceptually simple even as they are wildly beyond political imagination today:

    • a wholesale adoption of laissez-faire economic doctrine by national politicians;

    • immediate deep tax and regulatory reductions;

    • immediate sharp reductions in government spending at every level (leaving federal spending well below federal revenue);

    • rigorous entitlement cuts, using some combination of means testing and raising age eligibility for both Social Security and Medicare;

    • rigorous defense spending cuts of at least 50 percent, combined with a radically reduced US military footprint overseas;

    • cessation of new debt issuance by the US Treasury;

    • cessation of active monetary “policy” by the Federal Reserve Bank, meaning no intervention with respect to the money supply, interest rates, or credit and debt markets (including US Treasurys);

    • a radical reduction in the Fed’s balance sheet by letting existing Treasurys mature and roll off;

    • an entirely hands-off approach allowing the US dollar to float freely relative to other currencies and commodities;

    • an express policy against bailouts or subsidies of any kind to any industry or company, regardless of the severity of an economic downturn;

    • allowing troubled industries or companies, no matter how big, to fail—through bankruptcy and asset sales; investor losses; and firing boards, management, and employees when restructuring is possible;

    • actively encouraging business and individuals to save (through market/floating interest rates);

    • elimination of any price ceilings or floors on prices, wages, and profits;

    • elimination of any unemployment subsidies to individuals, along with abolition of minimum wage laws; and finally,

    • the immediate sale of federal land and other assets to reduce debt service on the $31 trillion in Treasury obligations and to restore worldwide confidence in the US economy.

    This, ladies and gentlemen, is what a real program of austerity looks like. That these actions are politically unfeasible—complete nonstarters—shows how politics dominates economics in America. The profession charged with explaining how no free lunch is possible instead mostly operates as a handmaiden to the state and its bosses. But politics won’t fix this, and we won’t vote our way out of trouble.

    The best path forward is at the state and local levels, attempting to build regional economies with less fragility in the face of the warring, borrowing, spending, and devaluing mania of Uncle Sam.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 20:35

  • Hurricane In December? 50% Formation Odds In Atlantic As Storm Churns
    Hurricane In December? 50% Formation Odds In Atlantic As Storm Churns

    Nearly one week after the 2022 Atlantic hurricane season ended, an incredibly rare tropical disturbance formed over the central subtropical Atlantic.

    The National Hurricane Center released a tropical weather outlook on Tuesday, explaining the storm has a 50% chance of becoming the 15th named storm of the season over the next two 2-5 days. 

    “Environmental conditions appear marginally conducive for development and a subtropical or tropical storm could form in the next couple of days,” NHC said. However, it added:

    “By Thursday night or Friday, the low will move northeastward over cooler waters and interact with a mid-latitude trough, limiting subtropical or tropical development of the system.”

    Christianne Pearce, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service’s Tampa Bay office, told Tampa Bay Times the storm doesn’t threaten Florida or the US as it moves northeast into even cooler waters. 

    “The probability of having a storm this late in the season is very low because the waters out there are a lot cooler.

    “We just have different atmospheric phenomenon happening that kind of put a damper on those things developing,” Pearce said.

    The Atlantic hurricane season begins on June 1 and concludes on Nov. 30. Tropical storms and hurricanes forming in December are rare. According to Fox 35 Orlando, data between 1851 to 2017 showed that 2% of tropical storms formed outside “off months” (December to May) of the season. 

    Keep an eye on the Atlantic’s tropical region over the next few days. If the storm does form, it will be named “Owen.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 20:15

  • Canada To Increase Warship Presence In Taiwan Strait: Foreign Affairs Minister
    Canada To Increase Warship Presence In Taiwan Strait: Foreign Affairs Minister

    Authored by Peter Wilson via The Epoch Times,

    Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly says Canada is planning to increase its number of warships in the Taiwan Strait as a message to China that the waters are not its national property.

    “We will continue to enforce the international rules-based order when it comes to the Taiwan Strait. And that’s why also we had a frigate going through the Taiwan Strait this summer, along with the Americans, [and] we’re looking to have more frigates going through it,” Joly told the Financial Times.

    “We need to make sure that the question of the Taiwan Strait is clear and that it remains an international strait.”

    The Taiwan Strait is a stretch of international waters less than 200 kilometres wide separating Taiwan from mainland China. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin had said at a regular news briefing in Beijing on June 13: “There is no such thing as international waters in international maritime law. … Relevant countries claim that the Taiwan Strait is in international waters with the aim to manipulate the Taiwan question and threaten China’s sovereignty.”

    Foreign Affairs Minister Joly’s comments come less than two weeks after she unveiled Canada’s new Indo-Pacific Strategy, during the announcement of which the Foreign Affairs Minister referred to China as an “increasingly disruptive” global power.

    The new strategy also includes a pledge by the federal government to spend $2.2. billion on investments in the region over the next five years.

    Joly said Canada will be “committing to new military assets” in the Indo-Pacific, and later told reporters in Bucharest, Romania, where she is attending a NATO foreign affairs ministers’ meeting, that Canada must “play a role in the security” of the Indo-Pacific.

    “We need to invest in deterrence because we believe … it is the best way to, at the end of the day, respect international norms,” she said.

    More Military

    Before Joly announced the strategy, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said the Canadian Armed Forces will also be increasing its presence in the Indo-Pacific region, with additional investments by the federal government to support them.

    “We’ll be making new investments to enhance the Canadian Armed Forces engagement in the region,” Trudeau told reporters in Bangkok, Thailand, on Nov. 18. “This will support our allies, Japan and South Korea, and all of us in the Pacific.”

    Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy also says China continues to disregard “international norms” as a means toward becoming the region’s “leading power.”

    “China’s assertive pursuit of its economic and security interests, advancement of unilateral claims, foreign interference and increasingly coercive treatment of other countries and economies have significant implications in the region, in Canada and around the world,” the strategy reads.

    Joly previously said Canada will “challenge China when we ought to, and we will cooperate with China when we must” when speaking to reporters in Toronto, on Nov. 9.

    “Its sheer size and influence makes cooperation necessary to address the world’s existential pressures,” she said.

    However, while recently speaking to reporters in Bucharest, Joly also reacted to a report from the Pentagon released several days ago saying China is on pace to almost quadruple its number of nuclear warheads by 2035.

    Joly said Canada is “taking note definitely” of China’s increasing nuclear capacity and said Canada will “make sure we have better intelligence capacity across the region” in the near future.

    “We are a Pacific nation, we need to make sure that we play a bigger role,” she said, according to the Financial Post.

    “Since this part of the world is so important for us, we need to be a reliable partner because for too long we weren’t.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 19:55

  • Musk's Neuralink Suddenly Under Investigation Over Animal Testing
    Musk’s Neuralink Suddenly Under Investigation Over Animal Testing

    Knives are out for Elon Musk, after the richest man in the world bought Twitter, began reinstating the accounts of ‘political prisoners’ banned by wokelings for unpopular speech, and then began releasing evidence of 2020 election interference via the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story.

    Remember, the FBI and other official bodies went around warning Facebook and Twitter about a Russian hacking campaign right before the Hunter laptop story hit, and said companies appear to have gladly complied with said ‘tap on the shoulder.’

    So now, Musk’s Neuralink – a medical device company, is now under federal investigation for potential animal-welfare violations (Anthony Fauci’s ‘cruel’ puppy experiments are just fine, by the by), according to information leaked to Reuters from somewhere.

    Neuralink is developing a brain implant in the hopes of helping paralyzed people walk again (and probably put your Tesla in valet mode by just thinking about it). According to Reuters, the federal probe was opened months ago, but disclosed just now, for some reason.

    The probe was opened by the US Department of Agriculture’s Inspector General at the request of a federal prosecutor, who alleges that Neuralink has committed violations of the Animal Welfare Act.

    The investigation has come at a time of growing employee dissent about Neuralink’s animal testing, including complaints that pressure from CEO Musk to accelerate development has resulted in botched experiments, according to a Reuters review of dozens of Neuralink documents and interviews with more than 20 current and former employees. Such failed tests have had to be repeated, increasing the number of animals being tested and killed, the employees say. The company documents include previously unreported messages, audio recordings, emails, presentations and reports. -Reuters

    In total, approximately 1,500 animals have been killed – including over 280 sheep, pigs and monkeys, since 2018 according to records reviewed by Reuters.

    Why were so many animals killed? Because evil Elon demanded results, and fast!

    Through company discussions and documents spanning several years, along with employee interviews, Reuters identified four experiments involving 86 pigs and two monkeys that were marred in recent years by human errors. The mistakes weakened the experiments’ research value and required the tests to be repeated, leading to more animals being killed, three of the current and former staffers said. The three people attributed the mistakes to a lack of preparation by a testing staff working in a pressure-cooker environment. -Reuters

    Fauci’s puppies, meanwhile, had their heads locked in mesh cages with hungry sand flies so that the insects could ‘eat them alive,’ all to test an experimental drug. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 19:35

  • Deglobalization And The End Of Trust-Based Money Set The Stage For National Bitcoin Adoption
    Deglobalization And The End Of Trust-Based Money Set The Stage For National Bitcoin Adoption

    Authored by Ansel Lindner via Bitcoin Magazine.com,

    Breakdowns in global trade and credit call for money that doesn’t depend on trust. Bitcoin is the modern answer for international economics…

    Two forces have dominated the globe economically and politically for the last 75 years: globalization and trust-based money. However, the time for both of these forces has passed, and their waning will bring about a great reset of the global order.

    But this is not the global, Marxist kind of Great Reset promoted by Klaus Schwab and those who attend Davos. This is an emergent, market-driven reset characterized by a multipolar world and a new monetary system.

    GLOBALIZATION IS ENDING

    The first reaction I usually get to my claim that the age of hyper-globalization is ending is flippant disbelief. People have so completely integrated the environment of the dying global order into their economic understanding that they cannot fathom a world where the cost-to-benefit analysis of globalization is different. Even after COVID-19 exposed the fragility of complex supply chains, like when the U.S. very nearly ran out of surgical masks and basic medications or when the world struggled to source semiconductors, people have yet to realize the shift that is happening.

    Is it that hard to imagine that the businessmen who designed such fragile, overcomplicated production processes didn’t properly weigh the risks?

    All that is needed to break globalization is for risk-adjusted costs to change a few percentage points and outweigh the benefits. The pennies saved by outsourcing numerous tasks to numerous jurisdictions will no longer outweigh the possibility of complete collapse of supply chains.

    These concerns about fragile supply chains did not disappear as horrible COVID-19 policies ended. Now, they have shifted to concerns about trade wars and real wars. U.S. trade sanctions against China, the Russian conflict with NATO-proxy Ukraine and subsequent sanctions, the seemingly-erratic U.S. position on Taiwan, the coronation of Xi Jinping and his Marxist revival, the Nord Stream sabotage, the clear split of international consensus in the UN and even the weaponization of these international institutions, and most recently, the Turkish ground offensive versus the Kurds — all these things should be interpreted as a rise in costs.

    Gone is the time when complex supply chains were robust against typical risks. The risks today are much more systemic. Sure, there were skirmishes around the world and disagreements among parliaments, but great powers did not openly threaten one another’s spheres of influence. Risk-adjusted costs and benefits to globalization have radically changed.

    CREDIT DOESN’T LIKE CONFLICT

    Very closely related to deglobalization of supply chains is deglobalization of credit markets. The same factors that affect business peoples’ physical, risk-adjusted costs and benefits are also felt by bankers.

    Banks don’t want to be exposed to the risk of war or sanctions wrecking their borrowers. In the current environment of deglobalization and rising risks to international trade, banks will naturally pull back on lending to those associated activities. Instead, banks will fund safer projects, likely fully-domestic or friend-shoring opportunities. The natural reaction by banks to this risky global environment will be credit contraction.

    The deglobalization of supply chains and credit will be as closely linked on the way down as they were on the way up. It will start slowly, but pick up speed. A feedback loop of rising risk leading to shorter supply chains and less credit creation.

    THE CREDIT-BASED U.S. DOLLAR

    The prevailing form of money in the world is the credit-based U.S. dollar. Every dollar is created through debt, making every dollar someone else’s debt. Money is printed out of thin air in the process of making a loan.

    This is different from pure fiat money. When fiat money is printed, the balance sheet of the printer adds assets alone. However, in a credit-based system, when money is printed in a loan, the printer creates an asset and a liability. The borrower’s balance sheet then has an offsetting liability and asset, respectively. Every dollar (or euro or yen, for that matter) is therefore an asset and a liability, and the loan that created that dollar is both an asset and a liability.

    This system works extremely well if two factors are present. One, highly-productive uses of new credit are available, and two, a relative lack of exogenous shocks to the global economy. Change either of these things and a breakdown is bound to occur.

    This dual nature of credit-based money is at the root of both the dollar’s spectacular rise in the 20th century, and the coming monetary reset. As global trust and supply chains break down, the comingling of assets in banks becomes more risky. Russia found this out the hard way when the West confiscated its reserves of dollars held in banks abroad. How is trust possible in that sort of environment? When credit-based money’s creation is based on trust… Houston, we have a problem.

    BITCOIN’S ROLE IN THE FUTURE

    Luckily, we have experience with a world that doesn’t trust itself — i.e., the entire history of man prior to 1945. Back then, we were on a gold standard for reasons which included all those that bitcoiners are very familiar with (gold scores highly in the characteristics that make good money), but also because it minimized trust between great powers.

    Gold lost its mantle for one reason — and you’ve probably never heard this anywhere before: because the global economic, political and innovation environment post-WWII created an extremely fertile soil for credit. Trust was easy, the major powers were humbled and all joined the new international institutions under the security umbrella of the U.S. The Iron Curtain provided a stark separation between zones of trust economically, but after it fell, there was a period of roughly 20 years where the world sang “kumbaya” because new credit was still extremely productive in the old Soviet block and China.

    Today, we are facing the opposite sort of scenario: Global trust is eroding and credit has exploited all productive low-hanging fruit, forcing us into a period that demands neutral money.

    The world will soon find itself split between regions/alliances of influence. A British bank will trust a U.S. bank, where a Chinese bank will not. To bridge this gap, we need money that everyone can hold and respect.

    GOLD VS. BITCOIN

    Gold would be the first choice here, if not for bitcoin. This is because gold has several drawbacks. First, gold is owned mainly by those groups who are losing trust in one another, namely the governments of the world. Much of the gold is held in the United States. Therefore, gold is unevenly distributed.

    Second, gold’s physical nature, once a positive holding profligate governments in check, is now a weakness because it cannot be transported or assayed nearly as efficiently as bitcoin.

    Lastly, gold is not programmable. Bitcoin is a neutral, decentralized protocol that can be tapped for any number of innovations. The Lightning Network and sidechains are just two examples of how Bitcoin can be programmed to increase its utility.

    As globalization of both trade and credit is breaking down, the economic environment favors a return to a form of money that doesn’t depend on trust between major powers. Bitcoin is the modern answer.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 19:15

  • Josh Hawley Is Imploring White House To Prioritize Arming Taiwan Over Ukraine
    Josh Hawley Is Imploring White House To Prioritize Arming Taiwan Over Ukraine

    In a wholly expected development, given GOP leadership has of late expressed its unease over what’s been dubbed Biden’s “blank check” given to Ukraine at the expense of the American taxpayer, Secretary of State Antony Blinken was grilled Tuesday over why the US isn’t doing enough to help Taiwan instead.

    Republican senator from Missouri Josh Hawley questioned Blinken in a signed letter over why the Pentagon is diverting arms intended for Taiwan to the Ukrainian government. Hawley argued that it’s actually staving off potential Chinese invasion of the democratic-ruled island that should be the highest priority. 

    “Seizing Taiwan is Beijing’s next step toward dominating the Indo-Pacific region,” Sen. Hawley argued in the letter. “If Beijing succeeds, it would have dire ramifications for Americans’ national security, as well as our economic security and freedom of action.”

    Sen. Josh Hawley; Sipa USA via AP file

    Anticipating the Biden administration’s response, Hawley said that he expects Blinken to say that approved mechanisms differ for delivery of arms to Taiwan vs. Ukraine. That’s when the Republican senator pointedly stressed: “But this explanation does little to allay concerns,” writing further, “Regardless of the weapons’ source, if both Taiwan and Ukraine need them, they should go to Taiwan first.”

    He additionally reminded Blinken of the top US diplomat’s own October assessment saying that Beijing is looking to achieve “reunification” of Taiwan on a faster timeline. According to the letter summarized in The Hill: 

    Hawley said the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, an independent government agency that submits annual reports to Congress on the U.S.-Chinese relationship, found that the direction of existing stocks of munitions and arms to Ukraine and supply issues stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic have caused a backlog in delivering weapons that were approved for sale to Taiwan. 

    Hawley referenced a Wall Street Journal report from days ago which estimated the current arms backlog to the island has reached $18.7 billion worth of defense supplies. 

    Taiwan and its Western backers have long feared that a Chinese blockade would come first, before invasion. But an effective blockade would eventually make successful invasion and occupation more likely. Hawley argued that US strategy should seek to prevent a blockade in the first place, which is why the approved arms flowing to the island unimpeded remains crucial, according to the letter.

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

    Hawley’s letter also comes amid what some have called “Ukraine fatigue” among both officials and the Western public. There are also fears among hawks that the GOP takeover of the House starting next month could erode ‘necessary’ support needed to Ukraine’s armed forces, especially as anger grows over lack of Ukraine arms oversight coupled with the astronomical price tag.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 18:55

  • Top Marine Corps General Admits COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Has Led To Decline In Military Recruitment
    Top Marine Corps General Admits COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Has Led To Decline In Military Recruitment

    Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

    A top general in the Marine Corps has acknowledged that the COVID-19 vaccine mandate is hampering its recruitment goals, but he credited the requirement with keeping military personnel healthy.

    Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger made the comments during a panel discussion at the Reagan National Defense Forum in Simi Valley, California, on Dec. 3.

    “Where it is having an impact for sure is on recruiting, where in parts of the country there’s still myths and misbeliefs about the backstory behind it,” Berger said, Military.com reported.

    The general noted that the requirement for military personnel to be fully vaccinated has created recruitment issues in the south of the country in particular.

    “There was not accurate information out early on and it was very politicized and people make decisions and they still have those same beliefs. That’s hard to work your way past, really hard to work,” he said.

    However, Berger also credited the vaccines for preventing deaths among the Marines, stating that they were needed in order to “maintain a healthy unit that can deploy, on ship, ashore.”

    Berger’s comments come as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has pledged not to pass the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) if the military COVID-19 vaccine mandate remains in place.

    Military Not Meeting Recruitment Goals Right Now

    Speaking on the “Ingraham Angle” on Monday, McCarthy, who looks set to be the next speaker of the House, said he has spoken with President Joe Biden regarding the bill and made it “very clear from the very beginning,” that the NDAA will not pass unless the vaccine mandate for military men and women is lifted, citing a decline in recruitment.

    The vaccine mandate was announced by the Marine Corps in September 2021 and has faced multiple legal challenges.

    “Why? They are not meeting the recruitment goals right now because of this. People are leaving,” McCarthy said. 

    “I told the president if we don’t have the lifting of the vaccine, I’ll do it in January.”

    As of August, 3,299 Marines had been separated from the Corps for refusing to get vaccinated, Marine Corps Times reported. Separate data from the Defense Department peg that number at 3,717.

    Meanwhile, roughly 96 percent of the Marines’ active-duty force is fully vaccinated, according to the latest monthly COVID-19 update from the Marines (pdf), while 99 percent are at least partially vaccinated.

    A total of 96 percent of reserves are fully vaccinated and another 96 percent are partially vaccinated too, according to the update.

    The White House has said Biden is considering dropping the mandate but that he ultimately supports Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s recommendation to keep it in place.

    “Discussions about the NDAA are ongoing,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Dalton said on Monday.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 18:35

  • US Nuclear Submarine 'Buzzed By Underwater Object' Traveling 'Faster Than Speed Of Sound': Scientist
    US Nuclear Submarine ‘Buzzed By Underwater Object’ Traveling ‘Faster Than Speed Of Sound’: Scientist

    A scientist carrying out classified work onboard the USS Hampton nuclear submarine in the late 1990s says the sub was ‘buzzed’ by an unidentified object traveling underwater faster than the speed of sound.

    USS Hampton at the North Pole in April 2004

    In a YouTube interview with UFO researcher Chris Leto, scientist Bob McGwier said that the sub was “running deep and fast” when it was passed at extremely high speed by an object. According to McGwier, the encounter was confirmed by a member of the crew who was shocked at the speed of the Unidentified Submerged Object (USO), Daily Star reports.

    “We were under way and all of a sudden I hear the sound. It’s really strange because it’s clear that what is going on is something is whizzing by us and it’s moving so fast I just can’t believe it,” said McGwier, adding “This thing blew by us like we were standing still.”

    “A person with knowledge of onboard systems came out and said ‘this goddam thing is going faster than the speed of sound underwater – but that’s faster than the speed of sound in air’,” he continued.

    According to McGwier, the crew “didn’t want to report it, didn’t want to tell anybody, didn’t want to cause any problems.”

    Sound moves at 1,480 meters per second in water (3,355 miles per hour) vs. 331 meters per second in air.

    Perhaps it was a ‘Tic Tac’ UFO, which have been seen emerging from the ocean at high rates of speed?

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 12/06/2022 – 18:15

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Dec 06

Today’s News 6th December 2022

  • Mapped: Global Energy Prices By Country
    Mapped: Global Energy Prices By Country

    For some countries, energy prices hit historic levels in 2022.

    Gasoline, electricity, and natural gas prices skyrocketed as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ruptured global energy supply chains. Households and businesses are facing higher energy bills amid extreme price volatility. Uncertainty surrounding the war looms large, and winter heating costs are projected to soar.

    Given the global consequences of the energy crisis, Visual Capitalist’s infographics below shows the price of energy for households by country, with data from GlobalPetrolPrices.com.

    1. Global Energy Prices: Gasoline

    Which countries and regions pay the most for a gallon of gas?

     

    Source: GlobalPetrolPrices.com. As of October 31, 2022. Represents average household prices.

     

    At an average $11.10 per gallon, households in Hong Kong pay the highest for gasoline in the world—more than double the global average. Both high gas taxes and steep land costs are primary factors behind high gas prices.

    Like Hong Kong, the Central African Republic has high gas costs, at $8.60 per gallon. As a net importer of gasoline, the country has faced increased price pressures since the war in Ukraine.

    Households in Iceland, Norway, and Denmark face the highest gasoline costs in Europe. Overall, Europe has seen inflation hit 10% in September, driven by the energy crisis.

    2. Global Energy Prices: Electricity

    Extreme volatility is also being seen in electricity prices.

    The majority of the highest household electricity prices are in Europe, where Denmark, Germany, and Belgium’s prices are about double that of France and Greece. For perspective, electricity prices in many countries in Europe are more than twice or three times the global average of $0.14 per kilowatt-hour.

    Over the first quarter of 2022, household electricity prices in the European Union jumped 32% compared to the year before.

    Source: GlobalPetrolPrices.com. As of March 31, 2022. Represents average household prices.

    In the U.S., consumer electricity prices have increased nearly 16% annually compared to September last year, the highest increase in over four decades, fueling higher inflation.

    However, households are more sheltered from the impact of Russian supply disruptions due to the U.S. being a net exporter of energy.

    3. Global Energy Prices: Natural Gas

    Eight of the 10 highest natural gas prices globally fall in Europe, with the Netherlands at the top. Overall, European natural gas prices have spiked sixfold in a year since the invasion of Ukraine.

    Source: GlobalPetrolPrices.com. As of March 31, 2022. Represents average household prices.

    The good news is that the fall season has been relatively warm, which has helped European natural gas demand drop 22% in October compared to last year. This helps reduce the risk of gas shortages transpiring later in the winter.

    Outside of Europe, Brazil has the fourth highest natural gas prices globally, despite producing about half of supply domestically. High costs of cooking gas have been especially challenging for low-income families, which became a key political issue in the run-up to the presidential election in October.

    Meanwhile, Singapore has the highest natural gas prices in Asia as the majority is imported via tankers or pipelines, leaving the country vulnerable to price shocks.

    Increasing Competition

    By December, all seaborne crude oil shipments from Russia to Europe will come to a halt, likely pushing up gasoline prices into the winter and 2023.

    Concerningly, analysis from the EIA shows that European natural gas storage capacities could sink to 20% by February if Russia completely shuts off its supply and demand is not reduced.

    As Europe seeks out alternatives to Russian energy, higher demand could increase global competition for fuel sources, driving up prices for energy in the coming months ahead.

    Still, there is some room for optimism: the World Bank projects energy prices will decline 11% in 2023 after the 60% rise seen after the war in Ukraine in 2022.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 23:20

  • Benchmark Diesel's 17.4-Cent Plunge Comes Amid Broad Market Slide
    Benchmark Diesel’s 17.4-Cent Plunge Comes Amid Broad Market Slide

    By John Kingston of FreightWaves.com

    The benchmark price for most diesel surcharges fell the most in a week since the early days of the 2009 financial crisis, with physical markets suggesting there are further declines to come. 

    Not since October 2009 has the Department of Energy/Energy Information Administration weekly diesel price fallen as much as the 17.4 cents it dropped Monday. The price came in at $4.967 a gallon, the first time it has been below $5 since Oct. 3. 

    This week’s decline is only 1 cent more than the 16.4-cent drop recorded July 25. The DOE/EIA had not dropped more than 17.4 cents since a decline of 19.4 cents Oct. 27, 2009, which wrapped up a four-week decline of more than 67 cents as the full impact of the collapse of Lehman Brothers and other financial market turmoil was kicking into high gear.

    The latest price decline came on an eventful day for oil and diesel markets. Those markets also suggest that retail diesel prices still have a long way to fall to catch up with broader market conditions.

    The FUELS.USA data series in SONAR, which reflects the spread between retail and wholesale prices, has pushed past $1.90 a gallon in recent days. That is easily the highest number in the more than four and a half years that SONAR has tracked the spread, which before the enormous volatility of this year tended to move toward a range of $1 to $1.10, though with significant swings above and below that range.

    The FUELS.USA data series in SONAR has climbed from about 55 cents October 8 to more than $1.92 Monday

    If wholesale prices were to be locked into place at the current level, retail diesel would be expected to fall at least 50 cents and likely more just to get back to some level of normalcy.

    That retail/wholesale spread has been affected not only by recent declines in the ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) price on the CME commodity exchange, but also by weakness in the physical markets that trade as a differential against the ULSD futures price.

    For example, the daily basis differential for ULSD in New York Harbor published by DTN Energy stood at $1 on Nov. 15. That means that delivery of ULSD in New York Harbor in the subsequent few days after Nov. 15 traded at $1 more than the price of ULSD on the CME commodity exchange. On Nov. 15, ULSD on CME would have been reflecting product to be delivered during December. 

    That spread is normally a few cents. And on Monday, it was down to that level, being assessed by DTN at a spread of 1.5 cents. The differential has shed 98.5% of its value in just three weeks.

    The benchmark U.S. Gulf Coast physical price never soared as East Coast prices did. On Nov. 15, it was negative 28.5 cents, according to DTN, meaning physical diesel in the U.S. Gulf Coast was that much less than the CME ULSD price. It has gotten stronger since then, to negative 23.5 cents. But that is still well below normal prices, which are also generally 10 cents or less under the CME price.

    Those strong spreads on the East Coast and in other markets incentivized refiners to run their plants at high levels, and they have responded. In the more than 30 years of data on refinery operating rates published by the EIA, there have been only three times in the final weekly report of November when the nation’s refineries ran at an operating rate more than the 95.2% they  recorded in the week ended Nov. 25, the latest report published by EIA.

    That has led to a significant easing of inventories. The closely watched Days Cover figure for distillate inventories — which are generally 85% to 90% ULSD — came in at 29 days in that report for the week ended Nov. 25. That figure was less than 26 days just a few weeks earlier and the highest since the end of September. Days cover represents the number of days of current consumption that could be supplied solely by inventories.

    The background of this movement in diesel prices Monday was the start of a price cap implemented by Western nations on purchases of Russian crude, combined with an EU ban on waterborne imports of Russian crude. 

    The $60/barrel cap for now would not have an impact on sales of Urals crude, the grade of oil it ships out to Western markets, because the price of Urals has been less than $60.

    But a more immediate test will come with sales of ESPO, a crude exported out of Russia’s east coast, which before the large declines of Monday was selling for  more than $70 a barrel.

    The prospect of the Russian cap being implemented and the possibility it might end up restricting Russian crude exports was seen as a factor in early gains Monday in global oil markets. 

    But the later weakening of equity markets pulled oil down with it. The end result was that the DOE/EIA price was not the only one to break through a key number; the CME price for ULSD did too, falling below $3 a gallon for the first time since Feb. 25, settling at $2.9998 a gallon.

    The volatility in Monday’s market could best be seen by the fact that while ULSD settled at less than $3 a gallon, it traded as high as nearly $3.24 earlier in the day.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 23:02

  • NASA's Homeward-Bound Orion Spacecraft Captures Last Stunning Image Of Moon
    NASA’s Homeward-Bound Orion Spacecraft Captures Last Stunning Image Of Moon

    On the 19th day of the historic Artemis I mission, a camera mounted on the uncrewed Orion spacecraft captured a stunning image of the moon. 

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

    The Orion spacecraft performed a powered flyby burn of the moon — the longest so far — as it’s now on its final stretch of the 25-day mission. 

    “We’ve completed our return-powered flyby burn and are heading home!” NASA tweeted. 

    Orion will travel 238,900 miles back to Earth, and reentry into the atmosphere is expected on Dec. 11 — with a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. If successful, the spacecraft would complete a 1.3 million-mile space mission. This would allow astronauts to make the journey in the Artemis II mission in 2024 and return to the lunar surface by 2025. 

    NASA has said the mission has yet to experience major issues. There was a minor issue when the spacecraft lost communication for about an hour.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 22:40

  • Victor Davis Hanson: How Corrupt Is A Corrupt Media?
    Victor Davis Hanson: How Corrupt Is A Corrupt Media?

    Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

    The media has ceased to exist, and the public plods on by assuming as true whatever the media suppresses and as false whatever the media covers.

    The current “media”—loosely defined as the old major newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post, the network news channels, MSNBC and CNN, PBS and NPR, the online news aggregators like Google, Apple, and Yahoo, and the social media giants like the old Twitter and Facebook—are corrupt. 

    They have adopted in their news coverage a utilitarian view that noble progressive ends justify almost any unethical means to obtain them. The media is unapologetically fused with the Democratic Party, the bicoastal liberal elite, and the progressive agenda. 

    The result is that the public cannot trust that the news it hears or reads is either accurate or true. The news as presented by these outlets has been carefully filtered to suppress narratives deemed inconvenient or antithetical to the political objectives of these entities, while inflating themes deemed useful. 

    This bias now accompanies increasing (and increasingly obvious) journalistic incompetence. Lax standards reflect weaponized journalism schools and woke ideology that short prior basic requisites of writing and ethical protocols of quoting and sourcing. In sum, a corrupt media that is ignorant, arrogant, and ideological explains why few now trust what it delivers.

    Suppression

    Once a story is deemed antithetical to left-wing agendas, there arises a collective effort to smother it. Suppression is achieved both by neglect, and by demonizing others who report an inconvenient truth as racists, conspiracist “right-wingers,” and otherwise irredeemable. 

    The Hunter Biden laptop story is the locus classicus. Social media branded the authentic laptop as Russian disinformation. That was a lie. But the deception did not stop them from censoring and squashing those who reported the truth. 

    Instead of carefully examining the contents of the laptop or interrogating Biden-company players such as Tony Bobulinksi, the media hyped the ridiculous disinformation hoax as a mechanism for suppressing the damaging pre-election story altogether.

    Joe Biden’s cognitive state was another suppression story. The media simply stifled the truth that 2020 candidate Biden was unable to conduct a normal campaign due to his frailty and non-compos-mentis status. Few fully reported his often cruel and racist outbursts of the “lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier” and “you ain’t black”/“terrorist” sort. 

    The #MeToo media predictably quashed the Tara Reade disclosure. In fact, journalists turned on her in the manner that they previously had insisted was sexist and defamatory “blame-the-victim” smearing. 

    Joe Biden has long suffered from a sick tic of creepily intruding into the private space of young women and preteen girls: blowing their hair, talking into their ears, squeezing their necks, hugging in full body embraces—all for far too long. In other words, Biden should have expected the Charlie Rose or the Donald Trump Access Hollywood media treatment. Instead, he was de facto exonerated by collective media silence. To this day, despite staffers’ efforts to corral his wandering hands and head, he occasionally reverts to form with his creepy fixations with younger women. 

    Ask the media today which administration surveilled journalists and they will likely cry “Trump!” Yet their own sensationalist reporting that the IRS was weaponized by Trump was proven a lie when the inspector general notedTrump never went after either James Comey or Andrew McCabe. And it was an untruth comparable to the smear that “nuclear secrets” and “nuclear codes” were hidden away at Mar-a-Lago or that Donald Trump sought to profit from the trove. Nor does anyone remember that Barack Obama went after the Associated Press reporters and Fox News Channel’s James Rosen. Nor do they care that Biden sought to birth an Orwellian Ministry of Truth censorship bureau.

    Fantasy

    The media does not just suppress, but concocts. The entire Russian-collusion hoax—Robert Mueller’s vain 22-month and $40 million investigation—was a complete waste of time on the one hand, but on the other an effective effort to destroy the effectiveness of an elected president. 

    How many print and television celebrity journalists declared that Trump would shortly resign, be jailed, or impeached over the pee-pee tape or Christopher Steele’s other mishmash of lies? The problem for the media in promoting the fallacious dossier was not just that it was untrue, but that it was so awfully written, so obviously poorly sourced, and so Drudge Report-like amateurishly sensational that it could not be appear factual to any sane person—other than an agenda-driven and addled journalist who found it useful.

    Do we remember the Hillary Clinton-approved Alfa Bank/Trump Tower fable that is now resurfacing for a second try? 

    Or the Jussie Smollett caper that trumped even the Brett Kavanaugh-as-teenage-assaulter and rapist lie? Or the Covington kids fabrications that trumped the Duke lacrosse hoax that trumped the “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” myth that trumped the “white Hispanic,” doctored photo/edited 911 call smear about George Zimmerman? 

    Recall Trump’s supposed “immigration jails” and “kids in cages” at the border—in truth both not cages and in fact birthed by Obama. 

    Then there was Trump’s supposedly impeachable offense of purportedly canceling military aid to Ukraine so that he could allegedly hound the innocent Biden family—rather than delaying, but not canceling, offensive arms vetoed by the Obama Administration for the prescient worry that the Biden family had left a trail of corruption in Ukraine.  

    Who ran with the “voter suppression” untruth that Stacey Abrams was the “real” governor of Georgia or the yarn that Donald Trump was illegitimately elected? How exactly did Jeffery Epstein and Harvey Weinstein operate as sexual perverts and high-profile, liberal-benefacting deviants for years without media scrutiny? Who created the cable news myth of now-felon Michael Avenatti as presidential timber? 

    Chronological Manipulation

    Why, after the midterms, did we suddenly learn that Donald Trump did not, as in the case of Barack Obama’s Lois Lerner skullduggery, manipulate the IRS for political purposes to go after James Comey and Andrew McCabe? Why suddenly post-election did we read that his presidential papers at Mar-a-Lago really did not contain “nuclear codes” and “nuclear secrets” or stuff intended for sale? Why did we learn after November 8 that a special counsel was suddenly appointed? Why did we discover the Ponzi scheme of Sam Bankman-Fried only after the midterms and why is he treated as an aw-shucks teen in bum drag rather than a calculating and conniving crook?

    The answer is the same as why, just days before the 2016 election, we were assured suddenly by the media that the DNC’s planted stories about Christopher Steele’s dossier “proved” that Trump was a Russian stooge. 

    Asymmetry 

    When did the media finally dribble out that Obama’s memoir Dreams From My Father was chock full of lies and thus was intended all along to be read as “impressionistic” rather than factual? 

    We only learned belatedly that Hillary Clinton did not brave the front lines in virtual combat in Bosnia. We were assured that she was completely out of the loop on the Uranium One deal and thus knew nothing about the cash that poured into the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton’s honoraria from Russian sources? 

    Did the media ever fully report that Hillary Clinton: 1) broke the law by using a personal server to communicate while Secretary of State; 2) lied about the missing emails by claiming they were all personal about “yoga” and “weddings” and such; 3) destroyed subpoenaed evidence by smashing her devices; 4) had her husband accidently bump into Attorney General Loretta Lynch on a Phoenix tarmac who was supposedly investigating Clinton at the time; and 5) became our first major election denialist by declaring “Russian collusion” to be true, Donald Trump to be illegitimately elected, and the 2016 balloting to be “rigged”?

    Unethical Behavior 

    Our once lions of network news were long ago revealed to have feet of clay. Dan Rather insisted that “fake but true” memos “proved” George W. Bush got special exemptions from military service. Brian Williams fabricated an entire Walter-Mitty fantasy existence with ease. The Wiki Leaks Podesta trove revealed blue-chip reporters checking in with the Clinton campaign and the DNC to “fact check” and brainstorm their pre-publication puff pieces. 

    Throughout the Obama years, Ben Rhodes, the failed novelist and deputy national security advisor distorted U.S. foreign policy, as CBS News, overseen by his brother, warped its coverage of him. 

    Do we remember the commentary on MSNBC of the brilliant Vanderbilt professor and MSNBC “analyst,” presidential historian Jon Meacham? He periodically praised Joe Biden’s eloquence and moving addresses without informing his audience that he contributed to or indeed helped write what he gushed about. No problem. Even after finally being fired, Meacham is still at it, offering his input on Biden’s September 1, Phantom-of-the-Opera “un-American” rant.

    CNN Sums It Up

    The long, slow death of Jeffery Zucker’s CNN is emblematic of all the mortal sins listed above of our present-day corrupt media.

    It is ancient history now and thus forgotten that the self-righteous MSNBC anchorman Lawrence O’Donnell falsely claimed that Deutsche Bank documents would prove that Russian oligarchs co-signed a loan application for Donald Trump. 

    Over a decade ago, CNN’s Candy Crowley—remember this impartial “moderator” of the second 2012 presidential debate?—infamously transformed before our very television eyes into an active and shameless partisan by attacking candidate Mitt Romney. CNN commentator Donna Brazile topped Crowley when she unethically leaked primary-debate questions to candidate Hillary Clinton. When pressed, Brazile serially denied her role.

    CNN’s former Obamaite Jim Sciutto is known as a serial offender of journalistic ethics and was recently the subject of an internal investigation. Sciutto has also alleged, falsely, that the CIA had yanked a high-level spy out of Moscow because of President Trump’s supposedly dangerously reckless handling of classified information. Sciutto joined CNN’s Carl Bernstein and Marshall Cohen to falsely report that Lanny Davis’ client Michael Cohen would soon assert that Trump had prior knowledge of an upcoming meeting between his son and Russian interests.

    Another CNN trio of Thomas Frank, Eric Lichtblau, and Lex Harris were forced out from CNN for their mythologies that the Trump-hating Anthony Scaramucci was directly involved in a $10 billion Russian fund.

    CNN’s Julian Zelizer fabricated his own tall tale that Donald Trump never reiterated America’s commitment to honor NATO’s critical Article 5 guarantee. The quartet of CNN’s Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper, and Brian Rokus all were exposed wrongly assuring that former FBI director James Comey would unequivocally contradict President Trump’s prior assertion that Comey had told him he was not under investigation. 

    CNN reporter Manu Raju in December 2017 trafficked in lots of fake news stories that Donald Trump, Jr. supposedly had prior access to the hacked WikiLeaks documents. And he offered another fable that Trump, Jr. would be indicted by Mueller’s special-counsel investigation. But then, who at CNN did not blast out such “bombshells” and “walls are closing in” lies?

    The once supposedly great Chris Cuomo—finally fired for softball incestuous interviews with his brother Andrew while serving as confidant to his sibling’s sexual-harassment dilemmas—had been caught on tape screaming obscenities. He also lied on the air when he assured a CNN audience in 2016 that it was illegal for citizens to examine the just-released WikiLeaks emails.

    Julia Ioffe was eagerly hired by CNN after Politico fired her for tweeting that the president and his daughter Ivanka might have had an incestuous sexual relationship. CNN Anderson Cooper was every bit as creepy. He harangued a pro-Trump panelist with “If he [Trump] took a dump on his desk, you would defend it!”

    Erstwhile CNN religious “expert” Reza Aslan was not so subtle. He trashed Trump as “this piece of sh**.” The late CNN cooking show guru Anthony Bourdain openly joked about poisoning Trump with hemlock. Recall CNN New Year’s Eve host Kathy Griffin posing with a bloody facsimile of Trump’s severed head. Was there something in the CNN contract that stipulated CNN journalists had to be obscene, vulgar, and threatening? 

    The CNN circus also hired as a “security analyst” the admitted liar James Clapper. So, was it any surprise that on spec Clapper did what he was hired to do—by falsely claiming that President Trump was a veritable Russian asset?

    But for that matter, former CIA director Michael Hayden preposterously alleged that Trump’s immigration policies resembled those in the death camps of Nazi Germany. Was it any wonder either that CNN host Sally Kohn and her roundtable panelists raised their hands to reverberate the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie of the Ferguson shooting?

    Do the bias, invective, and lack of ethics of the media even matter anymore? 

    In truth, media corruption has changed the course of recent history. 

    Had the true nature of the contents of the Hunter Biden laptop been reported, the 2020 voters have polled that the revelation may well have made a difference because they would not have voted for a candidate so clearly compromised by foreign interests. 

    Tell the full story of death, destruction, arson, looting, and injured police of the post-George Floyd rioting and what emerges is not the MSNBC denial of violence or the August 2020 CNN lie of a “fiery but mostly peaceful” sort of idealistic protestors.

    The Kavanaugh and Smollett fake news accounts helped further to tear apart the country and greenlighted the new assaults on the Supreme Court, from Senator Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) rants and threats to the would-be assassin who turned up near the Kavanaugh residence. 

    The Russian collusion hoax and the first impeachment media hysteria virtually ruined a presidency and have had grave foreign-policy consequences vis à vis Russia.

    The media, moreover, matter-of-factly assumed Twitter was an arm of the Democratic Party. Mark Zuckerberg and the FBI worked together to suppress any news embarrassing to the Biden campaign. Do not expect much media coverage of Elon Musk’s serial disclosures of Twitter’s efforts to suppress free communications.

    No thanks to the media, after nearly three years we are finally learning that the Wuhan Lab proved the likely source of the COVID pandemic and that the media-sainted Dr. Anthony Fauci subsidized gain-of-function viral research in Wuhan. 

    Despite the lies, Americans assumed that Officer Brian Sicknick was not killed by Trump supporters as reported. The public shrugged “of course” when the media did its best to suppress the name of the Capitol policeman who lethally shot Ashli Babbitt for attempting to go through a broken window inside the Capitol. And on and on.

    In sum, there is no media. It has ceased to exist, and the public plods on by assuming as true whatever the Pravda-like news outlets suppress and as false whatever they cover.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 22:20

  • "Conditions Are In Place": Chile On Alert As Villarrica Volcano Spits Lava Balls
    “Conditions Are In Place”: Chile On Alert As Villarrica Volcano Spits Lava Balls

    Chile’s Villarrica volcano’s last major eruption was in 1984. The 9,300-foot-high snow-capped volcano has become active again, belching lava fireballs into the night sky and shaking the ground with earthquake swarms. Local officials are concerned the next big eruption could be nearing. 

    “While we cannot predict when the volcano will erupt, the conditions are in place,” Alvaro Amigo, the head of the National Volcanic Surveillance Network, told AFP. 

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

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

    Amigo warned a large population and infrastructure are around Villarrica, and any eruption would be hazardous because of the volcanic rock and mud flows.  

    “The thing about Villarrica is the risk, because many people are living in areas that are highly exposed” to potential damage from the volcano, geophysicist Cristian Farias said. 

    About 28,000 people live less than ten miles from the peak in a city called Pucon. Officials have placed a yellow alert for the volcano, which means imminent eruption. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 22:00

  • Contradictions, Lies, And "I Don't Recalls": The Fauci Deposition
    Contradictions, Lies, And “I Don’t Recalls”: The Fauci Deposition

    Authored by Techno Fog via The Reactionary,

    Today, Missouri Attoney General Eric Schmitt released the transcript of the testimony of Dr. Anthony Fauci. As you might recall, Fauci was deposed as part of an ongoing federal lawsuit challenging the Biden Administration’s violations of the First Amendment in targeting and suppressing the speech of Americans who challenged the government’s narrative on COVID-19.

    Here is the Fauci deposition transcript.

    And here are the highlights…

    EcoHealth Alliance – the Peter Daszak group – is knee-deep in the Wuhan controversy, having been funded by the Fauci’s NIH for coronavirus and gain of function research in China (and having worked with the Chinese team in Wuhan). What does Fauci say about EcoHealth Alliance? Over two years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, and after millions dead worldwide, he’s “vaguely familiar” with their work.

    In early 2020, Fauci was put on notice that his group – NIAID – had funded EcoHealth alliance on bat coronavirus research for the past five years.

    This coincided with early reports – directly to Fauci, from Jeremy Ferrar and Christian Anderson – “of the possibility of there being a manipulation of the virus” based on the fact that “it was an unusual virus.”

    Fauci conceded that he was specifically made aware by Anderson that “the unusual features of the virus” make it look “potentially engineered.”

    Fauci couldn’t recall why he sent an article discussing gain of function research in China to his deputy, Hugh Auchincloss, telling him it was essential that they speak on the phone. He couldn’t recall speaking with Auchincloss via phone that day. But remarkably, Fauci did remember assigning research tasks to Auchincloss

    Fauci was evasive on conversations with Francis Collins about whether NIAID may have funded coronavirus-related research in China, eventually stating “I don’t recall.”

    The phrase “I don’t recall” was prominent in Fauci’s deposition. He said it a total of 174 times:

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

    For example, Fauci couldn’t remember what anyone said on a call discussing whether the virus originated in a lab:

    During that same call, Fauci couldn’t recall whether anyone expressed concern that the lab leak “might discredit scientific funding projects.” He also couldn’t recall whether there was a discussion about a lab leak distracting from the virus response. Fauci did remember, however, that they agreed there needed to be more time to investigate the virus origins – including the lab leak theory.

    What else couldn’t Fauci remember? Whether, early into the pandemic, his confidants raised concerns about social media posts about the origins of COVID-19.

    Yet Fauci did admit he was concerned about social media posts blaming China for the pandemic. He even admitted the accidental lab leak “certainly is a possibility,” contradicting his prior claims to National Geographic where he said the virus “could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated.”

    Fauci also couldn’t recall whether he had any conversations with Daszak about the origins of COVID-19 in February 2020, but admitted those conversations might have happened: “I told you before that I did not remember any direct conversations with him about the origin, and I said I very well might have had conversations but I don’t specifically remember conversations.” And he couldn’t recall telling the media early on during the pandemic that the virus was consistent with a jump “from an animal to a human.”

    Fauci said he was in the dark on social media actions to curb speech and suspend accounts that posted COVID-19 information that didn’t fit the mainstream narrative: “I’m not aware of suppression of speech on social media.” Yet it was Fauci’s proclamations of the truth, whether about the origins of COVID-19 to the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, that led to social media companies banning discussions of contrary information.

    Regarding those removals of content, Fauci had no personal knowledge of a US Government/Social Media effort to curb “misinformation.” But he conceded the possibility numerous times.

    Then there’s the issue of masks. In February 2020, Fauci informed an acquaintance that was traveling: “I do not recommend that you wear a mask.” Fauci would later become a vocal proponent of masks only two months later.

    I’m near my Substack length limit – posting the excerpts does that – but you can see from Fauci’s testimony that his public statements about COVID-19 origins and the necessity to wear a mask didn’t match his private conversations. This has been known for some time, but it’s finally nice to get him on record.

    Again, read it all and subscribe here.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 21:40

  • "That Is Where Tyranny Starts": New Zealand May Take Baby From Parents Demanding 'Unvaccinated' Blood For Heart Surgery
    “That Is Where Tyranny Starts”: New Zealand May Take Baby From Parents Demanding ‘Unvaccinated’ Blood For Heart Surgery

    Over 100 anti-vaccination protests showed up in New Zealand to support the parents of a critically ill 4-month-old baby in New Zealand who demanded that the hospital provide supplementary blood from unvaxxinated donors before the child goes under the knife for pulmonary valve stenosis, a heart valve disorder.

    Te Whatu Ora is taking a case against parents who are refusing to allow blood from vaccinated people to be used during their baby’s life-saving heart operation. Photo: RNZ / Mohammad Alafeshat

    The boy’s mother says she wants “safe blood” to be used, which her lawyer described as a fear of blood containing traces of vaccines using mRNA technology.

    The request has been denied by New Zealand health service, which says vaccines pose no risk to donor supplies, according to RNZ. On Tuesday, the Auckland High Court will decide whether to grant a request to remove the child from the family to perform the surgery.

    Paul White, a lawyer for Te Whatu Ora, aka Health New Zealand, described the baby as “getting sicker with every heartbeat.”

    Te Whatu Ora is making an application under the Care of Children Act regarding the baby who needs open heart surgery.

    It is asking that the baby be placed under the guardianship of the court.

    Te Whatu Ora then wants the court to appoint the doctors as agents of the court for medical care, and the parents agents of the court for all other care. -RNZ

    According to White, a child with this condition would have been treated by now.

    Supporters outside the High Court in Auckland where Te Whatu Ora is taking a case against parents who are refusing to allow blood from vaccinated people to be used during their baby’s life-saving heart operation. Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi

    Sue Grey, a lawyer for the family, said the doctors are dismissing the parents as conspiracy theorists and ignoring their concerns.

    A full hearing on the matter will be held on Tuesday.

    One supporter of the family, Sarah McNaulty, said she was standing up for freedom of choice.

    “There’s so many people lined up to give their blood freely,” she said, adding “That is where tyranny starts. When the state provides us with not being able to give blood freely to a patient that needs it.”

    According to officials, the Blood Service does not segregate blood from vaccinated and unvaccinated donors, and that there is no risk from the Covid-19 vaccine.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 21:20

  • Censorship By Surrogate: Why Musk's Document Dump Could Be A Game-Changer
    Censorship By Surrogate: Why Musk’s Document Dump Could Be A Game-Changer

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    Below is my column in the Hill on the recent disclosures in the “Twitter Files” on the coordination of censorship between the company and both Biden and Democratic party operatives. Beyond personally attacking Elon Musk and Matt Taibbi, many have resorted to the same old saw of censorship apologists: it is not censorship if the government did not do it or direct it. That is clearly untrue.  Many groups like the ACLU define censorship as denial of free speech by either government or private entities.  It is also worth noting that this censorship (and these back channels) continued after the Biden campaign became the Biden Administration. Moreover, some of the pressure was coming from Democratic senators and House members to silence critics and to bury the Hunter Biden influence peddling scandal.

    Here is the column:

    “Handled.” That one word, responding to a 2020 demand to censor a list of Twitter users, speaks volumes about the thousands of documents released by Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, on Friday night. As many of us have long suspected, there were back channels between Twitter and the Biden 2020 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to ban critics or remove negative stories. Those seeking to discuss the scandal were simply “handled,” and nothing else had to be said.

    Ultimately, the New York Post was suspended from Twitter for reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. Twitter even blocked users from sharing the Post’s story by using a tool designed for child pornography. Even Trump White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany was suspended for linking to the scandal.

    Twitter’s ex-safety chief, Yoel Roth, later said the decision was a “mistake” but the story “set off every single one of my finely tuned APT28 hack and leak campaign alarm bells.” The reference to the APT28 Russian disinformation operation dovetailed with false claims of former U.S. intelligence officers that the laptop was “classic disinformation.”

    The Russian disinformation claim was never particularly credible. The Biden campaign never denied the laptop was Hunter Biden’s; it left that to its media allies. Moreover, recipients of key emails could confirm those communications, and U.S. intelligence quickly rejected the Russian disinformation claim.

    The point is, there was no direct evidence of a hack or a Russian conspiracy. Even Roth subsequently admitted he and others did not believe a clear basis existed to block the story, but they did so anyway.

    Musk’s dumped Twitter documents not only confirm the worst expectations of some of us but feature many of the usual suspects for Twitter critics. The documents do not show a clear role or knowledge by former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. Instead, the censor in chief appears to be Vijaya Gadde, Twitter’s former chief legal officer who has been criticized as a leading anti-free speech figure in social media.

    There also is James Baker, the controversial former FBI general counsel involved in the bureau’s Russia collusion investigation. He left the FBI and became Twitter’s deputy general counsel.

    Some Twitter executives expressed unease with censoring the story, including former global communications VP Brandon Borrman, who asked, “Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?” Baker jumped in to support censorship and said, “It’s reasonable for us to assume that they may have been [hacked] and that caution is warranted.” Baker thus comes across as someone who sees a Russian in every Rorschach inkblot. There was no evidence the Post’s Hunter Biden material was hacked — none. Yet Baker found a basis for a “reasonable” assumption that Russians or hackers were behind it.

    Many people recognized the decision for what it was. A former Twitter employee reportedly told journalist Matt Taibbi, “Hacking was the excuse, but within a few hours, pretty much everyone realized that wasn’t going to hold.”

    Obviously, bias in the media is nothing new to Washington; newspapers and networks have long run interference for favored politicians or parties. However, this was not a case of a media company spiking its own story to protect a pal. It was a social media company that supplies a platform for people to communicate with each other on political, social and personal views. Social media is now more popular as a form of communications than the telephone.

    Censoring communications on Twitter is more akin to the telephone company agreeing to cut the connection of any caller using disfavored terms. And at the apparent request of the 2020 Biden campaign and the DNC, Twitter seems to have routinely stopped others from discussing or hearing opposing views.

    The internal company documents released by Musk reinforce what we have seen previously in other instances of Twitter censorship. A recent federal filing revealed a 2021 email between Twitter executives and Carol Crawford, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s digital media chief. Crawford’s back-channel communication sought to censor other “unapproved opinions” on social media; Twitter replied that “with our CEO testifying before Congress this week [it] is tricky.”

    At the time, Twitter’s Dorsey and other tech CEOs were about to appear at a House hearing to discuss “misinformation” on social media and their “content moderation” policies. I had just testified on private censorship in circumventing the First Amendment as a type of censorship by surrogate. Dorsey and the other CEOs were asked about my warning of a “‘little brother’ problem, a problem which private entities do for the government that which it cannot legally do for itself.” In response, Dorsey insisted that “we don’t have a censoring department.”

    The implications of these documents becomes more serious once the Biden campaign became the Biden administration. These documents show a back channel existed with President Biden’s campaign officials, but those same back channels appear to have continued to be used by Biden administration officials. If so, that would be when Twitter may have gone from a campaign ally to a surrogate for state censorship. As I have previously written, the administration cannot censor critics and cannot use agents for that purpose under the First Amendment.

    That is precisely what Musk is now alleging. As the documents were being released, he tweeted, “Twitter acting by itself to suppress free speech is not a 1st amendment violation, but acting under orders from the government to suppress free speech, with no judicial review, is.”

    The incoming Republican House majority has pledged to investigate — and Musk has made that process far easier by making good on his pledge of full transparency.

    Washington has fully mobilized in its all-out war against Musk. Yet, with a record number of users signing up with Twitter, it seems clear the public is not buying censorship. They want more, not less, free speech.

    That may be why political figures such as Hillary Clinton have enlisted foreign governments to compel the censoring of fellow citizens: If Twitter can’t be counted on to censor, perhaps the European Union will be the ideal surrogate to rid social media of these meddlesome posters.

    The release of these documents has produced a level of exposure rarely seen in Washington, where such matters usually are simply “handled.”

    The political and media establishments generally are unstoppable forces — but they may have met their first immovable object in Musk.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 21:00

  • These Are The World's Richest Billionaires Over The Past 10 Years
    These Are The World’s Richest Billionaires Over The Past 10 Years

    The last decade has seen a number of changes in the world’s richest billionaires list.

    For one, there are new faces at the top of the leaderboard that were never there before. But, as Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley details below, one of the most obvious changes though, is that the richest billionaires have accumulated a lot more wealth in recent years.

    Using annual data from Forbes on the richest billionaires, Routley has visualized the wealth and ranking of the top 10 billionaires over the past decade.

    Who are the World’s Richest Billionaires?

    While the pecking order has fluctuated, the leaderboard remains very exclusive. Out of a possible 10 spots, there are only 19 individuals that have made the list over the last decade.

    Here’s the current list of richest billionaires in 2022, including when they first made the list (if in the last decade):

     

    *Billionaires with “-” first made the list at an earlier date. Example: Mukesh Ambani made the 2008 list.

     

    Microsoft co-founder turned philanthropist, Bill Gates, is a perennial presence at the top of these lists. Gates is currently at his lowest rank over this time period, but is still in fourth spot. The billionaire has pledged to give away nearly all of his fortune to the eponymously named Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

    From 2018 to 2021, Jeff Bezos sat at the top of the world’s richest people ranking, only to be bumped out by Elon Musk. In 2020, Bezos became the first person to amass a $200 billion fortune after Amazon’s stock price surged during the pandemic. In recent months, Bezos’ net worth has taken a hit as Amazon’s share price has fallen back down to Earth.

    Today, Elon Musk is the world’s richest person.

    The Rich Get Richer

    Over time, the median net worth of the richest billionaires has grown significantly.

     

    Most fortunes are held in the form of business equity, real estate, and publicly-traded stocks—all asset classes that have benefited from the era of cheap money and ultra-low interest rates.

     

    Over the decade period, the median net worth of the top 10 billionaires has nearly tripled from $39 billion to $115 billion.

    In fact, the first billionaire to pass the $100 billion threshold was Jeff Bezos in 2018, when he took the top spot on the list from Bill Gates. However, now all but two on the top 10 wealthiest list are centibillionaires.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 20:40

  • Teacher Who Wears Large Prosthetic Breasts Subject Of College Review, Possible Lawsuit
    Teacher Who Wears Large Prosthetic Breasts Subject Of College Review, Possible Lawsuit

    Authored by Tara MacIsaac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A teacher in Oakville, Ontario, who wears large prosthetic breasts in class has been the subject of protests, bomb threats, a College of Teachers review—and now, potentially, a lawsuit.

    Protesters stand outside of Oakville Trafalgar High School on Friday, Sept. 23, 2022. (The Epoch Times/Peter Wilson)

    The teacher at Oakville Trafalgar High School wears oversized prosthetic breasts with protruding nipples, under tight-fitting shirts. Pictures of the teacher posted on social media by students have received international attention.

    The school had four bomb threats from September through November targeting the teacher. One demanded, for example, that the teacher be fired. No explosives were found at the school, and no arrests were made.

    Parents of students at the school have formed a group called Students First Ontario and say their concerns have not been adequately addressed.

    “We have retained legal counsel and are in the process of moving forward with a legal strategy,” the group told The Epoch Times via email. This announcement follows up on a recent review of the case by the Ontario College of Teachers.

    Professional Conduct Review

    The controversy around the Oakville teacher came to the attention of Education Minister Stephen Lecce, who asked the Ontario College of Teachers in September to “consider strengthening” professional standards.

    “In this province, in our schools, we celebrate our differences,” he told reporters at Queen’s Park. “We also believe there must be the highest standards of professionalism for our kids, and on that basis, I’ve asked the Ontario College of Teachers to review and to consider strengthening those provisions.”

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

    The college completed the requested review October 14, though its contents were first made public Dec. 5 by the National Post. The Epoch Times has obtained a copy of the review.

    It concludes that no strengthening of professional standards is needed. It said the standards of conduct already in place for teachers should be sufficient to address the situation at the Oakville school.

    “Following our review, Council has concluded that the standards, governing legislation and supporting resources appropriately address professionalism in today’s modern learning environment,” the review said. “All Ontario Certified Teachers, in their position of trust, are expected to demonstrate responsibility and sound judgement in their relationships with students.”

    It suggested that the teacher in question should review the standards already in place. It said there is a “critical need for teachers to adhere to government and employer policies and protocols, as part of their commitment to teacher professionalism. For example, the College’s Essential Advice for the Teaching Profession advises that ‘OCTs should consult their employers’ policies to ensure that they know and follow the expectations and obligations in their particular workplaces and communities.’”

    College spokesperson Andrew Fairfield said the college cannot discuss any complaints or concerns filed against teachers. A search of the teacher’s name in the college database shows the teacher is in “good standing.”

    ‘A Safe Environment’

    At a protest outside the school in September, parent Dave Kvesic told The Epoch Times, “Kids should have a safe environment to learn free of ridiculous distractions.” He said the protest wasn’t about “transphobia.” It was “just about my kids.”

    Since that time, some parents have expressed continued frustration with the Halton District School Board (HDSB).

    In a Nov. 21 statement, the Students First parent group said, “parents have been largely silenced by HDSB administrators and there has been little desire for open inquiry, transparency, and accountability.”

    It continued: “Many parents/students have significant questions that need to be addressed given the HDSB’s insistence that there are effectively ‘no boundaries’ when it comes to the ‘expression’ of adults in the company of minors in a publicly-funded school system. It appears our children are part of a social experiment—one that is testing the limits of ‘Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.’”

    HDSB spokesperson Heather Francey did not respond specifically to questions about the parents’ concerns regarding the teacher as of publication. But she said via email, “We have every confidence in the security measures and safety procedures in place at all Halton District School Board (HDSB) schools. …. The HDSB and police work together to investigate threats.”

    Board Chair Margo Shuttleworth told The Epoch Times in September that HDSB supports the teacher “as prescribed by the Ontario Charter of Human Rights.”

    Moral Codes, Dress Codes

    The parent group criticized Shuttleworth for requesting a change to the Education Act that would remove section 264 (1)(c), related to religion and morals. Shuttleworth made the request in an Oct. 20 letter to Education Minister Lecce.

    The section in question says that a teacher’s duties include, “to inculcate by precept and example respect for religion and the principles of Judaeo-Christian morality and the highest regard for truth, justice, loyalty, love of country, humanity, benevolence, sobriety, industry, frugality, purity, temperance and all other virtues.”

    Shuttleworth requested that it be replaced with a clause that reflects “contemporary and current diversity, equity and inclusion policy and practices, and to reflect the Calls to Action 62 and 63s brought forward by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.”

    HDSB recently considered a proposal to implement a dress code for staff. The proposal was made by board trustees. On Nov. 9, HDSB Superintendent of Human Resources, Sari Taha, said at a board meeting that a dress code for teachers would likely be found discriminatory and should not be implemented.

    He said as an employer, the board has the right to implement a dress code or rule for employees as any business does. But, if a dress code places additional burdens on one gender over another, that’s a problem.

    A dress code that results in “deferential treatment⁠—that’s key to really pay attention to this word, deferential treatment⁠—will generally be found to be discriminatory,” Taha said.

    “Arbitrators will often engage in a balancing of the employer’s legitimate business interest with employees’ interest in personal expression. The employer bears the burden in these cases to establish that the employee’s appearances pose a real threat to its business that is more important than the rights of the employee,” Taha said. “And that is the burden of proof on us if we are to establish a dress code.”

    The Epoch Times reporter Peter Wilson contributed to this report. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 20:20

  • Global Wages Take A Hit As Inflation Eats Into Paychecks
    Global Wages Take A Hit As Inflation Eats Into Paychecks

    The global inflation crisis paired with lackluster economic growth and an outlook clouded by uncertainties have led to a decline in real wages around the world, a new report published by the International Labour Organization (ILO) has found.

    As Statista’s Felix Richter reports, according to the 2022-23 Global Wage Report, global real monthly wages fell 0.9 percent this year on average, marking the first decline in real earnings at a global scale in the 21st century.

    Infographic: Global Wages Take a Hit As Inflation Eats Into Paychecks | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    The multiple global crises we are facing have led to a decline in real wages.

    “It has placed tens of millions of workers in a dire situation as they face increasing uncertainties,” ILO Director-General Gilbert F. Houngbo said in a statement, adding that “income inequality and poverty will rise if the purchasing power of the lowest paid is not maintained.”

    While inflation rose faster in high-income countries, leading to above-average real wage declines in North America (minus 3.2 percent) and the European Union (minus 2.4 percent), the ILO finds that low-income earners are disproportionately affected by rising inflation. As lower-wage earners spend a larger share of their disposable income on essential goods and services, which generally see greater price increases than non-essential items, those who can least afford it suffer the biggest cost-of-living impact of rising prices.

    “We must place particular attention to workers at the middle and lower end of the pay scale,” Rosalia Vazquez-Alvarez, one of the report’s authors said.

    “Fighting against the deterioration of real wages can help maintain economic growth, which in turn can help to recover the employment levels observed before the pandemic. This can be an effective way to lessen the probability or depth of recessions in all countries and regions,” she said.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 20:00

  • Everything And Everybody Is More Important Than You
    Everything And Everybody Is More Important Than You

    Authored by Robert Gore via StraightLineLogic.com,

    You will sacrifice and sacrifice until there’s nothing left to sacrifice…

    If we’re all responsible to everybody, what’s in it for you? How does it work, exactly? Can you claim anything—your production, property, expression, body, mind, life, or soul—for yourself? If you can’t, if everyone else has first claim to them, what can you claim for yourself? Do you give up everything for our eight billion fellow earth-citizens as they give up everything for you? Do you get one eight-billioneth of what’s nominally everyone else’s? Or is this supposed to be pure sacrifice—give up everything and receive nothing in return? If you give up everything, is there any you left?

    It’s best not to think about such questions, they won’t get you anywhere but confused. What you do know is what you’ve been told your entire life: everything you do for others is good; everything you do for yourself is selfish and bad. Just look what happens when everyone pulls together in a cause greater than themselves, like war. Isn’t that a cause greater than yourself, maiming and killing people you don’t know? You must be doing it for the greater good, because you might be maimed or killed by those people you don’t know. Oh, you can’t let yourself think of it that way. Everyone has to pitch in.

    Government must be a cause greater than yourself, because you spend several months every year working to pay your taxes. That’s a good chunk of money, and you and millions of other hard-working Americans pay it. People complain a bit, but everybody pays, because it’s necessary to keep the country running and fund all the great things the government does. Like what, exactly? You’re funding those wars, and a lot of money ends up in the pockets of people who are of no discernible benefit to you. A lot of it stays right there in Washington. And even with all the money they take in they are still $31 trillion in the hole. Stop it! You can’t let yourself think of it that way; we’ve got to have government.

    Think what would have happened the last couple of years if we hadn’t had the government. We saw that pull-together spirit, with everyone wearing their masks and getting vaccinated. Well, almost everybody. There were a few people who didn’t wear masks or get vaccinated.

    But here’s where things started to break down. Because you know a few antisocial refuseniks and they either didn’t get sick or if they got sick, they took care of themselves, took the medicines they weren’t supposed to take, and got well. And you know people who had both rounds of vaccines and every booster and got sick. And there are those stories, all over the Internet, about apparently healthy people, young people, collapsing, some dying; you’ve seen the videos.

    The thoughts you can’t shut down started when somebody close to you, a relative or friend, had a severe reaction after a shot, or told you about someone they know who did. And maybe you brushed it off, but then it happened again . . . and again. These weren’t stories on the Internet; this was direct experience, or direct experience once removed. And it wasn’t just severe reactions, the afflicted recovering after hospitalization. There were long term effects for which there are apparently no cures, lives ruined. And there were those who died. You know of more people harmed by the cure than the disease.

    One day, out of nowhere, the question popped into your head: Who’s collecting the sacrificial offerings? Because that’s what all this is—sacrificial offerings—not to propitiate some unseen deity, but to line the pockets and to increase the power of . . . of those telling you that you have to sacrifice! That’s the thought you’ve pushing down all these years: All this sacrifice is a damn scam, a racket! Once you gave it some thought, you realized it’s been going on for years, decades, centuries. Somebody telling people they must sacrifice for some greater good, and those same somebodies collecting the sacrificial offerings.

    If we’re all responsible to everybody, what’s in it for you? Nothing, absolutely nothing. Actually, less than nothing. You no longer have whatever it is you offer. It’s not even an offering, something you do voluntarily. Your “offerings” are taken from you under implicit or explicit threat of force. What you get back, if anything, is worth less to you than what you gave up.

    You’ve never minded giving up things for something you regarded as a greater value—saving for the down payment on a house or a child’s college education. Paying for groceries and utilities rather than taking a vacation you couldn’t afford. Those weren’t sacrifices, not like the sacrifices you’re told you must make for the greater good, where you give up something and get nothing in return.

    If you’re giving something and getting nothing, somebody’s getting something and giving nothing. Think of what they’ve done with your sacrifices—your money, your time, and your life—and what you could have done with them. There’s nothing greater or good about their greater good; the country’s going to hell in a hand basket. We’re riding a ruination train downhill, the grade is getting steeper and steeper, and the engineer has it on full throttle.

    Their greater good is your greater bad—your life gets increasingly risky and difficult. What you’re paying out is rising faster than what you’re taking in. All while money is tossed down the toilet of the latest war and domestic boondoggles and the trillion-dollar milestones on the national debt come faster and faster. You hear the bell tolling: doom, doom, doom.

    You’re dealing with reality to the fullest extent of your capacity so that people you despise, and who despise you, don’t have to. Accept the morality of sacrifice, accept that everybody and everything is more important than you, and you’ve issued them a blank check. They have, they are, and they will continue to take everything you offer, up to and including your life.

    The lie has always been that the sacrifices of you and your fellow sacrificers would build a better world for everyone. Now they no longer try to hide it: sacrifice gets you worse, not better. Bugs instead of meat; an urban apartment instead of a house and land; mass transit instead of a personal automobile; a guaranteed income instead of meaningful work; computer entries instead of money, surveillance instead of privacy; compliance instead of freedom; punishment instead of reward.

    “And you will be happy.” That assurance is as stale and false as the phony causes they trot out to justify your unhappiness: the climate, the earth, a virus, a war, an alien invasion, the common good, etc. We do owe them one debt. The last few years have made it obvious to anyone who will look that it’s not about the phony causes, it never has been; it’s about power and control, and always has been.

    That’s not nothing, for from that recognition comes the realization: run from those demanding sacrifice, which at the least means every government on the planet. Sadly, running is only possible in the metaphorical sense. Gangster governments are the order of the day, regardless of how they cloak their intentions and actions.

    And when you ask ’em, “How much should we give?”
    Ooh, they only answer, “More, more, more, more!”

    “Fortunate Son,” John Fogerty, Credence Clearwater Revival, 1969

    You will sacrifice and sacrifice until there’s nothing left to sacrifice, and then they’ll discard you like last night’s garbage. Your life means one thing to them—enslaved, subjugated submission. It’s the less than zero existence, the logical consequence, of everybody and everything is more important than you.

    Accept that—and most people do—and you’ll deserve what you get—less than zero. Claim your life and resolve that nothing is more important to you than the freedom to live it, and your course will be fraught with danger. It’s not the less-than-zeros who change things; expect nothing from them but opposition. If you want what’s yours you’re going to have to fight for it, and yes, fight means fight. That is the truth that can no longer be evaded.

    Resistance is lonely and dangerous. Choose it, and you may have compatriots, but if you’re not careful, you’ll also have false friends who will betray you in the darkest hour. You will, fortunately, have an ally in the incompetence and evil of those who seek to enslave you. Nothing they’ve established can last and their system is collapsing. In some ways that will make things easier—bankrupt and collapsed governments don’t have the wherewithal to maintain order. However, chaos presents its own dangers.

    Fight for your life, or accept endless sacrifice and less than zero. There are no other choices, no middle ground. It’s your choice. It’s your life.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 19:40

  • Putin Signs Into Law Sweeping Ban On "LGBT Propaganda"
    Putin Signs Into Law Sweeping Ban On “LGBT Propaganda”

    As if the West needed more reason to hate Vladimir Putin, the Russian president on Monday signed into law updated legislation which expands the current ban on the prohibition of what it dubs LGBT propaganda to children, shrugging off widespread Western human rights criticisms leveled at Moscow.

    The new law now expands to banning anything that promotes LGBT propaganda before the entire population, regardless of age or demographic, which makes it much more sweeping and broad. 

    The law also aggressively targets transgender ideology. At this point, anything interpreted as advancing or displaying information that “can make minors want to change their gender” is banned, according to the new law. This includes promoting “non-traditional sexual relations”.

    Police breaking up Gay pride parades has become a familiar scene in Moscow. Image via Reuters.

    Violation of the law, for example with media campaigns or formal organizing and activism, could see entities face a fine of up to 4 million rubles (or just under $64,000). Time in jail is also possible as a punishment. It further effectively bans all future attempts at ‘pride’ parades.

    According to details in The Moscow Times: 

    People of all ages are now banned from accessing certain content under the new legislation. From now on, LGBT relationships and “lifestyles” cannot be displayed or mentioned, according to activists.

    The display of LGBT relationships is also banned from advertising campaigns, films, video games, books and media publications. Outlets that break the new law could be fined or shut down by the government.  

    Foreigners could also be booted from the country if they are found in violation of the law. 

    For years it has been illegal to promote ‘alternative’ sexual lifestyles among minors, based on an initial 2013 law that focused on rooting out “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” aimed at children. As it previously existed, violators could face 15 days in prison, or also a fine. 

    President Putin has over the last few years increased his focus on fighting against gender ideology in speeches, vowing to protect the country and the Russian people from “gender obscurantism” – as he dubbed it in a 2021 speech. Many Russian officials also associate it with nefarious intentions from NATO.

    “I am a proponent of the traditional approach that a woman is a woman and a man is a man,” Putin said at the time – in a theme which has since been reiterated. “A mother is a mother, a father is a father. And I hope that our society has the internal moral protection dictated by the traditional religious denominations of the Russian Federation.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 19:20

  • Democrat Head Of Armed Services Committee Says Ukraine Oversight Push "Russian Propaganda"
    Democrat Head Of Armed Services Committee Says Ukraine Oversight Push “Russian Propaganda”

    Authored by Dave Smith via AntiWar.com,

    Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the head of the House Armed Services Committee, said Saturday that the growing calls for more oversight of the billions of dollars the US is spending on Ukraine are “part of Russian propaganda.”

    While the majority of Republicans strongly favor continuing to arm Ukraine, even the more hawkish GOP members have said they favor increased oversight for the aid. Smith said that the concern from Republicans for more transparency “makes me a little crazy.”

    Rep. Adam Smith, via Politico

    “Ukraine is spending the money really well; that’s why they’re winning,” Smith said at the Reagan National Defense Forum, according to Defense News. “Yes, we need oversight, but we don’t need that as an excuse to not fund what we’re doing.”

    Last month, a small group of House Republicans opposed to arming Ukraine led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) introduced a bill that would require an audit of the funds that the US has spent on the war so far. Greene said that if she needed to, she would reintroduce the legislation after the next Congress is sworn in this January.

    House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who is expected to be the speaker in the next Congress, has said a Republican-controlled House wouldn’t send a “blank check” to Ukraine.

    McCarthy later downplayed his comments and said the lack of oversight was the issue, and other Republican leaders insisted they would keep arming Ukraine. But McCarthy’s comments were still enough to prompt a push to approve a massive new Ukraine aid package.

    The White House is looking for Congress to approve $37.7 billion in new Ukraine aid during the lame-duck period. If authorized, the new funds will bring total US spending on a proxy war on Russia’s border to about $105 billion.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 19:00

  • BofA Finds Increasing Number Of Wealthier Americans Now Shop At Value Supermarkets
    BofA Finds Increasing Number Of Wealthier Americans Now Shop At Value Supermarkets

    US consumers, the biggest economic force in the world, are rapidly altering their spending habits and where they get groceries due to persistently high inflation, 19 months of negative real wage growth, and threats of recession. 

    Bank of America’s report on consumer trends titled “Supermarket Swap” found consumers are “trading down” (i.e., shifting spending from more to less expensive items within the same category), with yearly growth spending at value grocery stores up more than a third versus premium stores. 

    According to the findings of the report:

    So who is “trading down” the most? Middle – and higher-income consumers have more scope to trade down and shift spending to less expensive versions of items, since lower-income consumers are more likely to be shopping at less expensive grocery stores already. For the higher-income consumers , spending at value-tier grocery stores in October 2022 was up 22% relative to January 2019, according to Bank of America data, likely due to persistent negative real wage growth this year

    BofA reminds readers of the latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) print via the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which shows prices for the ‘food at home’ category were still at a shocking 12.4% YoY in October. They said, “real (inflation-adjusted) grocery spending per household, estimated using Bank of America card data and CPI inflation, has slowed substantially since 2021 and was below 2019 levels in October,” but the number of transactions per household made at the grocery store was still holding levels in line with 2019, indicating “real grocery spending per household per transaction that has dropped meaningfully.” 

    This means the consumer is trading down for cheaper items at the supermarket. BofA data shows consumer spending at value-tier supermarkets exploded earlier this year as inflation surged, “suggesting an increasing rotation into cheaper grocery options. This adds further evidence that consumers might have been looking for alternative ways to save on groceries by trading down and purchasing from less expensive stores,” the report said. 

    And why are consumers shifting to value-tier supermarkets? One big issue has been 19 months of negative real wage growth. Essentially the vast majority of Americans find their cost of living is increasing faster than the income they bring home.

    BofA said middle- and higher-income consumers are more likely to be the ones trading down since lower-income folks are already shopping at value-tier stores. 

    The report focused on annual incomes of $50k – $100k and >$100k and found significant shifts in spending as value-tier supermarkets surged in popularity among wealthier Americans. 

    And now, people in higher income brackets are trading down for cheaper items and shopping at value supermarket stores. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 18:40

  • FBI Held "Weekly Meetings" With Big Tech Ahead Of 2020 Election, "Sent Lists Of URLs And Accounts" To Be Censored
    FBI Held “Weekly Meetings” With Big Tech Ahead Of 2020 Election, “Sent Lists Of URLs And Accounts” To Be Censored

    Authored by Chris Menahan via InformationLiberation.com,

    The FBI held “weekly meetings” with social media giants ahead of the 2020 election and sent in “lists of URLs and accounts” for them to take down in the name of fighting “foreign influence operations,” an FBI agent revealed Tuesday while under oath.

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

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

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

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

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

    This is what real “election interference” looks like.

    From Fox News:

    On Tuesday, lawyers from the offices of Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jeff Landry of Louisiana deposed FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan as part of their lawsuit against the Biden administration. That suit accuses high-ranking government officials of working with giant social media companies “under the guise of combating misinformation” to achieve greater censorship.

    Chan, who serves in the FBI’s San Francisco bureau, was questioned under oath by court order about his alleged “critical role” in “coordinating with social-media platforms relating to censorship and suppression of speech on their platforms.”

    During the deposition, Chan said that he, along with the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force and senior Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency officials, had weekly meetings with major social media companies to warn against Russian disinformation attempts ahead of the 2020 election, according to a source in the Missouri attorney general’s office.

    Those meetings were initially quarterly, then monthly, then weekly heading into the presidential election between former President Donald Trump and now President Biden. According to a source, Chan testified that in those multiple, separate meetings, the FBI warned the social media companies that there could be potentially Russian “hack and dump” or “hack and leak” operations.

    In their complaint, the GOP AGs noted an Aug. 26 podcast episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience,” in which Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg stated that “the FBI basically came to us” and told Facebook to be “on high alert” relating to “a lot of Russian propaganda.” Zuckerberg added that the FBI said “there’s about to be some kind of dump… that’s similar to that, so just be vigilant.”

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

    […]

    “Since filing our lawsuit, we’ve uncovered troves of discovery that show a massive ‘censorship enterprise,'” Attorney General Eric Schmitt told Fox News Digital. “Now, we’re deposing top government officials, and we’re one of the first to get a look under the hood — the information we’ve uncovered through those depositions has been shocking to say the least. It’s clear from Tuesday’s deposition that the FBI has an extremely close role in working to censor freedom of speech.”

    Elon Musk released internal documents from Twitter last week showing the “Biden team” sent in requests for URLs to be taken down ahead of the election.

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

    As we saw with Zuckerberg’s comments on Rogan, the FBI’s “warnings” were a way to pressure Big Tech to censor content the regime viewed negatively.

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

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

    The FBI not only directed the censorship of the internet ahead of the 2020 election but also manufactured a fake terror plot in the swing state of Michigan to hype the phony threat of “right-wing extremism.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 18:20

  • Macron: Russia Needs Security Guarantees 'Essential' To Ending The War
    Macron: Russia Needs Security Guarantees ‘Essential’ To Ending The War

    As we detailed earlier, a clear division is arising between Europe and the United States over Washington’s more hawkish and hardline stance on resisting all negotiations with Russia, but instead which is centered on encouraging Kiev to pursuing ‘victory’ on the battlefield. “The fact is, if you look at it soberly, the country that is most profiting from this war is the U.S. because they are selling more gas and at higher prices, and because they are selling more weapons,” one senior European official bluntly complained to Politico last month.

    Underscoring that Europe is more ready to pursue avenues of negotiated settlement in Ukraine, over the weekend French President Emmanuel Macron urged for the West to take seriously Russia’s security concerns regarding NATO expansion near its border. He called for greater willingness to give Moscow the “guarantees” necessary for negotiations to be successful. He called them ‘essential’ if the West wants to get serious about talks and peaceful settlement. 

    Image via The Hill

    “We need to prepare what we are ready to do, how we protect our allies and member states, and how to give guarantees to Russia the day it returns to the negotiating table,” President Macron said in an interview that aired Saturday.

    That’s when he underlined something which a mere months ago would elicit rage and accusations of ‘pro-Kremlin’ stooge among Western mainstream punditry. “One of the essential points we must address — as President Putin has always said — is the fear that NATO comes right up to its doors, and the deployment of weapons that could threaten Russia,” Macron said. 

    The timing of the remarks was interesting given the interview was recorded while he was on the US on a state visit to the White House, and it aired as he departed. 

    According to The New York Times, “The interview with TF1, a French television network, appeared sympathetic to the concerns of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and was immediately picked up prominently by TASS, the Russian state news agency. It prompted an angry reaction in Ukraine.”

    While there was no immediate reaction from the Biden administration, the Ukrainian presidency’s office said such negotiations and security guarantees would only be possible “after tribunal, conviction of war authors and war criminals” and the “imposition of large-scale reparations.”

    Separately, David Arakhamia, the chief of the Ukrainian negotiating group involved in short-lived ceasefire talks in the opening months of the war, also echoed that Russian forces must first “leave the territory of our country; pay reparations; punish all war criminals; voluntarily give up nuclear weapons.”

    The Times further points out that Russian state media was quick to amplify Macron’s interview statements: 

    Responding to a tweet from TASS featuring Mr. Macron’s remarks, Nicolas Tenzer, a prominent French political scientist and essayist, commented: “Devastating.”

    During the summer months and prior, European leaders seemed to tilt toward Washington’s more hardline approach to the conflict, but with the energy crisis becoming more acute and now headed into the winter months it appears a new consensus is emerging.

    As another example, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz spoke with President Vladimir Putin on Friday, with the Kremlin side later saying that Scholz admitted the West’s policy on Ukraine is “destructive” and that Berlin may pursue a rethinking of its policy. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 18:00

  • Ron Paul: The 'Twitter Papers' Reveal The Totalitarians Among Us
    Ron Paul: The ‘Twitter Papers’ Reveal The Totalitarians Among Us

    Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute,

    I admit to being skeptical of Elon Musk as a free speech hero. He has moved from one US government-subsidized business to another on his path to becoming the world’s richest person. But there is no denying that his release of the “Twitter Papers” this past weekend, which blew the lid off government manipulation of social media, has been a huge victory for those of us who value the First Amendment.

    The release, in coordination with truly independent journalist Matt Taibbi, demonstrated indisputably how politicians and representatives of “official Washington” pressed the teams that were then in charge of censorship at Twitter to remove Tweets and even ban accounts that were guilty of nothing beyond posting something the power-brokers did not want the general public to read. Let’s not forget that many of those demanding Twitter censorship were US government officials who had taken an oath to the US Constitution and its First Amendment.

    It is important to understand that both US political parties were involved in pushing Twitter to censor information they didn’t like. There is plenty of corruption to go around. However, as the Twitter Papers demonstrated, vastly more Tweets were censored at the demand of Democratic Party politicians simply because Twitter employees on the censorship team were overwhelmingly Democratic Party supporters.

    Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence released in this first installment of the Twitter Papers was a series of Tweets from the Biden 2020 campaign to its contact inside Twitter asking that the social media censor them. An internal Twitter document shows that the censor team “handled these,” meaning censored them.

    Elon Musk himself openly stated before the release that, prior to his taking control of the company and engaging in mass firing, Twitter had been manipulating elections. So all those years we heard lies from the Washington elites that Russia was interfering in our elections when after all it was Twitter. Of course that raises the question about other large social media companies like Facebook. Will Mark Zuckerberg come clean about his own company’s election interference? Will anyone have the courage to demand that he do so?

    How did they get away with all of this? As another truly independent journalist, Glenn Greenwald, pointed out on the Tucker Carlson show the night the “Twitter Papers” were released, while it was once controversial for the CIA to attempt to manipulate what Americans consume in the mainstream media, nowadays these outlets openly hire “former” US intelligence leaders and officers as news analysts. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, and the rest of them all bring on “former” members of the intelligence services to tell Americans what to think. “Big tech censorship is a critical tool of the national security state,” Greenwald told Tucker. “Whenever anyone tries to do anything about it these former people from the CIA and the Pentagon and the rest jump up and say ‘we cannot allow you to restore free speech.’”

    This is a corruption scandal so massive that it is almost guaranteed to never be properly investigated. Government itself is among the most guilty and we know “government commissions” are really about covering up rather than uncovering the crimes committed. But the truth is powerful. Some 58 years after the Warren Report whitewashed the assassination of President Kennedy, polls show that few Americans believe the “official” narrative.

    Truth is powerful and we must always seek it. No amount of lies can withstand the disinfectant of truth. Thanks to Elon Musk for his courage and we encourage him to continue.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 17:40

  • PepsiCo To Lay Off Hundreds After Price-Hikes As Consumer 'Strength' Questioned
    PepsiCo To Lay Off Hundreds After Price-Hikes As Consumer ‘Strength’ Questioned

    Up until now, the majority of layoffs have been focused in technology firms and banks, as talking heads proclaim ‘the consumer is still strong’.

    However, tonight’s news that no lesser staple than PepsiCo is to announce a major belt-tightening suggests the pain is spreading much more broadly across the US economy.

    The Wall Street Journal reports, according to people familiar with the matter and documents reviewed, that the giant firm will be cutting hundreds of jobs at its North American snack and beverage headquarters.

    As of Dec. 25 last year, PepsiCo employed about 309,000 people worldwide, including about 129,000 people in the U.S.

    In a memo sent to staff that was viewed by the Journal, PepsiCo told employees that the layoffs were intended “to simplify the organization so we can operate more efficiently.”

    Of course, it’s anyone’s guess when these layoffs appear in the official jobs data…

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

    This decision comes just a few week after the company announced it had raised prices on its snacks and drinks by 17% on average from last year.

    “The consumer has very much stuck with our products,” said Hugh Johnston, PepsiCo’s finance chief, in an interview.

    “In a world where there are many struggles and stresses, we are kind of an affordable luxury.”

    …

    “There may be a point when the revenue growth slows down,” Mr. Johnston said. He added: “We just have to be prepared for it.”

    Do the layoffs mean that the consumer is cutting back further? Or have margins been crushed even more by inflation?

    Are Doritos now out of reach for the average joe?

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 12/05/2022 – 17:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest