• Cancel Culture's War On History, Heritage, & The Freedom To Think For Yourself
  Cancel Culture’s War On History, Heritage, & The Freedom To Think For Yourself

  Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “All the time – such is the tragi-comedy of our situation – we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible… In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”

  – C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

  There will come a time in the not-so-distant future when the very act of thinking for ourselves is not just outlawed but unthinkable.

  We are being shunted down the road to that dystopian future right now, propelled along by politically correct forces that, while they may have started out with the best of intentions, have fallen prey to the authoritarian siren song of the Nanny State, which has promised to save the populace from evils that only a select few are wise enough to recognize as such.

  As a result, we are being infantilized ad nauseum, dictated to incessantly, and forcefully insulated from “dangerous” sights and sounds and ideas that we are supposedly too fragile, too vulnerable, too susceptible, or too ignorant to be exposed to without protection from the so-called elite.

  

  Having concluded that “we the people” cannot be trusted to think for ourselves, the powers-that-be have taken it upon themselves to re-order our world into one in which they do the thinking for us, and all we have to do is fall is line.

  Those who do not fall in line with this government-sanctioned group think—who resist, who dare to think for themselves, who dare to adopt views that are different, or possibly wrong or hateful—are branded as extremists, belligerents, and deplorables, and shunned, censored and silenced.

  The fallout is as one would expect.

  Cancel culture – political correctness amped up on steroids, the self-righteousness of a narcissistic age, and a mass-marketed pseudo-morality that is little more than fascism disguised as tolerance – has shifted us into an Age of Intolerance, policed by techno-censors, social media bullies, and government watchdogs.

  Everything is now fair game for censorship if it can be construed as hateful, hurtful, bigoted or offensive provided that it runs counter to the established viewpoint.

  In this way, the most controversial issues of our day—race, religion, sex, sexuality, politics, science, health, government corruption, police brutality, etc.—have become battlegrounds for those who claim to believe in freedom (of religion, speech, assembly, press, redress, privacy, bodily integrity, etc.) but only when it favors the views and positions they support.

  The latest victim of this rigid re-ordering of the world into one in which vestiges of past mistakes are scrubbed from existence comes from the New York Department of Education, which has ordered schools to stop using Native American references in mascots, team names and logos by the end of the current school year or face penalties including a loss of state aid.

  Citing concerns about racism and a need to comply with the state’s Dignity for All Students Act, which requires schools to create environments free of harassment or discrimination, New York officials are telling communities—many of which are named after Native American tribes—that longstanding cultural associations with their towns’ Indian namesakes are offensive and shameful.

  More than 100 schools in 60 school districts across New York State have nicknames or mascots that reference Native Americans. The cost to divest their communities of such branded names and images will be significant. One school district estimates that the cost to remove its Indians imagery from the gym floor alone will be upwards of $60,000.

  This drive to sanitize New York schools of “offensive” Native American logos and imagery comes on the heels of iconoclastic campaigns to rid the country of anything and anyone that may offend modern-day sensibilities.

  Monuments have been torn down, schools and streets have been renamed, and the names of benefactors stripped from prominent signage in the quest for a more enlightened age.

  These are not new tactics.

  Since the days of the Byzantine Empire, when “Emperor Leo III ordered the destruction of all Christian images on the grounds that they represented idolatry and were heretical,” political movements have resorted to destroying monuments, statues and imagery of the day as a visual means of exerting their power and vanquishing their enemies.

  We have been caught in this intolerant, self-righteous, destructive, mob-driven cycle of book-burning, statue-toppling, history-erasing iconoclasm ever since.

  As art critic Alexander Adams explains:

  “Iconoclasm is an activity evenly distributed between both left and right of the political spectrum, mainly at the extreme ends… The intolerant ideology, which refuses to accept the co-existence of alternative views, takes the stance that…the ideals within the art are no longer utterable or supportable: they are actually injurious and dangerous to the vulnerable… The political activist reserves to himself the right to retrospectively edit our history for his satisfaction by removing monuments, those fixtures of civic life, embedded in the memories of generations… Iconoclasm is an expression of domination and a demonstration of willingness to act—illegally and unethically—to impose the will of one group over an entire population. It asserts control over all aspects of society… The campaigner argues that public art, accumulated piecemeal over 1,000 years of history, must reflect our society and values today—even if that means altering or erasing stories of the values our past society expressed via its monuments, or suppressing evidence of how we arrived at our current situation… The iconoclast believes that it is only the values of today that count—that it is only her values that count. She takes it upon herself to correct history through monstrous acts of egotism. That correction, when it involves destruction, permanently alters the cultural legacy. It shrinks the breadth of human experience available to the generations which follow ours.”

  In such a world, there can be no debate, no journey to understanding, no chance to learn from one’s mistakes or even make mistakes that are uniquely your own; there is only obedience and compliance to the government, its corporate overlords and the prevailing mob mindset.

  Censorship, cancel culture, political correctness, woke-ism, hate speech, intolerance: whatever label you assign to this overzealous drive to sanitize the culture of anything that might be deemed offensive or disturbing or challenging, be assured they are sign posts on a one-way road to graver dangers marked by “suppression, persecution, expulsion and the massacring of people.”

  Whether those smashing monuments and erasing history are doing so for noble purposes or more diabolical reasons, the end results are the same: criminalization, confiscation, imprisonment, exile and genocide.

  “Look at mobs which gather to smash monuments,” says Adams. “These monuments may be the statues of deposed dictators who terrorized populations, causing untold death and suffering. They may be monuments to fallen soldiers who died defending causes that are no longer fashionable. The mob’s anger is the same. The viciousness and triumphant celebrations are the same. Only the causes differ in seriousness, topicality and justification.”

  Adams continues:

  “The Civil War statue destroyers think they are assaulting the posterity of slave owners, but they themselves are in the grip of ideological fervor. They are unaware that they are running a biological code, hardwired in their brains by evolution and activated by political extremists. The activists of today heedlessly erase history they haven’t yet learned to read. They act as the hammer that extremists use to deface the cathedrals and museums our ancestors built.”

  What’s different about this present age, however, is the use of technology to censor, silence, delete, label as “hateful,” demonize and destroy those whose viewpoints run counter to the cultural elite.

  “In the last few years,” writes Nina Powers for Art Review, “what is understood to be contentious has become increasingly broadly defined… The range of what counts as acceptable gets smaller and smaller… [W]e thus find ourselves… in the midst of a new culture war in which the freedom to think, feel and express ourselves comes at the risk of economic impoverishment, social ostracism and mob justice.”

  Where this leads is the stuff of dystopian nightmares: societies that value conformity and group-think over individuality; a populace so adept at self-censorship and compliance that they are capable only of obeying the government’s dictates without the ability to parse out whether those dictates should be obeyed; and a language limited to government-speak.

  This is what happens when the voices of the majority are allowed to eliminate those in the minority, and it is exactly why James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

  Freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society.

  The alternative, as depicted in Ayn Rand’s novella Anthem, is a world in which individuality and the ability to think for oneself independent of the government and the populace are eradicated, where even the word “I” has been eliminated from the vocabulary, replaced by the collective “we.”

  As Anthem’s narrator Equality 7-2521 explains, “It is a sin to think words no others think and to put them down upon a paper no others are to see. . . . And well we know that there is no transgression blacker than to do or think alone.”

  As I make clear in Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we are not merely losing the ability to think critically for ourselves and, in turn, to govern our inner and outer worlds, we are also in danger of losing the right to do so.

  The government’s war on thought crimes and truth-tellers is just the beginning.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 23:50

• Have Shopping Holidays Jumped The Shark?
  Have Shopping Holidays Jumped The Shark?

  After years of unabated growth, Black Friday and Cyber Monday online sales dipped for the first time last year, as many shops spread out deals over the entire Thanksgiving week or even further.

  “With early deals in October, consumers were not waiting around for discounts on big shopping days like Cyber Monday and Black Friday,” said Taylor Schreiner, Director at Adobe Digital Insights.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter notes, according to Adobe’s estimates, U.S. consumers spent $10.7 billion on Cyber Monday last year, slightly down from $10.8 billion in 2020. Black Friday spending also just missed the 2020 record, coming in at $8.9 billion in 2021 vs. $9.0 billion the year before.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The fact that the dedicated shopping holidays didn’t beat spending records last year doesn’t mean that shoppers were cutting back on their holiday spending generally. They merely spread it out throughout the holiday season. Between November 1 and November 29, U.S. consumers spent $109.8 billion online, up 11.9 percent from the same period in 2020. Moreover, 22 days exceeded $3 billion in online sales in November 2021, up from just 9 days in November 2020 and further proof of shoppers spending their holiday cash more evenly than before.

  

  With all that said, do we even need Black Friday and Cyber Monday anymore? Well, it depends. While it certainly feels like the overabundance of discounts throughout the year has watered down the importance of special shopping days, people will always be willing to save money on genuinely good offers. So it’s up to the retailers to counter the deal fatigue with discounts that offer genuine savings instead of just marking down inflated original prices.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 23:15

• War On Cash: India Rolling Out Retail Pilot Program For Digital Rupee
  War On Cash: India Rolling Out Retail Pilot Program For Digital Rupee

  Via SchiffGold.com,

  We recently reported that the Federal Reserve plans to launch a 12-week pilot program in partnership with several large commercial banks to test the feasibility of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The US isn’t alone in experimenting with digital currency. India is working on developing a digital rupee and recently announced the second phase of testing.

  

  After successfully running a pilot program to test its digital currency at the wholesale level, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has announced it will test the digital rupee in a retail setting.

  According to the RBI, the central bank digital currency “is a legal tender issued by a central bank in a digital form. It is the same as a fiat currency and is exchangeable one-to-one with the fiat currency. Only its form is different.”

  Digital currencies are similar to bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. They exist as virtual banknotes or coins held in a digital wallet on your computer or smartphone. The difference between a government digital currency and bitcoin is the value of the digital currency is backed and controlled by the state, just like traditional fiat currency.

  As the RBI put it, “Unlike cryptocurrencies, a CBDC isn’t a commodity or claims on commodities or digital assets. Cryptocurrencies have no issuer. They are not money (certainly not currency) as the word has come to be understood historically.”

  According to a report in the Economic Times of India, the National Payments Corporation of India will host the platform for the digital rupee payment system during the testing phase. The Reserve Bank of India wants each commercial bank in the pilot to test retail use of the digital rupee with 10,000 to 50,000 users.

  State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, Union Bank of India, ICICI Bank, HDFC Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, Yes Bank and IDFC First Bank will participate in the pilot program. If the pilot is successful, the RBI will roll out the program to the entire Indian banking system.

  “The e-rupee will be stored in a wallet, the denominations will be available as per the customer’s request, just like you request cash from an ATM. Banks are launching this only in select cities,” a person involved in the program told the Times.

  In a concept note, the RBI touted the benefits of digital currency.

  It is believed that retail CBDC can provide access to safe money for payment and settlement as it is a direct liability of the central bank. Wholesale CBDC has the potential to transform settlement systems for financial transactions and make them more efficient and secure. Going by the potential offered by each of them, there may be merit in introducing both CBDC-W and CBDC-R.”

  Government-issued digital currencies are sold on the promise of providing a safe, convenient, and more secure alternative to physical cash. We’re also told it will help stop dangerous criminals who like the intractability of cash. But there is a darker side – the promise of control.

  At the root of the move toward government digital currency is “the war on cash.” The elimination of cash creates the potential for the government to track and even control consumer spending, and it would make it even easier for central banks to engage in manipulative monetary policies such as negative interest rates.

  Imagine if there was no cash. It would be impossible to hide even the smallest transaction from government eyes. Something as simple as your morning trip to Starbucks wouldn’t be a secret from government officials. As Bloomberg put it in an article published when China launched its digital yuan pilot program, digital currency “offers China’s authorities a degree of control never possible with physical money.”

  The government could even “turn off” an individual’s ability to make purchases. Bloomberg described just how much control a digital currency could give Chinese officials.

  The PBOC 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. ‘China’s goal is not to make payments more convenient but to replace cash, so it can keep closer tabs on people than it already does,’ argues Aaron Brown, a crypto investor who writes for Bloomberg Opinion.”

  China launched its digital yuan pilot program last year. The Chinese government-backed digital currency got a boost when the country’s biggest online retailer announced the first virtual platform to accept the Chinese digital currency.

  Economist Thorsten Polleit outlined the potential for Big Brother-like government control with the advent of a digital euro in an article published by the Mises Wire. As he put it, “the path to becoming a surveillance state regime will accelerate considerably” if and when a digital currency is issued.

  Governments around the world have quietly waged a war on cash for years. Back in 2017, the IMF published a creepy paper offering governments suggestions on how to move toward a cashless society even in the face of strong public opposition.

  As with most things the government does, you should be wary of the digital dollar. It has a dark side that you can be sure the mainstream will mostly ignore.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 22:40

• Black Friday Chaos: Amazon Warehouse Workers Set To Strike Across 40 Countries
  Black Friday Chaos: Amazon Warehouse Workers Set To Strike Across 40 Countries

  Thousands of workers across approximately 40 countries are planning to take part in ‘Black Friday’ protests to demand better wages and working conditions in the company’s warehouses, as the global cost-of-living crisis increases

  

  The protests will coincide with the largest holiday shopping season of the year, which means Amazon warehouse workers are going to be very busy for the next week as consumers panic buy deeply discounted items, though there might be a huge problem: less than 24 hours before the big sale begins, Bloomberg reported Amazon warehouse workers across 40 countries are about to strike.

  We would note that the world’s biggest retailer has longstanding ambitions to automate its warehouses – with robots that don’t strike. 

  Amazon workers in the US, UK, India, Japan, Australia, South Africa, and across Europe are set to walk out of warehouses on Friday as they demand higher wages and better working conditions amid the worst inflationary environment the world has seen in decades. 

  The labor action is called “Make Amazon Pay” and is coordinated by an army of trade unions, with support from civil society and environmental groups. 

  “For workers and consumers, the price of everything is going up. And for everyone, the global temperature is rising and our planet is under stress. But instead of supporting its workers, communities and the planet, Amazon is squeezing every last drop it can,” Make Amazon Pay’s website said. 

  Make Amazon Pay is correct by outlining “real wages are going down”… and as we noted not too long ago, have been negative for 19 months — hence why labor unions have gained so much traction. 

  

  “It’s time for the tech giant to cease their awful, unsafe practices immediately, respect the law and negotiate with the workers who want to make their jobs better,” said UNI Global Union general secretary, Christy Hoffman.

  The group also outlines Amazon’s corporate greed, not paying taxes, and polluting the world. It also published a map of all the strike locations. 

  

  The company replied to the protests, saying “While we are not perfect in any area, if you objectively look at what Amazon is doing on these important matters you’ll see that we do take our role and our impact very seriously,” pointing to the company’s green ambitions to reach net zero status by 2040, which is “continuing to offer competitive wages and great benefits, and inventing new ways to keep our employees safe and healthy.”

  Ah, that settles it then.

  Unions in France and Germany – CGT and Ver.di – are spearheading the latest collective action, with coordinated strikes in 18 major warehouses, intended to disrupt shipments across key European markets.

  Monika di Silvestre, head of Ver.di’s Amazon committee in Germany, said that workers were particularly concerned about the way their productivity was closely monitored by computers, with algorithms determining targets, for example for the number of packages they need to handle per hour. -Stars & Stripes

  “The workers are under a lot of pressure with these algorithms,” said di Silvestre, adding “It doesn’t differentiate between workers, whether they are old or have limited mobility. Workers stay awake at night thinking only of their productivity stats.”

  Amazon warehouse employees have been speaking out against working conditions for years – notably complaining of low pay, pressure not to take sick leave when ill, and having to work so many hours they’re forced to urinate in bottles.

  It’s not clear how disruptive the strikes will be for Amazon, but it’s just another reason why the world’s biggest retailer is full steam ahead in automating warehouse (read: “Amazon Unveils Warehouse Robot To Replace Human Pickers Amid Unionization Threats”). 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 22:05

• MIT Reports Breakthrough In Solid-State Lithium Battery Development
  MIT Reports Breakthrough In Solid-State Lithium Battery Development

  By Brian Westenhaus of OilPrice.com

  Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s new discovery could finally usher the development of solid-state lithium batteries, which would be more lightweight, compact, and safe than current lithium batteries. The growth of metallic filaments called dendrites within the solid electrolyte has been a longstanding obstacle, but the new study explains how dendrites form and how to divert them. This is a goal that’s been pursued by labs around the world for years.

  The key to this potential leap in battery technology is replacing the liquid electrolyte that sits between the positive and negative electrodes with a much thinner, lighter layer of solid ceramic material, and replacing one of the electrodes with solid lithium metal. This would greatly reduce the overall size and weight of the battery and remove the safety risk associated with liquid electrolytes, which are flammable.

  But that quest has been beset with one big problem: dendrites.

  Dendrites, whose name comes from the Latin for branches, are projections of metal that can build up on the lithium surface and penetrate into the solid electrolyte, eventually crossing from one electrode to the other and shorting out the battery cell. Researchers haven’t been able to agree on what gives rise to these metal filaments, nor has there been much progress on how to prevent them and thus make lightweight solid-state batteries a practical option.

  The new research published in the journal Joule in a paper by MIT Professor Yet-Ming Chiang, graduate student Cole Fincher, and five others at MIT and Brown University, seems to resolve the question of what causes dendrite formation. It also shows how dendrites can be prevented from crossing through the electrolyte.

  Chiang said in the group’s earlier work, they made a “surprising and unexpected” finding, which was that the hard, solid electrolyte material used for a solid-state battery can be penetrated by lithium, which is a very soft metal, during the process of charging and discharging the battery, as ions of lithium move between the two sides.

  This shuttling back and forth of ions causes the volume of the electrodes to change. That inevitably causes stresses in the solid electrolyte, which has to remain fully in contact with both of the electrodes that it is sandwiched between. “To deposit this metal, there has to be an expansion of the volume because you’re adding new mass,” Chiang said. “So, there’s an increase in volume on the side of the cell where the lithium is being deposited. And if there are even microscopic flaws present, this will generate a pressure on those flaws that can cause cracking.”

  Those stresses, the team has now shown, cause the cracks that allow dendrites to form. The solution to the problem turns out to be more stress, applied in just the right direction and with the right amount of force.

  While previously, some researchers thought that dendrites formed by a purely electrochemical process, rather than a mechanical one, the team’s experiments demonstrate that it is mechanical stresses that cause the problem.

  The process of dendrite formation normally takes place deep within the opaque materials of the battery cell and cannot be observed directly, so Fincher developed a way of making thin cells using a transparent electrolyte, allowing the whole process to be directly seen and recorded. “You can see what happens when you put a compression on the system, and you can see whether or not the dendrites behave in a way that’s commensurate with a corrosion process or a fracture process,” he said.

  The team demonstrated that they could directly manipulate the growth of dendrites simply by applying and releasing pressure, causing the dendrites to zig and zag in perfect alignment with the direction of the force.

  Applying mechanical stresses to the solid electrolyte doesn’t eliminate the formation of dendrites, but it does control the direction of their growth. This means they can be directed to remain parallel to the two electrodes and prevented from ever crossing to the other side, and thus rendered harmless.

  In their tests, the researchers used pressure induced by bending the material, which was formed into a beam with a weight at one end. But they say that in practice, there could be many different ways of producing the needed stress. For example, the electrolyte could be made with two layers of material that have different amounts of thermal expansion, so that there is an inherent bending of the material, as is done in some thermostats.

  Another approach would be to “dope” the material with atoms that would become embedded in it, distorting it and leaving it in a permanently stressed state. This is the same method used to produce the super-hard glass used in the screens of smart phones and tablets, Chiang explained. And the amount of pressure needed is not extreme: The experiments showed that pressures of 150 to 200 megapascals were sufficient to stop the dendrites from crossing the electrolyte.

  The required pressure is “commensurate with stresses that are commonly induced in commercial film growth processes and many other manufacturing processes,” so should not be difficult to implement in practice, Fincher added.

  Fischer explained that in fact, a different kind of stress, called stack pressure, is often applied to battery cells, by essentially squishing the material in the direction perpendicular to the battery’s plates – somewhat like compressing a sandwich by putting a weight on top of it. It was thought that this might help prevent the layers from separating. But the experiments have now demonstrated that pressure in that direction actually exacerbates dendrite formation. “We showed that this type of stack pressure actually accelerates dendrite-induced failure,” he said.

  What is needed instead is pressure along the plane of the plates, as if the sandwich were being squeezed from the sides. “What we have shown in this work is that when you apply a compressive force you can force the dendrites to travel in the direction of the compression,” Fincher said, and if that direction is along the plane of the plates, the dendrites “will never get to the other side.”

  That could finally make it practical to produce batteries using solid electrolyte and metallic lithium electrodes. Not only would these pack more energy into a given volume and weight, but they would eliminate the need for liquid electrolytes, which are flammable materials.

  Having demonstrated the basic principles involved, the team’s next step will be to try to apply these to the creation of a functional prototype battery, Chiang said, and then to figure out exactly what manufacturing processes would be needed to produce such batteries in quantity. Though they have filed for a patent, the researchers don’t plan to commercialize the system themselves, he said, as there are already companies working on the development of solid-state batteries. “I would say this is an understanding of failure modes in solid-state batteries that we believe the industry needs to be aware of and try to use in designing better products,” he said.

  The research team included Christos Athanasiou and Brian Sheldon at Brown University, and Colin Gilgenbach, Michael Wang, and W. Craig Carter at MIT. The work was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the U.S. Department of Energy.

  ***

  Assuming the press release has adequate data for not being certain this work will yield a prototype battery, the odds are that there will be a successful prototype built. How many models are tried and what works in the end is very much in the air for now.

  On the other hand the mechanical formation research result looks quite compelling and actually makes reasoned sense now that it is explained. That raises questions. Does the dendrite formation greatly impede the battery capacity and function or does that added dendrite surface area increase it? Then one wonders how the dendrite formation impacts overall lifespan?

  This effort isn’t over yet. But this is a significant milestone with lots of clues and hints on where further research might go. It looks like solid state lithium metal batteries are just a matter of innovation, insight and creativity away from the market.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 21:30

• Is Mercedes Intentionally Detuning Its EVs To Charge $1,200 Yearly "Acceleration" Fee
  Is Mercedes Intentionally Detuning Its EVs To Charge $1,200 Yearly “Acceleration” Fee

  Mercedes-Benz is the latest auto manufacturer to unveil a subscription fee to unlock perks, such as the ability to boost acceleration. 

  The $1,200 yearly subscription is called “Acceleration Increase” and can be found on Mercedes’ online store. 

  “COMING SOON – Accelerate more powerfully: increase the torque and maximum output of your Mercedes-EQ,” reads the description on the online store. It’s available for all upcoming EQ electric models that will “improvement in acceleration of 0.8 to 1.0 seconds (0-60 MPH).” 

  

  According to The Drive, the performance improvements will only cost owners $1,200 a year. Here’s what owners get: 

  • Mercedes-EQ EQE 350 4MATIC (from 288 horsepower to 349 horsepower/0-60 mph from 6.0 to 5.1 seconds)
  • Mercedes-EQ EQE SUV 350 4MATIC (from 288 horsepower to 349 horsepower/0-60 mph from 6.2 to 5.2 seconds)
  • Mercedes-EQ EQS 450 4MATIC (from 355 horsepower to 443 horsepower/0-60 mph from 5.3 to 4.5 seconds)
  • Mercedes-EQ EQS SUV 4MATIC (from 355 horsepower to 443 horsepower/0-60 mph from 5.8 to 4.9 seconds)

  Is it worth it? Absolutely no. Those 0-60 mph times are awful when compared to other EVs. Plus, you don’t have to pay extra. This might prove that Mercedes intentionally detuned the EQ models to allow such a subscription. 

  This comes several months after BMW introduced the ConnectedDrive Store, a portal for existing owners can download various apps over the air to upgrade features on their vehicle, similar to how Tesla offers upgraded Autopilot subscriptions for a hefty monthly fee. 

  However, BMW sparked social media uproar by charging an $18 monthly subscription in some countries for owners to use heated seats already installed in the vehicle. 

  Subscription fees appear to be the new normal for the automotive industry to slap customers with to unlock extra technology or performance even though the vehicles already have capabilities. These fees sound like a scam. 

  The internet wasn’t too thrilled about this…,

  The most ridiculous part of this is that if you purchase the vehicle, you shouldn’t have to spend any additional money on performance for the BASE vehicle. I feel like this would have to be easy to get around through the ECU.

  — Tyler Sloboda (@A_Username_Here) November 24, 2022

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

  In case anyone forgot this is “their” plan for us pic.twitter.com/O0MCBRmhVn

  — A man has no name 🇨🇩 (@CaptainPree) November 24, 2022

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

  Microtransactions have come to destroy everything we enjoy https://t.co/oK7uiRsZhI

  — Marques Brownlee (@MKBHD) November 24, 2022

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

  Imagine your airbags won’t deploy because you missed a subscription payment 💀

  — BalaSiva (@L3VIfps) November 24, 2022

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

  This type of stuff should be made illegal before it’s too late and we’re paying to use our seatbelts

  — AxoLofa (@AxoLofa) November 24, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 20:55

• "If You Don't Know What's On The Thanksgiving Menu, It's You"
  “If You Don’t Know What’s On The Thanksgiving Menu, It’s You”

  By Michael Every of Rabobank

  If you wanted to embody how the turkeys running things react when confronted with the fact that they voted for Thanksgiving and Christmas, it would be Bankman-Fraud being invited to speak at a New York Times event next week alongside Yellen, President Zelenskiy, and Ben Affleck/Batman. Alleged harems, billions of dollars in client money missing, and public accusations it was used as a personal and political piggy bank? Hey – have a seat alongside the global elite (and Batman) to say sorry and tell us about all the good things you did! Madoff obviously wasn’t available.

  

  If only this nonsense were a one-off, but the market heads into the US Thanksgiving holiday in fine mood because ‘the Fed minutes were dovish’, confirming their wrong-all-year view. Yet the compromise between Fed doves, who are there, and Fed hawks, who are running things, is that while the pace of hikes will slow, the ultimate level of rates will be higher. If I carve you with a smaller knife, but more times, is that ‘dovish’? Try ‘turkey-ish’! Philip Marey, well ahead of the Street in calling a 5% peak, has his view here: he thinks 50bp is coming in December, but rates aren’t going down at all until 2024. That’s a sour cranberry, or real stuffing for some turkeys given Treasury yields fell after the minutes, and the dollar sold off.

  Note the RBNZ flirted with 100bp yesterday before going a record 75, and are saying their overnight cash rate needs to hit 5.5%, even at the cost of 3-quarter recession. Yes, rates are contractionary there – and they want them to be: “Spend wisely this Christmas,” said Governor Orr as he signed off, literally encouraging Kiwis to not be turkeys, and to save, not spend. Likewise, the BOC governor just told parliament that Canadian rates need to rise even higher because inflation is not under control. Again, note the absence of turkeys.

  In China, there is buzz about another cut in banks’ reserve requirement ratios (RRR). There are still turkeys who think this matters despite umpteen RRR cuts already to no effect. As Covid cases soar, lockdowns intensify, and footage of unrest emerges at the world’s largest iPhone factory, Bloomberg asks, ‘Is a Wealth Tax How Xi Fills China’s Empty Coffers?’ Months ago Western investment banks were piling into ‘wealth management opportunities’; now, some are slashing jobs after seeing only ‘poultry’ returns. Relatedly, Bloomberg flagged ‘High-Yield Party Returns to Emerging Markets Too Cheap to Ignore’ earlier this week; how long until the ‘Oops, They Got a Lot Cheaper’ headline emerges?

  In Europe, ECB speakers were generally hawkish. However, European politicians said ‘yelp’ – which is what a turkey says, as well as having the more regular meaning of surprise/panic.

  From January, Germany will start a “double-kaboom” policy. Not losing to two late goals in football, which the rest of Europe would love, but a EUR200bn gas and electricity subsidy, which Europe won’t. Households and SMEs will see gas prices capped at 12 EUR cents gross/KwH for 80% of their previous consumption until April 2024, and electricity at 40 EUR cents/KwH. For industry, the gas cap is 7 EUR cents net for 70% of consumption, and electricity is 13 EUR cents plus taxes, levies, and surcharges. Notably, Germany has already faced EU anger over the fact that it can afford to save itself while others can’t: with Germans looking after Germans in this crisis, which Germans looking after Germans got the EU into, expect EU knives to be sharpened.

  Moreover, Politico says ‘EU plans subsidy war chest as industry faces ‘existential’ threat from US’, noting: “If it weren’t enough that energy prices look set to remain permanently far higher than those in the US thanks to Russia’s war in Ukraine, US President Joe Biden is also currently rolling out a $369 billion industrial subsidy scheme to support green industries under the Inflation Reduction Act. EU officials fear that businesses will now face almost irresistible pressure to shift new investments to the US rather than Europe. EU industry chief Thierry Breton is warning that Biden’s new subsidy package poses an “existential challenge” to Europe’s economy.

  The European Commission and countries including France and Germany have realized they need to act quickly if they want to prevent the Continent from turning into an industrial wasteland… the EU is now working on an emergency scheme to funnel money into key high-tech industries.”

  In short, the EU will resist US mercantilism; which is resisting Chinese mercantilism; which Europe has had no issue with for decades. Yet Europe overlooks that they are the least prepared bloc for such a realpolitik backdrop: talk about turkeys voting for Christmas! Indeed, they are saying they will push back against pro-EU President Biden while:

  • Running large twin deficits, as the German fiscal deficit is about to get much larger due to the “double-kaboom”, which smells like a potential market Cluster-Truss;
  • The EU energy crisis is only being tempered by imports of LNG from the US;
  • The EU are reliant on US weapons to fight the must-win war in Ukraine;
  • The EU are reliant on exports to the US; and
  • The EU are reliant on Eurodollar swaplines from the US to maintain financial stability at a time when the Fed is raising rates, which it still is.

  More realistically, the EU also announced a gas price cap that does not actually cap gas prices; and the G7 announced a Russian oil price cap that does not actually cap the price of Russian oil.

  On energy, gas prices are low now, but will only rise over 2023. Oil prices are sending a clearer signal, but wait and see what happens if the Fed does what the market wants for Christmas. I have kept saying that when we see long US yields go down and commodities tumble it will mean something: we are seeing that now.

  Yet yelp all you want, but that is not compatible with a weaker dollar. If the US is in trouble, try being everyone else with a lag. Mercantilism is a force very much on the US side, and is as much a story for 2023 as any ‘pivots’.

  As they say, if you don’t know what’s on the Thanksgiving menu – it’s you.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 20:15

• "They're Trying To Run Out The Clock": Kari Lake Files 1st Lawsuit After Election
  “They’re Trying To Run Out The Clock”: Kari Lake Files 1st Lawsuit After Election

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake on Nov. 23 filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County.

  

  Lake sued Stephen Richer, the county’s recorder, and other officials in Arizona Superior Court. She’s asking the court to compel the officials to promptly produce records on the administration of the midterm elections, which featured widespread issues in the state’s largest county.

  “Given instances of misprinted ballots, the commingling of counted and uncounted ballots, and long lines discouraging people from voting, as demonstrated in the attached declarations, these records are necessary for Plaintiff to determine the full extent of the problems identified and their impacts on electors,” the 19-page suit states.

  Maricopa County officials have acknowledged that tabulators across many polling sites stopped working properly on election day. Among the advised solutions was voters placing their ballots into a box to be counted later. Declarations attached to the new suit from poll observers say that workers mixed counted and uncounted ballots in the same container at the end of the night.

  Another solution to the tabulator problem was a voter checking out of a site and utilizing a mail-in ballot. To try to figure out the extent of the problems, the Lake campaign on Nov. 15 requested information such as all records related to voters who checked into a site and who also submitted a ballot by mail. The campaign sent another request on Nov. 16. None of the records have been produced yet, which violates Arizona law that public record requests must be fulfilled “promptly,” the suit states.

  “We need information from Maricopa County,” Lake said on Steve Bannon’s “War Room.”

  “They ran the shoddiest election ever, in history, and we want some information. We’re on a timeline, a very strict timeline when it comes to fighting this botched election. And they’re dragging their feet. They don’t want to give us the information, so we’re asking the courts to force them to give us the information.”

  At present, Lake’s opponent Katie Hobbs, a Democrat who serves as Arizona’s secretary of state, is ahead in the race. Maricopa County is scheduled to canvass the results on Nov. 28, with the state following on Dec. 5. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey this week said he’s working to help Hobbs transition to become governor.

  The suit asks the court to compel the county to produce the records prior to the canvassing. “This deadline (or its substantial equivalent) is, under the circumstances presented, necessary to ensure that vital public records are furnished promptly and that apparent deficiencies can be remedied before canvassing of the 2022 general election,” it says.

  Maricopa County did not return requests for comment on a different lawsuit filed this week by Abe Hamadeh, the Republican candidate for state attorney general, and the Republican National Committee. Its offices were closed on Thursday for Thanksgiving.

  

  An election worker carries trays filled with mail in ballots to open and verify at the Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center in Phoenix, Ariz., on Nov. 11, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

  Attorney General

  The office of Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, recently requested information from Thomas Liddy, the chief of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office’s Civil Division, after receiving hundreds of complaints about issues related to the midterms.

  “These complaints go beyond pure speculation, but include first-hand witness accounts that raise concerns regarding Maricopa’s lawful compliance with Arizona election law,” Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Wright wrote.

  “Furthermore, statements made by both Chairman Gates and Recorder Richer, along with information Maricopa County released through official modes of communication appear to confirm potential statutory violations of title 16.”

  The information indicated that the county did not uniformly administer the election, as is required by state and federal law, and that poll workers weren’t trained to check out voters who left sites where the tabulators weren’t working right, she added.

  Wright requested the information on or before the county submits its canvass to the secretary of state because the issues “relate to Maricopa County’s ability to lawfully certify election results.”

  Bill Gates, the Republican chairman of the county’s Board of Supervisors, said in a statement that the county would not delay the canvass.

  “Prior to the canvass, the County will respond to a letter from the Arizona Attorney General’s Office requesting information about the administration of the November General Election,” he said at the time.

  “Board members received this letter on Saturday night and had a team working on a response all day Sunday, even as staff continued counting votes. We look forward to answering the AG’s questions with transparency as we have done throughout this election.”

  Brnovich’s office has not indicated that the county has provided the information, nor has the county said it handed over the information.

  Lake said on “War Room” that the county is “trying to run out the clock,” referring to the looming canvass.

  Not the ‘Main Case’

  At least one other lawsuit is in the works, according to Lake.

  “This is not our main case. When our main case drops, they will hear it,” she said.

  Lake reiterated that whistleblowers are coming forward and that officials “better think long and hard” before certifying the election in light of the widespread issues that unfolded in Maricopa County.

  The forthcoming suit may cite findings from nearly a dozen Republican attorneys who observed the election at Maricopa County sites and attested to the tabulator failures being more widespread than county officials presented.

  The issues led to “substantial voter suppression,” attorney Mark Sonnenklar wrote in a memorandum summarizing the findings. Since Republicans voted in larger numbers on the day than Democrats, “such voter suppression would necessarily impact the vote tallies for Republican candidates much more than the vote tallies for Democrat candidates,” he added.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 19:10

• The Ridiculous Reality Of The "Russian Oil Price Cap" Debate In One Picture
  The Ridiculous Reality Of The “Russian Oil Price Cap” Debate In One Picture

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

  Bloomberg reports EU Talks Stall Over Price Level for Proposed Russian Oil Cap

  The EU’s executive arm proposed a level of $65 a barrel, which Poland and the Baltic nations rejected as being too generous to Moscow, the people said. But several countries with major shipping industries, including Greece, don’t want to go below $70, the upper end of the range put forward by the EU earlier Wednesday.

  $70 is about where Russian oil known as Urals trades right now. 

  

  Reuters reports EU Split on Russian Oil Price Cap Level, Talks to Resume Thursday

  • Representatives of the EU’s 27 governments met in Brussels to discuss a G7 proposal to set the price cap in the range of $65-$70 per barrel, but the level proved too low for some and too high for others.
  • Poland, Lithuania and Estonia believe the $65-$70 per barrel would leave Russia with too high a profit, since production costs are around $20 per barrel.
  • Cyprus, Greece and Malta – countries with big shipping industries that stand to lose the most if Russian oil cargos are obstructed – think the cap is too low and demand compensation for the loss of business or more time to adjust.

  Enforcing the Cap

  The kicker is amusing: “EU diplomats said most EU countries, with G7 members France and Germany taking the lead, were supportive of the price cap, worried only about the ability to enforce it.”

  This brings us back to how any economist can possibly think such a cap might work.

  The Incentive to Cheat

  For further discussion of the obvious that many economists refuse to see, please consider the Carnegie article  The Flaw in the Plan to Cap Russian Oil Prices

  Whenever countries on sanctions lists face difficulties in selling their natural resources, creative minds will find a way to thwart the proposed measures with help from companies prepared to turn a blind eye to the shady elements of ostensibly legal transactions. Oil shipments could be bundled with some symbolic but pricey services, such as customs services, laboratory analysis, or document translation. Another scheme would involve loading a supposedly full 80,000-ton oil tanker with only 50,000 barrels of oil, bringing the cargo price per barrel closer to the market price.

  Such schemes would, of course, require some collusion on the part of intermediary countries, but that is unlikely to be a problem.  In recent months, Malaysia’s oil exports to China have exceeded the country’s actual oil production by one-third. Malaysia also cooperates with Iran and Venezuela in contravention of sanctions regimes. 

  Paradoxically, Russia may get some help from the OPEC countries here. For them, an emerging buyers’ cartel risks potentially manipulating the entire oil market and its prices. If the cartel succeeds in forcing Russia to obey its rules, the Arab countries may be next. If Russia counters the price cap by reducing its output, therefore, Saudi Arabia may be reluctant to increase its oil exports to compensate for the reduction, whether it has sufficient available production capacity or not.

  Finally, the jury is still out on whether India and China, the biggest new buyers of Russian oil, are prepared to join the price cap coalition.

  Western Allies Aim to Agree on Russian Oil Price Cap Wednesday

  The Wall Street Journal reports Western Allies Aim to Agree on Russian Oil Price Cap Wednesday emphasis mine.

  The aim of the plan, which was pushed hard by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, is to crimp Russian energy exports revenue while avoiding a surge in oil prices when a European embargo on Russian oil imports kicks in early next month. Despite European reluctance at the time, the G-7 first agreed on setting the oil price cap in June following Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine.

  Aim of the Plan

  The aim of the plan is to not eat Russian cake while eating Russian cake.

  It’s quite amazing that anyone thinks the plan can possibly work, but president Biden, the EU, Janet Yellen and even prominent economists think the cap is a good idea.

  Q&A Why Not?

  Q: Why not cap the price of everything and end inflation?
  A: Figure it out.

  Q: Is it possible a cap might seem to work?
  A: Yes. If the cap is set high enough it will be meaningless.

  And if by some lucky fate a cap is set where the direction of oil is headed anyway, then the economic illiterates will be hooting and cheering their alleged success.

  Why Won’t Caps Work?

  • China, India and other countries will not go along. That’s enough right there to show the ridiculousness of the idea.
  • Countries in the EU have an incentive to cheat. 

  One of Two Things

  1. The cap will fail and do nothing.
  2. The cap fail spectacularly and drive up the price by re-routing oil headed to the EU to China and India instead. Then the EU will have to get oil from the US or OPEC over longer routes increasing the cost.

  The above two points are in isolation. But things should not be viewed in isolation. Given a pending global recession, oil prices are likely to drop anyway.

  If they do, then as noted above, the economic illiterates will be hooting and cheering the alleged success of caps.

  Related Articles

  • Wild Oil Price Swings on an OPEC Rumor Followed by a Denial
  • The Biden Oil Fiasco Continues With Export Control Threats
  • G-7 Agrees to Cap the Price of Russian Oil Using a Buyer’s Cartel

  That third bullet point is from June 27. The US and EU have been struggling since then trying to get agreement on price caps. The bloc still needs approval from all 27 nations on a precise cap.

  Many of the above points were also in my November 22 post Under Pressure From the US, EU Agrees to Cap the Price of Russian Oil.

  The struggle to get agreement stems from the impossibility of the goal to not eat Russian cake while eating Russian cake. That alone tells you the plan is doomed: this cap idea is so stupid that only economists and politicians are dumb enough to believe it can work. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 18:35

• EU Fails To Agree On Gas Price Caps
  EU Fails To Agree On Gas Price Caps

  By Alex Kimani of OilPrice.com

  

  Plans to introduce price caps on natural gas prices have hit a dead-end after EU energy ministers on Thursday failed to reach an agreement amid deep divisions. 

  Czech Industry Minister Jozef Sikela has, however, said that the ministers did manage to agree on other “important measures”, including joint gas purchases, supply solidarity in times of need and expediting the authorization process for renewable energy. Sikela has also revealed that the ministers will meet again In December to try and work out their differences.

  Earlier this week, the European Commission issued a statement whereby it declared what it called a “safety price ceiling” for gas prices set at 275 euros, or $283 dollars, per megawatt-hour.  

  The EC also planned to tie benchmark European gas futures prices to the price of liquefied natural gas on the spot market. The “safety price ceiling” would be triggered automatically, when “the front-month TTF derivative settlement price exceeds €275 for two weeks” and, second, when “TTF prices are €58 higher than the LNG reference price for 10 consecutive trading days within the two weeks”.

  Both moves have caused trepidation amongst gas traders, “Even a short intervention would have severe, unintended and irreversible consequences in harming market confidence that the value of gas is known and transparent,” said the European Federation of Energy Traders this week.

  Earlier in the year, Italy’s prime minister, Mario Draghi, hatched a radical plan to contain the oil price hike. The former European Central Bank president floated the idea of creating a “cartel” of oil consumers at a meeting with Joe Biden in order to increase their bargaining power similar to how the biggest oil-producing nations came together through OPEC to agree annual oil production quotas. The two met at the White House in order to coordinate their positions on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the economic fallout from the conflict.

  “We are both dissatisfied with the way things work, in terms of oil for the US and in terms of gas for Europe. Prices don’t have any relationship with supply and demand,” Draghi said.

  According to Brussels think tank Bruegel, since September 2021, Germany, France, Italy and Spain–four of the largest EU economies–have each spent €20bn-€30bn to artificially lower energy prices. However, these subsidies are viewed as less than ideal since they help to fund Moscow, drain public finances and harm the environment.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 18:00

• Fired AP Reporter Who 'Risked Triggering WWIII' Actually Did Nothing Wrong
  Fired AP Reporter Who ‘Risked Triggering WWIII’ Actually Did Nothing Wrong

  On Tuesday we reported that the Associated Press had fired reporter James LaPorta, two days before his birthday, over an erroneous report which cited a ‘senior US intelligence official,’ who claimed that a Russian missile fired into Poland had killed two civilians.

  If true, the bombshell development could have potentially triggered ‘Article 5‘ – the mutual defense agreement between NATO members, risking WWIII.

  

  AP later retracted the story after it was revealed that Ukraine fired the missile, and the outlet issued the following correction which pinned blame on the anonymous intelligence official;

  In earlier versions of a story published November 15, 2022, The Associated Press reported erroneously, based on information from a senior American intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity, that Russian missiles had crossed into Poland and killed two people. Subsequent reporting showed that the missiles were Russian-made and most likely fired by Ukraine in defense against a Russian attack.

  Five days after the report, LaPorta was fired. But Slack messages obtained by Semafor reveal that he did nothing wrong – aside from working for AP in the first place.

  The messages begin with LaPorta passing along a tip from a “senior American intelligence official” who was “vetted by Ron Nixon.” Nixon is an Associated Press vice president.

  

  Next, editor Lisa Leff asked if the wire service could run with the narrative despite having a single source – which is against AP‘s rules for anonymous sources.

  “that call is above my pay grade,” LaPorta replied.

  

  Another AP reporter, Vanessa Gera, suggests moving forward with the report, writing, “I can’t imagine a US intelligence official would be wrong on this.“

  

  Leff then asks PaPorta if he is “in position to work up an urgent” – to which he replies, “No, I’m actually at a doctor’s appointment. What I passed is all I know at the moment.”

  

  Then, Gera and Leff decide to run with it.

  

  In short, LaPorta – a former USMC infantryman, was fired after forwarding a tip from a vetted source, and then demurring when asked if he thought they should run with it.

  He has since been ordered not to comment on the situation, saying that he “would love to comment on the record, but I have been ordered by the AP to not comment.” As such, Zero Hedge has not reached out for comment.

  Oddly (or maybe there’s a perfectly good reason for it), journalist John Leichester’s name was also on the byline of the article in question despite being nowhere in the slack conversation – though he wasn’t fired.

  While LaPorta said Nixon had vetted his source, Nixon later said he did not know that the source was being cited for the missile story, according to people who spoke to David Bauder, an Associated Press reporter.

  The Associated Press has taken additional disciplinary action but declined to say against whom that action was taken. There have been no reports of any person besides LaPorta losing a job, including John Leicester, who was also listed on the byline.

  According to Bauder, Leicester was not involved with the anonymously sourced material being placed into the story. –The Epoch Times

  Most importantly, however, who was the anonymous ‘senior US intelligence official’ that fed LaPorta a false narrative which risked WWIII?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 17:45

• Epstein Accusers Sue JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank For Enabling Notorious Pedophile
  Epstein Accusers Sue JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank For Enabling Notorious Pedophile

  Multiple class action lawsuits filed by Jeffrey Epstein accusers accuses JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank of enabling Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse victims by turning a blind eye in order to “churn profits,” Bloomberg reports.

  

  The lawsuits, filed in a New York court, allege the banks had “knowingly benefited and received things of value for assisting, supporting, facilitating, and otherwise providing the most critical service for the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking organization.”

  JPMorgan was accused in the suit of “financially benefiting from participating” in the alleged sex trafficking through providing financial support from 1998 to August 2013. Deutsche Bank was accused of knowing that they would “earn million of dollars” from its relationship with Epstein. 

  Both suits are seeking unspecified damages and ask to be certified as a class action. A Deutsche Bank spokeswoman said the claim “lacks merit” and the bank will present its arguments in court. A spokesman for JPMorgan in London declined to comment. -Bloomberg

  “Epstein and his co-conspirators could not have victimized without assistance from wealthy individuals and financial institutions,” said Bradley Edwards of Edwards Pottinger, one of the firms representing victims. “We will not stop fighting for the survivors until everyone is held responsible.”

  And while Epstein’s client list has remained amazingly concealed during his – and sidekick Ghislaine Maxwell’s trials, the new class-action suits threaten to bring Epstein’s associations back into the spotlight – as a bevy of prominent financiers, entrepreneurs, celebrities, politicians and the British Royal Family have been associated with the dead pedophile (many of whom, like Bill Gates, had no problem hanging out with him after his first conviction).

  The UK’s Prince Andrew had to withdraw from public duties after a disastrous television interview about his ties to Epstein. Jes Staley abruptly stepped down as chief executive officer of Barclays Plc last year after UK regulators shared with Barclays the preliminary findings of their multi year probe into what he told the bank’s board about his relationship with Epstein.

  Staley has said that he knew Epstein since 2000 when he was head of JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s private bank and was told to strike up a professional relationship with the financial adviser. -Bloomberg

  “Staley made sure Epstein and his illegal sexual abuse organization was absolutely protected by the bank,” reads the lawsuit, filed Nov. 24.

  Meanwhile, anonymous accusers are being represented by David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner, who represented Virginia Giuffre vs. Prince Andrew in a case which subsequently settled. We’re sure the prominent Democrat attorney wasn’t chosen to protect Epstein’s client list while ensuring Giuffre was also paid.

  Epstein, a prolific pedophile who was, by all appearances, running a honeypot operation on prominent men, “was found dead in his US jail cell in 2019,” Bloomberg reports – which omitted any suggestion that he committed suicide.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 17:25

• Biden Allocates $1.1 Billion To Keep California’s Nuclear Power Plant Operating
  Biden Allocates $1.1 Billion To Keep California’s Nuclear Power Plant Operating

  Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  California’s last operating nuclear power plant was given another funding boost Nov. 21 as operators seek to keep it running for another eight years.

  

  The U.S. Energy Department awarded Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant $1.1 billion from the Civil Nuclear Credit Program funded by an infrastructure bill passed by Congress in 2021.

  “This is a critical step toward ensuring that our domestic nuclear fleet will continue providing reliable and affordable power to Americans as the nation’s largest source of clean electricity,” U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm said in a statement on Nov. 21.

  

  Nuclear power provides half of the nation’s carbon-free electricity, according to the agency. Since 2013, 13 reactors across the United States have shuttered.

  Final terms of the funding will need to be finalized by the Energy Department, officials said. The plant produces about 15 percent of California’s renewable energy.

  It produced about 9 percent of the state’s energy last year, according to the state’s energy commission.

  Politicians applauded the funding that will help extend the life of the once-doomed power plant located in central California near San Luis Obispo.

  “This investment creates a path forward for a limited-term extension of the Diablo Canyon Power plant to support reliability statewide and provide an onramp for ore clean energy projects to come online,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement.

  Newsom signed legislation Sept. 1 to reverse plans to terminate the plant, which was scheduled to close in 2025.

  The bill was essential to prevent rolling blackouts and increased electricity prices in California, according to author Sen. Bill Dodd (D-Napa). It allows Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) to continue operating the plant until 2030. It also authorized a forgivable loan of $1.4 billion from the state to help extend the operations.

  PG&E agreed six years ago to close the San Luis Obispo plant amid pressure from environmental groups and the local community.

  Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a statement she welcomed the news.

  “This short-term extension is necessary if California is going to meet its ambitious clean-energy goals while continuing to deliver reliable power,” Feinstein wrote. “This is especially critical as California’s electric grid has faced increasing challenges from climate-fueled extreme weather events.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 16:50

• "Amnesty Begins Next Week": Musk To Reinstate Suspended Twitter Accounts En Masse
  “Amnesty Begins Next Week”: Musk To Reinstate Suspended Twitter Accounts En Masse

  Elon Musk has given politically divided families all the ammunition they need for an epic pie fight this Thanksgiving – announcing ‘general amnesty’ for suspended Twitter accounts as long as they haven’t broken the law or engaged in egregious spam.

  

  On Wednesday, Musk asked in a poll whether Twitter should offer “general amnesty to suspended accounts,” to which 72.4% voted “Yes”.

  “The people have spoken,” Musk tweeted Friday, adding “Amnesty begins next week.“

  “Vox Populi, Vox Dei,” he said in closing – a Latin phrase meaning “The voice of the People, the voice of God.”

  The people have spoken.

  Amnesty begins next week.

  Vox Populi, Vox Dei.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2022

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

  Musk’s decision is sure to piss off even more advertisers, who have been pulling ad spending (as they underperform the market). Advertisers including Audi, General Mills, GM, United Airlines and Pfizer have all paused ads, leading to what Musk described as a “massive drop” in revenue.

  And… it looks like he gives exactly zero f**ks. (Though what of one Alex E. Jones?)

  Let the games begin!

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 16:15

• Socialism Sounds Good On Paper But It Was Deadly For The Pilgrims
  Socialism Sounds Good On Paper But It Was Deadly For The Pilgrims

  Authored by Michael Maharrey via SchiffGold.com,

  When I was a kid, we used to say some things only “sound good on paper.” In other words, they seem like good plans, but there is no way they’re going to work in the real world.

  That’s socialism in a nutshell.

  

  The Pilgrims found this out the hard way during their first couple of years in North America. Their experiment in socialism turned out deadly.

  Turns out, you can’t just ignore economics and human nature.

  Socialism really does sound good on paper though, right? We’re all going to own everything together and take care of each other. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.“

  It sounds so nice. And we all want to be nice, right? People are emotionally drawn to socialism because it sounds so good. It sounds fair. It sounds — nice.

  But do you know what’s not nice?

  Corpses.

  That’s exactly what happened the Pilgrims got when they took a stab at socialism.

  Most Americans don’t know that the Plymouth colony was originally an experiment in socialist utopianism and were it not for a complete 180 a couple of years in, we probably wouldn’t have enjoyed the bountiful feasts most of us will indulge in today. There would have been no Thanksgiving because there would have been nobody left to give thanks.

  When the Pilgrims arrived in Massachusetts on November 11, 1620, they placed all their food and provisions in a “common store.” These folks were forward thinkers. They didn’t even have Marx’s scribblings to appeal to. They set things up on the socialist principle of, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

  Things got off to a bad start in the new world. Conditions were miserable, as William Bradford described them.

  That which was most sad and lamentable was, that in two or three months time half of their company died, especially in January and February, being the depth of winter, and wanting houses and other comforts; being infected with the scurvy and other diseases, so as there died sometimes two or three of a day, in the aforesaid time; that of 100 and odd persons, scarce 50 remained.”

  Now, the Pilgrim’s initial struggles didn’t really have anything to do with socialism. They just had the misfortune of landing in Massachusetts at the onset of winter. If you live in New England, you understand their pain.

  But even after their first summer, things didn’t improve much. The following fall, the Pilgrims harvested their first crops and again, they all went into the common store.

  Now, wasn’t that nice? No greed. Nobody getting any more than they should. Of course, nobody was getting much of anything at all – but still – they had to feel good about themselves, right? Because, after all, the system was fair.

  So, in November the ship Fortune arrived with more than 30 new settlers, mostly young men. More manpower was welcome, but according to accounts, they brought “not so much as a bisket-cake” with them. Now they had a meager supply of food in the common store and even more mouths to feed. The future looked bleak as food supplies ran out and the “planned socialist” community faced starvation yet again.

  The following year, the harvest was poor in spite of the added manpower. Nevertheless, the pilgrims again put the meager harvest in the common store. Because, you know, it’s going to work this time!

  It didn’t.

  That winter, they starved.

  The colonists were learning economics the hard way.

  Richard Grant in his book The Incredible Bread Machine wrote:

  “For two years the Pilgrims faithfully practiced communal ownership of the means of production. And for two years nearly starved to death, rationed at times to “but a quarter of a pound of bread a day to each person.” Governor Bradford wrote that “famine must still ensue the next year also if not some way prevented.” He described how the colonists finally decided to introduce private property:

  [The colonists] began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. [In 1623] after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set down every man for his own … and to trust themselves … so assigned to every family a parcel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Gov. or any other could use, … and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little-ones with them to set corn, which before would allege weakness, and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.”

  Reflecting on the experience of the previous two years, Bradford goes on to describe the folly of communal ownership:

  “The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Platosand other ancients, applauded by some of later times; — that the taking away of property, and bringing in community into a common wealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young-men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children, without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more indivision of victuals and cloths, than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice…”

  Woah! Some people resented doing all the work? They didn’t work as hard when they knew they weren’t going to directly benefit?

  Shocking.

  Actually, it’s not shocking at all. It’s human nature. And we all know it.

  Now, we can lament the fact. We can say it shouldn’t be that way. We can finger-point and talk about greed. We can get all holier-than-thou and say we wouldn’t act that way (in other words lie). But people will still be people.

  Here’s a harsh truth: good intentions and feel-good policies can’t trump basic economics. You can dream of unicorns and lollipops all day, but it won’t change reality.

  Scarcity. Human behavior. Incentives. The experience of the Pilgrims vividly demonstrates basic economic principles. Their good intentions could not overpower the cold hard realities of economic principles. They never have. They never will.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 15:40

• Musk Tweets "Tesla Full Self-Driving Beta Now Available To Anyone" In US
  Musk Tweets “Tesla Full Self-Driving Beta Now Available To Anyone” In US

  The wait is finally over for Tesla owners who paid $10,000, or as of recently $15,000, for the controversial driver-assistance system, also known as “Full Self-Driving.” 

  Twitter, SpaceX, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted Thursday morning, “FSD Beta is now available to anyone in North America who requests it from the car screen, assuming you have bought this option.”  

  Tesla Full Self-Driving Beta is now available to anyone in North America who requests it from the car screen, assuming you have bought this option.

  Congrats to Tesla Autopilot/AI team on achieving a major milestone!

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2022

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

  FSD is Tesla’s upgraded “Autopilot” driver-assist feature that allows vehicles to navigate highways and city streets autonomously. Until now, some customers who paid the fee were blocked from using it “because they didn’t score high enough on metrics Tesla uses to set insurance rates,” explained Bloomberg. 

  Over the last six months, about 100,000 drivers were granted access to FSB Beta. Musk has promised a broader roll-out of FSD several times, though his timelines were off. In the latest 3Q22 earnings call, he indicated FSD would be available to all North American users who paid the fee: 

  “This quarter, we expect to go to a wide release of Full Self-Driving Beta in North America. So, anyone who has ordered Full Self-Driving will have access to the FSD Beta program this year, probably about a month from now. So – and then obviously, anyone who buys a car and purchases the Full Self-Driving option will immediately have to that available to them,” Musk said.

  The world’s richest man first promised FSD in 2018. Only a small number of “expert and careful drivers” received FSD in July 2021. On the last FSD release, Tesla lowered the requirement for at least 100 Autopilot miles and an 80 safety score, and now anyone who wants it can click a few buttons, sign a waiver, and presto… 

  Just got FSD on a car with 54 score and less than 100 miles on autopilot ! 114 kms 🇨🇦 Wide release here we goo!! pic.twitter.com/57dtzJalQp

  — 🤖FSD & Chill⚡️ (@MateenOmair) November 24, 2022

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

  Just got #FSD Beta 10.69.3.1 here in Toronto. Took it out for a drive in North York and this is the most confident FSD drive I’ve ever had. Zero takeovers within the ~30min drive.The turns are confident and navigation around parked cars on the roads are human-like.🤯10/10! #Tesla pic.twitter.com/JZzpvFqGDm

  — Ruiwen (@RuiwenHe) November 24, 2022

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

  FSD Beta Highway Merge Construction 🚧 @elonmusk $TSLA $Tesla pic.twitter.com/XTn3ADZhWp

  — Kevin Chunilal (@KevinChunilal) November 24, 2022

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

  FSD Beta 10.69.3.1 locked and loaded🙂
  Thank you team @Tesla pic.twitter.com/bSXKBHrmMK

  — Alicia Cryst  (@alicia_cryst) November 24, 2022

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

  However, over the years, we have not just pointed out delay after delay for FSD but also safety concerns around Autopilot.  

  In June, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published the first report highlighting that Tesla vehicles running on Autopilot were involved in 273 reported crashes over the past year. 

  “These technologies hold great promise to improve safety, but we need to understand how these vehicles are performing in real-world situations,” NHTSA’s administrator, Steven Cliff, told reporters over the summer. 

  Perhaps Musk’s wide release of FSD should make every non-Telsa driver a little bit more cautious when they see a Model S, Model 3, Model X, and or Model Y coasting down the highway or city street while the driver is distracted playing video games on an iPad while the car drives itself. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 15:05

• How To Talk To Family Members About Bitcoin This Thanksgiving
  How To Talk To Family Members About Bitcoin This Thanksgiving

  Authored by Joakim Book via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  I don’t…

  That’s it. That’s the article.

  

  In all sincerity, that is the full message: Just don’t do it. It’s not worth it.

  You’re not an excited teenager anymore, in desperate need of bragging credits or trying out your newfound wisdom. You’re not a preaching priestess with lost souls to save right before some imminent arrival of the day of reckoning. We have time.

  Instead: just leave people alone. Seriously. They came to Thanksgiving dinner to relax and rejoice with family, laugh, tell stories and zone out for a day — not to be ambushed with what to them will sound like a deranged rant in some obscure topic they couldn’t care less about. Even if it’s the monetary system, which nobody understands anyway.

  Get real.

  If you’re not convinced of this Dale Carnegie-esque social approach, and you still naively think that your meager words in between bites can change anybody’s view on anything, here are some more serious reasons for why you don’t talk to friends and family about Bitcoin the protocol — but most certainly not bitcoin, the asset:

  1. Your family and friends don’t want to hear it. Move on.
      
  2. For op-sec reasons, you don’t want to draw unnecessary attention to the fact that you probably have a decent bitcoin stack. Hopefully, family and close friends should be safe enough to confide in, but people talk and that gossip can only hurt you.
      
  3. People find bitcoin interesting only when they’re ready to; everyone gets the price they deserve. Like Gigi says in “21 Lessons:”

  “Bitcoin will be understood by you as soon as you are ready, and I also believe that the first fractions of a bitcoin will find you as soon as you are ready to receive them. In essence, everyone will get ₿itcoin at exactly the right time.”

  It’s highly unlikely that your uncle or mother-in-law just happens to be at that stage, just when you’re about to sit down for dinner.

  1. Unless you can claim youth, old age or extreme poverty, there are very few people who genuinely haven’t heard of bitcoin. That means your evangelizing wouldn’t be preaching to lost, ignorant souls ready to be saved but the tired, huddled and jaded masses who could care less about the discovery that will change their societies more than the internal combustion engine, internet and Big Government combined. Big deal.

  2. What is the case, however, is that everyone in your prospective audience has already had a couple of touchpoints and rejected bitcoin for this or that standard FUD. It’s a scam; seems weird; it’s dead; let’s trust the central bankers, who have our best interest at heart. No amount of FUD busting changes that impression, because nobody holds uninformed and fringe convictions for rational reasons, reasons that can be flipped by your enthusiastic arguments in-between wiping off cranberry sauce and grabbing another turkey slice.

  3. It really is bad form to talk about money — and bitcoin is the best money there is. Be classy.

  Now, I’m not saying to never ever talk about Bitcoin. We love to talk Bitcoin — that’s why we go to meetups, join Twitter Spaces, write, code, run nodes, listen to podcasts, attend conferences. People there get something about this monetary rebellion and have opted in to be part of it. Your unsuspecting family members have not; ambushing them with the wonders of multisig, the magically fast Lightning transactions or how they too really need to get on this hype train, like, yesterday, is unlikely to go down well.

  However, if in the post-dinner lull on the porch someone comes to you one-on-one, whisky in hand and of an inquisitive mind, that’s a very different story. That’s personal rather than public, and it’s without the time constraints that so usually trouble us. It involves clarifying questions or doubts for somebody who is both expressively curious about the topic and available for the talk. That’s rare — cherish it, and nurture it.

  Last year I wrote something about the proper role of political conversations in social settings. Since November was also election month, it’s appropriate to cite here:

  “Politics, I’m starting to believe, best belongs in the closet — rebranded and brought out for the specific occasion. Or perhaps the bedroom, with those you most trust, love, and respect. Not in public, not with strangers, not with friends, and most certainly not with other people in your community. Purge it from your being as much as you possibly could, and refuse to let political issues invade the areas of our lives that we cherish; politics and political disagreements don’t belong there, and our lives are too important to let them be ruled by (mostly contrived) political disagreements.”

  If anything, those words seem more true today than they even did then. And I posit to you that the same applies for bitcoin.

  Everyone has some sort of impression or opinion of bitcoin — and most of them are plain wrong. But there’s nothing people love more than a savior in white armor, riding in to dispel their errors about some thing they are freshly out of fucks for. Just like politics, nobody really cares.

  Leave them alone. They will find bitcoin in their own time, just like all of us did.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 14:30

• Fired Twitter Moderator Reveals "Worries" Over Platform's Free Speech Future
  Fired Twitter Moderator Reveals “Worries” Over Platform’s Free Speech Future

  Take one look at some of the employees fired from Twitter the past two weeks by Elon Musk and it’s easy to understand why the company operated as a far-left echo chamber for so long.  Though company executives claimed that the platform was “politically neutral” for many years, evidence is coming to light which confirms what we already knew – There was a severe leftist bias that permeated every aspect of the social media site which specifically targeted and censored any viewpoints or facts that did not fit with their narrative.

  Hilariously, Musk posted on the discovery of a supply closet at Twitter HQ containing activist swag including stacks of t-shirts which have “#StayWoke” printed on them.  A neutral company?  Not a chance.

  Most interesting of all has been the absolute distress and in some cases rage expressed by long time employees over Musk’s free speech position.  The level of open authoritarianism on display by the political left in the past few years has been astonishing, if not predictable.  The reaction to changes at Twitter solidifies this obsession in crystalline detail.  Here, former contracted Twitter employee (a male identifying as a trans female) hired as a “moderator” (censor) tells NBC about his worries when it comes to the company’s future as a free speech based platform.

  Musk fired over 4000 outside contractors this past week, most of them employed as moderators.  NBC’s message is relatively clear:  Free speech is a negative.  And, such an ideal being applied at Twitter overshadows the great harm being done to the poor innocent leftist employees who were doing God’s work by protecting platform users from unfiltered discussions. 

  The problem is, anyone can block anyone else on Twitter at any time and filter their own social media feeds, which completely debunks the common argument that people will be “harmed” by surprise exposure to politically incorrect discussions.  The next most exploited argument is that “hate speech” will run rampant on the site – But the term “hate speech” has become so diluted by false leftist accusations and fraudulent hype that it is now meaningless.  Even the term “groomer” was banned on Twitter before Elon Musk took over.

  The corporate media has spent the better part of the past week predicting the implosion of Twitter after the firing of several thousand workers.  At any moment the company was going to shut down, they claimed.  This has not happened, revealing a stark truth – The company runs just fine without them.  Those several thousand regular employees and contracted moderators were useless dead weight.  The proof is right there for the world to see. 

  Has the Earth exploded because of less moderation on Twitter?  No.  Has the Third Reich returned because gender identity warriors aren’t sitting on their laptops at home banning people who say Lizzo’s obesity is unhealthy or that men cannot be women, cannot menstruate and cannot have babies?  Nothing has happened.

  This leads us to a singular conclusion – Leftist censorship is about power and control, not about safety  They know it, and we know it.  And now, with Twitter out of their hands their denials can be challenged in an open forum.  It’s the one thing they fear the most.      

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 13:55

• Incoming GOP Congressman Fears Democrats Will Downplay FTX Scandal, Calls for 'Thorough' Investigation
  Incoming GOP Congressman Fears Democrats Will Downplay FTX Scandal, Calls for ‘Thorough’ Investigation

  Authored by John Ransom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A newly-elected GOP representative from New York said that he worries that Democrats will try to downplay potential campaign finance and securities law violations by former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried using a lame-duck session of Congress before the new Congress is sworn in.

  

  Republican George Santos, 34, who won New York’s 3^rd Congressional District flipping the seat red, joined his congressional colleagues by calling for a “thorough investigation” when the new GOP Congress takes over next year.

  The spectacular collapse of FTX, a crypto-currency exchange that is headquartered in the Bahamas, which filed for bankruptcy on Nov. 11 has left around million customers and other investors facing total losses of billions of dollars. Since then, reports have emerged that Alameda Research, a crypto hedge fund established by Bankman-Fried, was trading billions of dollars from FTX accounts without clients’ knowledge.

  

  The House Financial Services Committee said last week it plans to hold a hearing in December to investigate the FTX collapse. It said it expects to hear from companies and individuals involved, including Bankman-Fried, FTX, and Alameda Research.

  Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said in a statement that the United States needs “legislative action to ensure that digital assets entities cannot operate in the shadows outside of robust federal oversight.”

  But Santos is not convinced the Democrat-led committee will take robust action.

  “Waters has signaled that she’s not going to investigate Bankman-Fried and FTX as a class. So I’m a little concerned that the Democrats right now as lame-ducks in Congress, will deflect the issue between now and the start of the new Congress,” Santos, who is attending leadership meetings for the GOP this week, told The Epoch Times.

  “That’s something I’m very interested in investigating,” he added.

  Santos, who worked as a financial advisor and has asked for a Financial Services Committee assignment, said that “accountability is mandatory and absolutely necessary.”

  “Nobody should get away with this with impunity,” he added.

  Santos made news last week when he called some planned investigations by the House GOP, such probes of the COVID-19 origins, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s handling of the pandemic, and Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings, “hyperpartisan” issues.

  When speaking with the Epoch Times, Santos clarified his remarks, saying he was fine with any investigations, but that as a freshman legislator from New York with a background in financial services, he thought he could leave those decisions in the hands of party leadership.

  “I’m not opposed to investigating. I don’t think you’ll find someone more interested in investigating Hunter Biden and Anthony Fauci, than I am” said Santos.

  “But I’ll leave that to the senior members of Congress who know how to do those things better than I do,” he added.

  Santos said that for him these weren’t his main issues, because he felt better versed in financial and economic matters. The incoming congressman confirmed that he has asked for assignments in both the financial services committee and foreign affairs committee.

  “We don’t have the power to just pass legislation, but we also have the power to hold people accountable,” Santos said of the FTX scandal.

  Donations to Democrats

  The FTX matter has taken on added urgency given that Bankman-Fried was the second-largest Democratic donor for the 2021–22 election cycle, donating over $38 million to various Democrat-aligned PACs with another $990,000 going to individual members of Congress.

  Many of the donations came from foreign addresses in Nassau, capital of the Bahamas, and Hong Kong, according to an analysis by the Epoch Times.

  According to data by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), of the 182 donations made by Bankman-Fried this election cycle, two donations came with no address, 16 donations came from a Hong Kong address, 68 came from U.S. addresses and 96 came from two addresses in Nassau, Bahamas.

  It’s legal for American citizens to donate to campaigns from foreign accounts, said attorney John Zakhem, whose practice areas includes federal election law.

  “If he tells you that he’s a U.S. citizen living in the Bahamas, there’s no prohibition against him making a contribution,” Zakem told The Epoch Times, adding that once a campaign checks that box they only worry about the funds clearing the bank.

  There is also no prohibition against Bankman-Fried having donated money to those in Congress who regulate the financial services arena.

  The Washington Free Beacon reported this week, citing FEC records, that Bankman-Fried and his colleagues at FTX donated $300,351 to nine members of the House Financial Services Committee, with “[s]ome of the largest contributions [made] to Democrats on the committee’s Digital Assets Working Group, which worked on regulation of the crypto industry.”

  An Ethics Issue 

  It’s this nexus between Bankman-Fried and the committee members that makes Santos concerned that the Democrats might try to downplay the scandal in the upcoming investigation.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/24/2022 – 13:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Liberty Is Worth The Fight
  Liberty Is Worth The Fight

  Authored by J.B.Shurk via The Gatestone Institute,

  “There comes a time,” Martin Luther King Jr. advised, “when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.”

  Moral imperative, in other words, outweighs personal security, political correctness, and the psychological comfort of identifying with the crowd. During troubling times of human violence and suffering, it is always the lonely few — either blessed with innate courage or made resolute through private, grinding struggle — who dare to take a stand against encroaching evils tacitly accepted by the many. Such is the power of individual free will when man chooses principle as his guide.

  Today is a time for the voices of the few to coalesce. What is at stake is nothing less than individual control over one’s life, liberty, property, privacy, and pursuit of happiness. Freedom of speech hangs in the balance, as do freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. That many of these natural rights were recorded together in America’s First Amendment is not accidental. They are intimately interwoven. To weaken any one, weakens them all.

  To freeze the bank accounts of Freedom Convoy protesters demanding freedom from unwanted experimental “vaccines,” as was done in Canada, is to threaten speech, assembly, bodily autonomy, religious objection, property rights, and public resistance to government-caused harm.

  To forbid a football coach from publicly praying is to force him to sacrifice both his religious freedom and freedom of expression; if the very things that most define us are relegated to the home, then religious identity and freedom of speech do not have far to roam.

  Aside from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to create an official “Disinformation Governance Board” to “combat” free speech antithetical to the government’s point of view, reports show that DHS employees have regularly met with Facebook and Twitter to suppress and censor certain facts and opinions in online discussion of numerous issues dominating public debate — including such broad topics as the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, Covid-19, and “racial justice.”

  To hand Western governments the power to decide what may or may not be published on social media deprives the public square of both unfettered free speech (within the bounds of Brandenburg v. Ohio) and a truly free press. To empower government actors with the authority to designate some thoughts as “mis-,” “mal-,” or “dis-” information — in other words, to permit politicians and bureaucrats to arbitrate what is true or false, helpful or harmful, protected opinion or malicious deception — is to abrogate entirely the protections of America’s First Amendment. To use private sector cutouts as the government’s implicit censors is not only a nefarious and cynical workaround — it is also illegal to act as a government agent to enable it to circumvent constitutional prohibitions, in this instance limiting who may participate in the modern-day equivalent of the traditional town square.

  To censor dissenting views on experimental, yet coerced, medical treatments, two-tiered economic shutdowns (during which “Big Box” stores are inexplicably “allowed” to operate while economically vulnerable neighborhood shops are not), is mass censorship in the name of public health, shielding from scrutiny monstrous tyranny draped in the false cloak of the “greater” or “common good.”

  

  When governments censor dissenting opinions from public debate, they serve no greater interests than their own. When governments claim to act for the people’s “own good” while banning contrary points of view, they all too often augment their own power at the public’s expense. When governments camouflage their orders behind claims of “good intentions,” then the most atrocious evils can be blissfully undertaken.

  If you allow yourself to be blinded by any government’s “good intentions,” your eyes may one day be flooded with the sights of unspeakable harms. Hugo Chávez’s socialist government made many such promises “for the good” of the people of Venezuela, while his government’s endless public betrayals have left that nation’s citizenry suffering immeasurably still today.

  This is a pivotal moment in human history, when centuries of steady progress toward human emancipation and individual liberty will either find new, urgent momentum or suffer regrettable retreat. Either freedom means something, or it does not. Either personal agency resides in the hands of every individual, or it disappears behind a view of people as nothing more than parts of collective groups. Either self-government demands each citizen have a voice, or the many must obey the edicts of an ever-expansive government run by the few. Either citizens are uniquely empowered to control the direction of their governments, or legal citizenship and nationality mean nothing at all. These are the simple yet serious stakes we face today. They are clear, unforgiving, and unavoidable.

  The reason we are here now at this intersection in the history of liberty is not complex: it is the outcome of human nature. For most people in the West today, war and its painful consequences are unknown or have been distorted by time. Although violence and bloodshed continue uninterrupted in many places around the world, most Westerners have long been spared the horrors of war directly outside their doors. The difficulty for humans to appreciate what they cannot see has made them careless in preventing what they do not intimately know.

  Many politicians cavalierly embrace totalitarianism once again. Citizens, once aware of the attendant dangers to peace when large corporations and national governments work hand in glove to push “politically correct” ideas upon society, are apparently so far removed from the twentieth century’s vivid lessons in fascist, communist, and Nazi propaganda that they fail to see the harm in bureaucrats and officeholders dictating to the public what it may believe.

  Many Westerners have forgotten that freedom of speech and personal liberty — far from menacing “microaggressions” deserving of sanction — are the surest safety valves for mediating animosities inherent within any society before outright violence is unleashed in their stead. For many people, decades of relative peace have transformed hard-fought Western freedoms into disposable inessentials. Governments and international corporations think little of the risks to social cohesion — and probably do not even care — when they purposefully manipulate populations with mass media propaganda meant to reinforce the elite agendas of the World Economic Forum covering everything from energy use and food production to medical mandates and health passports. The same allure of ultimate power and control that fueled both world wars remains all too enticing.

  Governments already acclimated to universal public surveillance and warrantless online tracking see central bank digital currencies, human tracking implants, and the imposition of social credit scores all on the horizon and believe the time for total control over citizens is near, so long as they are the ones doing the controlling.

  As always, technology’s liberating benefits are accompanied by its powers to threaten populations and to suppress information that its directors may abhor. Radio and television connected the world as never before, but mass communication also rapidly fueled the rise of dictators and the spread of public indoctrination to new heights. Nuclear energy has provided both abundant power and the potential for apocalyptic destruction. Personal computers, smartphones and the internet have given ordinary individuals megaphones through which to articulate new ideas, yet that same cyberspace has opened up a brand new battlespace for government surveillance, propaganda, and mass manipulation.

  Rather than ensuring citizens’ economic security and fostering freer markets, some governments appear to view technology as providing not only more efficient tools for redistributing wealth, limiting personal income, and levying taxes but also the means for creating a technocratic system of total surveillance in which bureaucratic control over what consumers buy and sell and the implementation of social credit scores can both reward “politically correct” behaviors and punish “wrong” points of view.

  Technological advancement provides the means for both greater human freedom and absolute human abasement. When governments are allowed to make that choice for us, they will often choose the latter. Their concern is not our personal liberty but their power. For human freedom to flourish, only the people are capable of keeping government power in check.

  It is therefore imperative that Westerners not lose sight of the most important battle already raging — one pitting individual freedom against total state control. Every other issue should be scrutinized through this lens. We are, indeed, at an intersection in the history of human liberty. Even if only a small minority comprehend what is now at risk, those few would do well to fight for preserving our individual freedoms against those governments and corporations working diligently to dilute them.

  Either the light of liberty is once again rekindled, or it will be extinguished until a later day.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 23:55

• US Army Will Select Winner Of Next-Gen Assault Helicopter This Year
  US Army Will Select Winner Of Next-Gen Assault Helicopter This Year

  US Army officials are preparing to announce the winner of the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft. The contest comes down to Bell Textron and Lockheed Martin Sikorsky competing for the FLRAA contract to replace the Army’s decades-old Black Hawk.

  Bloomberg spoke with the Army assistant secretary for acquisition, Douglas Bush, who said the winner of the FLRAA contest would be announced “this calendar year.” And with only 40 days left until 2023, that decision is imminent. 

  Bell Textron has offered the Army a tiltrotor aircraft called the V-280 Valor, while the Sikorsky has produced the Defiant X with coaxial rotors. 

  V-280 Valor

  

  Defiant X

  

  Bush said the winner would need to build prototypes in the next fiscal year for flight tests in 2025. The new aircraft will replace the Black Hawk by 2030. 

  

  Besides the Army, the Air Force plans to reveal the B-21 Raider by Dec. 2. There have been rapid modernization efforts by the military as it prepares for possible conflict with either and or China. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 23:30

• JFK Assassination: 59 Years Of Lies Still Haven't Buried The Truth
  JFK Assassination: 59 Years Of Lies Still Haven’t Buried The Truth

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was not assassinated with three shots from the book depository fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. And almost all of us know it.

  

  In opinion polls going back to November 29th 1963, just a week after the shooting, at least a sixty-percent majority has rejected the official line every single time.

  In short, regarding JFK, the “crazy conspiracy theorists” make up two-thirds of the population, and always have done.

  This is a good thing. A victory for truth in the face of stark odds, overcoming fifty-nine years of propaganda.

  It doesn’t matter what you think of JFK the man – whether you believe he was trying to change things, or hail from the Chomsky school of “he was just like Obama” – the simple facts reflect he was killed by state agencies of his own government.

  It was a coup.

  We don’t need to go into the details, it has been endlessly written about, on this site and a million others.

  Suffice it to say, nothing about the “official story” has ever made sense. You have to leave rationality behind to believe it.

  Much like mask-usage and the “safe and effective” vaccines during the “pandemic”, embracing the mainstream story of the “lone gunman” and his “magic bullet” has passed beyond the realm of thoughts and opinions and become a tenet of a modern-day religion.

  Blaming Lee Harvey Oswald is now an oath of fealty, a show of faith. A sign you are one of the initiated – the first and most debased commandment in the book of State Orthodoxy.

  Question it, and you question everything. Pull on that thread and six decades of carefully crafted narratives unravel in minutes.

  This is why – fifty-nine years after the fact – they are still lying about it.

  Those truly responsible are more than likely all dead. The vast majority of the people living on the planet weren’t even born when it happened…and yet the deceptions still come.

  Pathetic exercises in propaganda passed around by second and third generations of twisted servants of the establishment. Brainwashed children, repeating the lies their parents told them despite being surrounded by evidence of their delusion.

  It would be tragic if it wasn’t so insidious. Its only saving grace is its ineptitude. (See this from the New York Post, or this from The Express).

  It’s all painfully transparent. Exercises in saying, rather than believing.

  A common factor in every propaganda narrative is the repetition of “the big lie”. Over and over and over again. In the case of JFK the catechism is a simple one:

  Lee Harvey Oswald shot the 35th President in the back and head from the Texas School Book Depository.

  The Express even uses that sentence, word for word. Not one part of this mantra has ever been proven. It’s just what you have to say.

  Most tellingly it does not even reflect the official position of the US government, with the Church committee having found JFK’s death “a probable conspiracy” forty-six years ago.

  As with Covid, when official sources conflict with official “truth” they are written out of the consensus. Rejected by the modern-day Council of Nicea. Left to gather dust in the archives like the gnostic gospels.

  In 1992, following the release of Oliver Stone’s simply brilliant film JFK, the US Senate passed a new law, the Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act.

  This law “requires that each assassination record be publicly disclosed in full and be made available in the collection no later than the date that is 25 years [after the law was passed]”.

  As of October 2017 both the CIA and FBI are in breach of this law.

  Politico has a long article about it, carefully explaining to everyone that it’s definitely not because they have anything to hide and they totally didn’t do it, but also acknowledging that the secrecy does feed into “corrosive conspiracy theories”.

  In yet another betrayal of his “anti-establishment” image, The Donald let this slide. Biden is apparently going to pressure them to release something…but that’s just theatre.

  Nothing will come of it, save perhaps a few pages of token talking points that subtly reinforce the official story.

  Agencies like that won’t ever release real evidence of their own guilt, even supposing it wasn’t shredded, burned and buried next to Jimmy Hoffa decades ago.

  But you know what? It doesn’t matter.

  We don’t need official documents to corroborate the evidence of our own eyes, and we don’t need official permission before we can acknowledge the truth.

  Let the media tell their empty stories to their dwindling readership, let their aging lies echo forever in hollow headlines.

  None of us believe them. We all know what really happened, and we always have.

  *  *  *

  For a deep dive on the JFK assassination, we recommend JFK and the Unspeakable, you should also watch JFK by Oliver Stone which is a wonderfully engaging introduction to the topic. You can read all our past articles on JFK here, and Kit’s long essay on it here.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 23:05

• CIA Seeking To Recruit Russians "Disgusted" By Putin's War
  CIA Seeking To Recruit Russians “Disgusted” By Putin’s War

  The Central Intelligence Agency is seeking to tap Russians as potential spies who are “disgusted” with Putin’s war in Ukraine, The Wall Street Journal reported this week, as part of a new push to bolster its ranks of Russian assets.

  The CIA’s deputy director of intelligence David Marlowe, who has been in the post since June 2021, said in a rare speech at George Mason University’s Hayden Center that the CIA is “looking around the world” for Russian who are unhappy with the invasion of Ukraine. It was Marlowe’s first public appearance while at post as deputy director. 

  

  This is “because we’re open for business,” he underscored. The attempt to gain dependable assets is said to include military officers and even oligarchs who are angry at being impacted by Russia’s extreme economic and political isolation on the world stage. 

  Offering his assessment on how the war is going for the Russians, Marlowe described, “Putin was at his best moment the day before he invaded.” Speaking of the potential for the Russian leader to put pressure on neighboring Ukraine and NATO before the decision to invade, Marlowe added: “He squandered every single bit of that.”

  At that point before the February 24 incursion, President Putin had “all the power that he is ever going to have,” according to the CIA #2 official. 

  Some international publications dubbed Marlowe’s speech, which happened last week but was first revealed on Tuesday, a “recruitment pitch”.

  “And so, for the director of operations, we’re looking around the world for Russians who are as disgusted with that as we are because we’re open for business,” Marlowe spelled out.

  As The Moscow Times wrote: 

  Despite wondering aloud if Marlowe’s comments were just an example of “CIA bravado,” The Wall Street Journal noted that the continuing war in Ukraine had unleashed an “intensified spy war” in Europe.

  Starting months ago it was widely reported that the CIA had set up a portal on the dark web for disgruntled Russians with government information or access wishing to make contact. 

  Below: the full video of the David Marlowe panel…

  “We are providing Russian-language instructions on how to safely contact CIA — via our Dark Web site or a reputable VPN — for those who feel compelled to reach us because of the Russian government’s unjust war,” a CIA official told CBS News back in May.

  At the time the CIA in the rare public disclosure indicated it is hoping that Russians, including soldiers and civilian officials, would utilize the encrypted methods to submit sensitive information to the US.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 22:40

• Oregon Corrects False Information On Child COVID-19 Hospitalization Rates
  Oregon Corrects False Information On Child COVID-19 Hospitalization Rates

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

  

  A report promoted by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) has been corrected after falsely claiming nearly 50 percent of children aged 12 to 17 who contracted COVID-19 required hospital treatment.

  The Rede Group, which created the report for the authority, acknowledged the misinformation in a memorandum obtained by The Epoch Times.

  “There was an issue with the numerator for hospitalizations in Figure 40 on page 180. When we calculated the percent hospitalized for each age group, we mistakenly thought the weekly hospitalization data from OHA were unique; they are not,” Danna Drum with the Rede Group told OHA in the memo. “We should have noticed this earlier and apologize for the error. Figure 40 has been corrected in version 1.1 of the report using data provided directly from OHA.”

  “Thank you for your attention to the matter and we apologize again for this error,” Drum added.

  The old version of the report claimed that 47.4 percent of children aged 12 to 17 who contracted COVID-19 required hospital care.

  According to OHA data, that percentage is actually at or below 1 percent.

  The report also claimed that the hospitalization rates for all age groups were at or above 30 percent and portrayed the child hospitalization rates as higher than those of the elderly.

  The new version of the report (pdf) presents significantly lower rates.

  There was no indication in the report that it had been updated besides the addition of “(corrected)” to the graph’s title.

  The Epoch Times asked OHA about the false claim, which led to OHA asking the Rede Group to examine the paper.

  “The report has been updated with the correct data, and it has been reposted. You can find the new version of the report at the same link as before,” an OHA spokesman told The Epoch Times via email.

  The Rede Group did not respond to a request for comment on the correction.

  State Sen. Dennis Linthicum, a Republican, told The Epoch Times in an email that the false information showed “poor statistical analysis” and was part of a pattern “of using public money to stir-up vast quantities of statistics, data, and meaningless factoids which veils the malfeasance and parades the contempt which our bureaucratic elites exhibit toward Oregonians, and people in living in the United States.”

  

  

  State Senator Opposed Bill

  A bill passed by state legislators and signed into law by Democrat Gov. Kate Brown in March directed OHA to study how public officials in Oregon responded to the COVID-19 pandemic and produce three reports analyzing the response.

  The legislation, Senate Bill 1554 (pdf), allocated approximately $900,000 in taxpayer money to the OHA for the purpose.

  Proponents said the legislation would help identify how the public health response could be improved in advance of future crises.

  “By beginning the After Action Report work this year, we will be better able to support public health investments and pave the way for future legislative action in the 2023 session. We must use this opportunity to learn meaningfully from this experience through a shared, iterative quality improvement process. We have a lot to learn and we must start now,” state Sen. Elizabeth Steiner Hayward, a Democrat who sponsored the legislation, said in a previous statement.

  Linthicum was among the senators voting against the bill.

  Linthicum said on the Senate floor that the report should include an assessment of the repercussions for widespread testing, including the testing of people who lacked symptoms, and an examination of how many businesses were closed due to the restrictive measures ordered by top officials.

  Linthicum feels the entire first report, which runs 725 pages, was aimed at empowering the state by making it sound like the state did its best during the pandemic.

  The report goes along with the storyline “that says, ‘oh, we had some deficiencies, we had some areas that needed improvement, but this was a good investment for Oregonians and we did our best,’” Linthicum said. “And that’s how you when you read the report, and given that insight to what the bill actually demanded of this reporting agency, you realize this is just trying to put lipstick on a pig.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 22:15

• Why China Will Win (In 1 Simple Chart)
  Why China Will Win (In 1 Simple Chart)

  Becoming an astronaut has seemingly lost some of its glamor, at least in the United States and the United Kingdom, where children are three times more likely to want to be a social media influencer than to jet off into space.

  However, in a potential sign of hegemonic things to come, Statista’s Anna Fleck notes that in China, the opposite is true, with more than half (56 percent) of 8 to 12-year-olds saying that they would most like to become an astronaut when they grow up and only 18 percent an influencer.

  The following chart shows the responses of some 3,000 children who were asked which profession they are most drawn to, out of an influencer/YouTuber, astronaut, teacher, professional athlete and a musician, as part of a 2019 study by The Harris Poll and Lego Group. They could choose up to three options.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  While the exact reason for the difference in aspirations is unknown, it likely comes down to a number of factors. Eric Berger from Ars Technica suggests that one possible reason could be that the education system in China places a higher emphasis on the value of science and space exploration.

  After all, the survey also found that children in China showed more interest in space subjects than in the other two countries, and when asked about whether humans would eventually live on other planets or in outer space, 95 percent of Chinese children said they would want to live beyond Earth themselves, whereas in the U.S. and UK it was still high, but under 70 percent.

  Or perhaps it is less to do with a lack of interest in space and more about the glamorization and relative exposure to social media per country. Where the United States and the United Kingdom have upped their social media usage in recent years, China has started to tighten its restrictions on such sites, especially when it comes to kids, citing the dangers of internet addiction and negative impacts on youths’ eyesight, concentration and mental health.

  Measures have tightened further in the years since the survey took place, with a “youth mode” added to Douyin, the version of TikTok available in China, which does not permit children under the age of 14 to use it for more than 40 minutes a day or between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. The app also reportedly shows more educational content (and more political censorship) than the international version. By contrast, social media has relatively few restrictions in the United Kingdom and the United States.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 21:50

• Transgender Guaranteed Income Programs Discriminatory, Critics Say
  Transgender Guaranteed Income Programs Discriminatory, Critics Say

  Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Guaranteed income programs for transgender residents in San Francisco and Palm Springs have raised the eyebrows of some critics, who say they are a misuse of public funds and discriminatory.

  Erin Friday, a co-leader of Our Duty, a group that protests the gender transitioning of minor children and young adults, told The Epoch Times the programs could indirectly promote prostitution and other crimes by prioritizing transgender convicts and sex workers.

  “Trans-identified people need mental health assistance, not unrestricted cash,” she said.

  San Francisco Mayor London Breed announced the launch of the Guaranteed Income for Transgender People (GIFT) program on Nov. 16 to provide “economically marginalized transgender people with unrestricted monthly guaranteed income as a way to combat poverty.”

  The city and county will provide $1,200 a month in guaranteed income for 18 months to 55 transgender residents at a cost of about $1.2 million.

  “The program will prioritize enrollment of Transgender, Non-Binary, Gender Non-Conforming, and Intersex (TGI) people who are also Black, Indigenous, or People of Color (BIPOC), experiencing homelessness, living with disabilities and chronic illnesses, youth and elders, monolingual Spanish-speakers, and those who are legally vulnerable such as TGI people who are undocumented, engaging in survival sex trades, or are formerly incarcerated,” according to the GIFT website.

  

  Friday, an attorney, said Our Duty is exploring legal challenges to the program, which she says is “both racist and discriminatory on the basis of sex and gender.”

  With health insurance providers mandated to provide gender transition treatment to those who seek it, and nonprofit groups such as Planned Parenthood offering cross-sex hormones at a nominal fee, Friday said trans-identified people should not be entitled to more money than other impoverished segments of the population.

  The poverty rate in California was estimated at approximately 12 percent in the fall of 2021, according to the Public Policy Institute of California, with 29 percent living near or below the poverty line. The poverty rate for seniors 65 and older was 16 percent, “markedly higher” than younger adults at 12 percent and children at 9 percent.

  In addition, public funds should not be spent to promote “an ideology that supports cancer-and-sterility-causing experimental hormones on children and removal of healthy body parts,” Friday said.

  

  She urged parents in other states to “be on the lookout” for similar policies being implemented in their cities, since others may also be planning similar pilot programs in the hopes of starting a nationwide movement, she said.

  Greg Burt with the California Family Council, a religious organization based in Fresno, told The Epoch Times in a Nov. 18 statement the programs are discriminatory and counterproductive.

  “It implies transgender poor are more valuable and deserving of help than those who are not,” he said.

  Giving money to poor people who identify as transgender with no accountability or limitations on how the money is spent isn’t compassionate because it harms the people it seeks to help, he said.

  “The policy is foolish because it will incentivize the poor to identify as transgender to get the $1,200. There is no medical test or visual identifier to know who is transgender,” he said.

  Mayors for Guaranteed Income

  Aside from the GIFT program, Breed has led two other guaranteed income pilot programs, including the Abundant Birth Project for pregnant women who are black or Pacific Islanders, and a $6 million universal basic income program for local artists affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

  The initiatives are part of the California Guaranteed Income Pilot Program, which plans to provide grants totaling $35 million for pilot programs across the state. Each program must be funded with at least a 50 percent match by local governments or organizations.

  According to the City of Palm Springs, it’s also part of a broader plan by Mayors for Guaranteed Income, an organization founded by former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs in 2020 that now has more than 80 supportive mayors in at least 29 different states. The group includes 23 mayors in California, including San Francisco’s Breed and Palm Springs’ former Mayor Christy Holstege.

  “Between the pilots that have already started disbursements and those that are in the works, our coalition will provide more than $200 million in direct, unconditional relief to everyday Americans,” the organization states on its website.

  The organization lists as its donors Jack Dorsey’s #startsmall, California Community Foundation, Carol Tolan, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Arrow Impact, Bloomberg Philanthropies, The California Wellness Foundation, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, and Wells Fargo Foundation.

  

  Palm Springs

  The Palm Springs City Council voted unanimously in March to set up a guaranteed income program that would pay transgender and non-binary residents up to $900 a month. The council allocated $200,000 to two organizations, DAP Health and Queer Works, to develop the guaranteed income plan and apply for a share of the state funding.

  Mayor Lisa Middleton, who is openly transgender, voted to support the program at a March city council meeting but expressed doubts about whether the city should fund it or not.

  “For the record, I strongly support reform of our poverty programs,” Middleton said. “I do not believe that guaranteed income programs as they are currently envisioned will be able to succeed and scale up to the level of the problem that they are attempting to address, nor do I believe that placing income maintenance programs within municipal government broadly is an appropriate public policy step. Notwithstanding that statement, I’m prepared to vote for the $200,000.”

  However, Jacob Rostovsky the founder and CEO of Queer Works, indicated the city is expected to provide an additional $1 million to $1.2 million, according to a city staff report. The anticipated state grant and financial support from donors will cover 40 to 50 percent of the $2 million project.

  Randy Economy, a Republican who resides in Coachella Valley, told The Epoch Times the mayor and council of Palm Springs have taken the city from “LGBTQ friendly” to a “much more radical place.”

  In 2017, Palm Springs became the first city in the nation with an all-LGBT city council.

  “Using the transgenderism situation as a political social experiment city by city is absolutely nonsensical and dangerous,” Economy said.

  An openly gay man “who happens to be a Republican in California,” Economy said he left the Democratic Party about 20 years ago because of its “bizarre obsession with sexuality and gender.”

  “What we’ve seen in cities with predominant majorities from one persuasion or the other, whether it be racially dominant … or in this case, dominated [by] … the LGBTQ community, just because they got elected, they feel they’ve been given a green light to be able to go ahead and promote their agenda, their will, their entire philosophy—on the entire community that they represent,” he said.

  Economy played a lead role in the recall effort against California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and he ran unsuccessfully in the June 7 primary election for the District 4 seat on the California State Board of Equalization.

  He also opposes subjecting children to gender identity issues inside or outside of the classroom.

  “It has gotten to the point where it’s socially acceptable and routine to take a 5-year-old or a 7-year-old and [allow] them to start [gender] transitioning,” he said. “To me, that’s reprehensible. It’s cruelty to the children to put them through such a horrendous situation until their minds mature and develop. I understand the issue because I’ve seen it happen, and kids need to be kids.”

  

  Drag Queen Laureate

  The day after San Francisco Mayor London Breed announced the GIFT program, she issued a press release requesting applications for the city’s first drag queen ambassador.

  The Drag Laureate program will support a drag performer to promote the city’s “LGBTQ+, arts, nightlife and entertainment communities,” according to the release.

  California state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) sponsored the program in his prior elected office as a county supervisor.

  “San Francisco’s Drag Laureate program is a wonderful celebration of our drag queens,” Wiener said in the release. “Drag performers are an amazing representation of the LGBTQ community and they contribute so much to our city. I’m thrilled about the launch of this program, and excited to see who is crowned Drag Laureate.”

  British feminist Kellie-Jay Keene recently staged a protest against Wiener’s promotion of drag queens at a pumpkin carving contest for families in San Francisco that Mayor Breed attended. Keene, who opposes the transgender movement, was in the city as part of her Let Women Speak U.S. tour.

  Wiener is the author of several controversial legislative bills supporting the transgender community and “gender-affirming care.” One of his bills, Senate Bill 107, will shelter parents of trans-identified youth who seek to avoid prosecution for child abuse in other states, making California a trans sanctuary state. Democrat California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the partisan bill into law in September despite widespread opposition and no support from Republicans in the legislature.

  Transgender and Non-Binary Population

  The Williams Institute at the University of California–Los Angeles studied data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and found about 42.7 percent of people in the U.S. who identify as transgender and nonbinary are teenagers or young adults, according to a report released in June 2022.

  Youth ages 3 to 17 currently comprise about 18 percent of the transgender-identified population, up from 10 percent in previous estimates.

  More than 1.6 million adults (18 years and older) and youth (ages 13 to 17) identify as transgender in the United States, or 0.6 percent of those ages 13 and older, the institute reports.

  In California, about 1.93 percent of 13- to 17-year-olds identify as transgender, compared to 0.7 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds, 0.5 percent of 24- to 64-year-olds, and 0.34 percent of people 65 and older. The number of adult Californians who identify as transgender is 150,000 or 0.49 percent of the total state population.

  The Williams Institute research also found the racial composition of people who identify as transgender generally reflects the racial makeup of the general population, though the estimates “mirror prior research that found transgender youth and adults are more likely to report being Latinx and less likely to report being White compared to the U.S. population.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 21:25

• Sequoia's FTX Mea Culpa Tour Continues
  Sequoia’s FTX Mea Culpa Tour Continues

  The mea culpa tour for Sequoia Capital, who lost $150 million in the FTX blowup, continues. 

  The venture capital firm reportedly apologized to its fund investors yet again last Thursday in a conference call, vowing “to improve its due diligence process for future investments”, Bloomberg wrote this week, citing people familiar with the matter.

  Bloomberg called it a “rare moment of contrition for Sequoia”, who has had a successful track record investing in companies like Apple, Google and Airbnb. 

  

   

  And what a surprise: the firm said that now, post-FTX blowup, it “would be able to push harder to have even early stage startups’ financial statements audited by one of the Big Four accounting firms”, Bloomberg wrote.

  If only someone had thought about due diligence before FTX blew up…

  Regardless, recall that back on November 10, we reported Sequoia had written down the entire value of its stake in FTX, a little over $210 million.

  “We are in the business of taking risk,” Sequoia wrote in a message to investors seen by Bloomberg. “Some investments will surprise to the upside, and some will surprise to the downside.”

  For a larger list of investors that lost money in FTX, consult our November 10, 2022 writeup here. 

  Here is the note we sent to our LPs in GGFIII regarding FTX. pic.twitter.com/Cgp1Yxk1pz

  — Sequoia Capital (@sequoia) November 10, 2022

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 21:00

• Top Arizona Election Official Moved To 'Undisclosed Location'
  Top Arizona Election Official Moved To ‘Undisclosed Location’

  Authored by Lorenz Duchamps via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Bill Gates, chair of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, confirmed that he was moved to an undisclosed location for safety reasons amid security concerns in connection to the 2022 midterm elections.

  While speaking on KTAR News 92.3 FM’s “Arizona’s Morning News” on Nov. 21, Gates noted that the condition hasn’t interfered with his work in the state’s election system.

  “I’m not in hiding … but I’ll put it this way. When the sheriff suggests that I spend the night somewhere else, I do it,” Arizona’s top election official told the station.

  

  Gates was asked on the show to describe what the incident has done to him and his family emotionally, and also if he’s considering leaving public office following threats of violence.

  “I’ve been an elected official since 2009 and here’s the reality: You’re not going to make everyone happy,” he said. “I was elected and was privileged to be reelected by my constituents in 2020 and I’m going to continue to serve.”

  Gates said disruption to his family “has been minimal,” adding that the issue has been “blown out of proportion.” He also underscored that the situation did not have any impact on his official duties.

  “This isn’t about me at all. I’m going to be fine. My family is going to be fine. This is not impacting me doing my work on the election, or generally, any one of the 50 lines of business that we’re in at Maricopa County,” Gates said.

  “Threats of violence should never be normalized, of course, and I am, in particular, more concerned with our elections workers who have been dealing with this … not only here in Maricopa County but, really, nationwide for the past two years,” he added.

  Jason Berry, a Maricopa County spokesperson, told CNN that Gates moved locations after there was a specific threat made against him on an undescribed social media platform. He was under the protection of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and stayed at the undisclosed location for just one night.

  The incident occurred as the state’s most populous county has been criticized after widespread problems with ballot-tabulation equipment were reported on Election Day at approximately 70 of the county’s 223 voting centers.

  A judge in Maricopa County who was asked to adjudicate an emergency motion (pdf) filed by the Republican National Committee (RNC), as well as GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and U.S. Senate candidate Blake Masters, said that the GOP did not “have evidence there was a voter who was precluded the right to vote” in connection to the tabulation problems.

  Arizona AG Investigation

  Lake, a candidate backed by former President Donald Trump, criticized the way Maricopa County ran the Nov. 8 elections, proclaiming on Nov. 19 that she will become governor after the office of Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich demanded explanations about Election Day problems in the county.

  

  Meanwhile, Republican Arizona Attorney General candidate Abe Hamadeh is suing his opponent and a slew of election officials over what he alleges were widespread “errors and inaccuracies.”

  Officials in at least 15 counties have “caused the unlawful denial of the franchise to certain qualified electors, erroneously tallied certain ballots, and included for tabulation in the canvass certain illegal votes in connection with the election for the office of Arizona Attorney General,” Abe Hamadeh, the candidate, said in the complaint.

  That includes Maricopa County officials improperly disqualifying ballots cast by people who, as a direct result of poll worker errors, were incorrectly listed as voting previously in the midterm election, Hamadeh added.

  “Immediate judicial intervention is necessary to secure the accuracy of the results of the November 8, 2022 general election, and to ensure that candidate who received the highest number of lawful votes is declared the next Arizona Attorney General,” the complaint states.

  The filing was lodged in Maricopa County court.

  The Arizona attorney general race is headed to a recount, according to Katie Hobbs, the state’s secretary of state, due to the slim margin separating Hamadeh from Democrat candidate Kris Mayes.

  Mayes is leading by just 510 votes out of more than 2.5 million cast, according to an unofficial tally from Hobbs’s office.

  Mayes and Hobbs, who were named as defendants in the new suit, did not respond to requests for comment. A Maricopa County spokesperson did not immediately return an inquiry.

  Problems

  Maricopa County officials have acknowledged problems with tabulation equipment, saying the problem affected 30 percent of all voting centers in the county and an estimated 17,000 ballots.

  On election day the officials said that voters could place their ballots in a secure box to be counted later. Other options included “checking out” of the poll site and casting a ballot at another location, or utilizing an early ballot if one was possessed.

  Both of the latter options required poll workers to properly list the voter as checking out, or leaving the site without casting a ballot, but some workers “were unaware of the process,” the new complaint alleges.

  “This pervasive and systematic error directly and proximately resulted in three recurring scenarios in which qualified electors were unlawfully and unconstitutionally disenfranchised,” it added.

  Hamadeh and the Republican National Committee, which joined in the legal action, say that at least 146 voters who should have been checked out and who later went to another location were required to vote using provisional ballots, which they say will not be counted because the voter was erroneously listed as having already voted.

  At least 273 other voters who should have been checked out utilized early ballots but those ballots will not count because of the same issue, the Republicans said.

  Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Gates, a Republican, failed to outline the steps voters had to take if they left the sites at which there were problems in a widely-viewed Election Day video that featured officials acknowledging for the first time the issues with tabulators, the complaint noted. He did not mention checking out but merely said people could “go to a nearby voting center.”

  “Chairman Gates’s instructions foreseeably resulted in the disenfranchisement of a significant number of qualified electors who followed his instructions,” it says. “By inducing voters to leave polling locations and then denying-through a consistent and erroneous practice of failing to properly implement ‘check-out’ procedures-these qualified electors their right to duly cast a ballot for tabulation, the Maricopa County Defendants engaged (through their election boards) in cognizable ‘misconduct,’ and wrongfully excluded valid and legally sufficient votes from the canvass line the race for Arizona Attorney General.”

  Other Issues

  Other issues include officials allegedly violating the law when they sought to verify early ballot signatures.

  Officials must, when receiving a mail-in ballot, compare the signature on the envelope containing the ballot with the signature of the voter on record. If the signatures don’t match, the ballot is invalid unless the voter “cures” the problem within three to five days, depending on the type of election.

  A number of the ballot envelopes had mismatched signatures but were still counted because county officials determined the signature matched the signature on a different document other than the registration record, which violates state law, the complaint alleges.

  The issue happened across multiple counties, the Republicans say.

  They also alleged that in the duplication process—triggered when a ballot is too defective to be read by a tabulator—officials incorrectly transcribed some of the selections in the attorney general race, which led to an inaccurate vote count.

  “Arizonans demand answers and deserve transparency about the gross incompetence and mismanagement of the General Election by certain election officials. I will not stop fighting until ALL voters receive justice. See you in court,” Hamadeh said in a statement.

  Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, said that the committee was “proud to join in this legal action.”

  “Maricopa County’s election failures disenfranchised Arizonans,” she said. “We’re going to court to get the answers voters deserve.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 20:35

• The Rise And Fall Of Global Nuclear Energy?
  The Rise And Fall Of Global Nuclear Energy?

  The global energy crisis brought about by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has increased interest in alternative energy sources, including nuclear, around the world.

  However, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz explains below, the age of nuclear infrastructure, the fact that the technology had entered a phase-out mode in many nations, and the continued resistance to new nuclear projects complicates a quick u-turn for many nuclear programs.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As seen in data by the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, most nuclear energy programs were started in the 1970s, a fact that reflects in the age of nuclear reactors today. Despite some nuclear programs having ended (and many more scheduled for phase-out), the number of nuclear programs in the world has plateaued for many decades as some nations still take up the technology, most recently the United Arab Emirates and Belarus in 2020. Poland at the end of October announced that it is looking to start using nuclear energy in 2033. Around that time, six other nuclear programs – among them the ones in Belgium, Germany, Switzerland and Spain – will be scheduled to have shut down, even though this could now be subject to change. Balancing out a dip in nuclear programs could be Italy, which is discussing taking up the technology again under its new right-wing government despite abandoning and even outlawing it after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. More u-turns are possible in Sweden and the Netherlands.

  Some small steps towards nuclear extension are happening in countries known for die-hard opposition to nuclear energy, but they are facing the expected roadblocks. Germany recently extended the ability to use its remaining three reactors until April 2023 among a lively public debate. Originally, the country had planned to shut off all reactors by the end of this year. In Japan, which reduced the number of operating reactors significantly since the Fukushima disaster in 2011, some reactors are approaching 60 years of age – the former lifespan cap that the country might now do away with due to the current circumstances. In Belgium, where mean reactor age is above 40 years, a petition to postpone the September shut-off of one reactor failed, while the government extended the end-of-life of three others from 2023 to 2025 after the invasion of Ukraine and might even run some until 2035.

  Despite the plateau in nuclear energy programs, the relative importance of the technology has still decreased as the capacity of other energy types outgrew nuclear. In 2021, the technology produced less than 10 percent of global electricity, down from a high of 17.4 percent in 1995 and 1996. Looking at all of the world’s energy needs, not just electricity, nuclear contributed just 4.3 percent.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 20:10

• "Blueprint For Success": DeSantis Credits Florida's Red Wave To Leadership Against "Woke Mind Virus"
  “Blueprint For Success”: DeSantis Credits Florida’s Red Wave To Leadership Against “Woke Mind Virus”

  Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Nov. 19 acknowledged “underwhelming performances” by Republicans in the midterm elections and contrasted the losses elsewhere with what he called a “true Republican landslide” in Florida.

  “We added four new Republican Congressmen to the U.S. House of Representatives from the state of Florida,” DeSantis told attendees at the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas on Saturday.

  “We secured supermajorities in the Florida legislature—the most Republicans we have ever had in Florida’s history.”

  

  At a time when Republicans are questioning what happened to the promised midterm elections’ “red wave” and what to do going forward, DeSantis clearly and elegantly stated that in Florida, Republicans are appealing to freedom, fighting against the “woke mind virus,” and implementing common-sense legislation. As a result, Republicans, Independents, and Democrats voted for a red wave in Florida.

  “We won, by double digits, Miami-Dade County!” DeSantis said of his Republican win in the previously Democrat stronghold.

  He added that if Republicans want to win future elections, they must follow his example in Florida.

  Blueprint to Win

  According to DeSantis, Republicans were successful in Florida’s midterm elections because “Florida really has a blueprint for success.” Specifically, he explained that his “blueprint” includes exercising authentic leadership that doesn’t bend to the shifting whims of society.

  “The job of a leader is not to stick your finger in the wind and try to contort yourself to wherever public opinion may be trending at any given moment. No, the job of a leader is to set out a vision. To execute that vision. To show people that it’s the right vision, and to deliver concrete results. And when you do that, the people respond,” DeSantis stated.

  

  He continued by giving the example that Florida has millions more people than New York, but New York’s budget is “over twice the size of our budget in Florida.” Despite that, DeSantis claimed that when New Yorkers move to Florida, they remark on Florida’s much better roads, services, and infrastructure.

  DeSantis added that in Florida, K-12 schools are performing better than in New York, Florida has a record budget surplus—and it does all of that without a state income tax and one of the lowest tax burdens in the country. He said that the government wants people to succeed in Florida, and they adopt legislation to make that possible and attract people to the state.

  Plus, DeSantis said, in Florida they don’t let red tape and bureaucracy prevent them from getting the job done.

  A Return to Sanity

  Expanding on why he thinks Republicans in his state did well in the midterms, DeSantis said Florida “stood out as the free state” over the past few years. He stated that during the height of the COVID-19 lockdowns, his administration refused to “descend into some type of Faucian dystopia” and instead respected people’s rights.

  That included refusing to force people to close their businesses, keeping schools open, and standing against vaccine mandates. DeSantis added that those decisions resulted in attacks from the mainstream media and government officials worldwide, but his administration stood firm.

  DeSantis went on to say that leadership requires standing against such attacks and said he was happy to take those “arrows” to protect his constituents. He said when people witnessed that, it drew them to Florida because it was a “refuge of sanity.”

  As part of that “refuge of sanity,” DeSantis said Florida chose law and order over rioting and disorder. He said that when riots broke out in 2020, he immediately called out the National Guard to quash them. Then he moved to enact legislation protecting the police and their funding and said that anyone who riots in Florida isn’t getting a “slap on the wrist” but instead gets the “inside of a jail cell.”

  

  DeSantis added that if any prosecutors try to pick and choose which laws to enforce, he immediately removes them from their posts.

  Further, DeSantis said to resounding applause that Florida has chosen “education over indoctrination” and noted that Florida protects parental rights over their children. He said his administration believes parents have a fundamental role in raising their children and, as a result, he’s expanded school scholarships, so parents have more choices in education.

  Pointedly, DeSantis stated that schools are not a place for “ideology” and said Florida banned Critical Race Theory in K-12 schools. He added that in Florida, they don’t teach children to hate themselves or each other and instead teach the history of the United States and what it means to “be an American.” The governor said he wouldn’t allow inappropriate content in elementary school, referencing the gender ideology curriculum.

  All of this, DeSantis said in conclusion, is his administration’s willingness to stand against the “woke mind virus” that’s destroying society. He said people see the insanity of “woke ideology,” his administration’s appeal and return to common sense, and his “courage to lead,” and that’s why Florida experienced a red wave.

  “Guess what? When you stand up for what’s right, when you show people you’re willing to fight for them, they will walk over broken glass barefoot to come vote for you. And that’s exactly what they did for me on Nov. 8 in record numbers,” DeSantis said.

  He finished by saying that people respond to “strong leadership,” and if Republicans want to win going forward, they need to remember that to attract voters from across the political sphere.

  Lost Red Wave

  Before the Nov. 8 election, many political models estimated a red wave of up to 45 House seats because of President Joe Biden’s unpopularity, the struggling economy, and the past precedent of the majority party losing seats in a midterm. That didn’t pan out, however.

  Instead, while Republicans managed to eke out a slim majority in the House, they lost at least one seat in the Senate—the Senate runoff results in Georgia could exacerbate that or return the Senate to a 50-50 split. Consequently, the 2022 midterms were considered a decisive win for Biden and his administration.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 19:45

• Fired AP Reporter Who 'Risked Triggering WWIII' Actually Did Nothing Wrong
  Fired AP Reporter Who ‘Risked Triggering WWIII’ Actually Did Nothing Wrong

  On Tuesday we reported that the Associated Press had fired reporter James LaPorta, two days before his birthday, over an erroneous report which cited a ‘senior US intelligence official,’ who claimed that a Russian missile fired into Poland had killed two civilians.

  If true, the bombshell development could have potentially triggered ‘Article 5‘ – the mutual defense agreement between NATO members, risking WWIII.

  

  AP later retracted the story after it was revealed that Ukraine fired the missile, and the outlet issued the following correction which pinned blame on the anonymous intelligence official;

  In earlier versions of a story published November 15, 2022, The Associated Press reported erroneously, based on information from a senior American intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity, that Russian missiles had crossed into Poland and killed two people. Subsequent reporting showed that the missiles were Russian-made and most likely fired by Ukraine in defense against a Russian attack.

  Five days after the report, LaPorta was fired. But Slack messages obtained by Semafor reveal that he did nothing wrong – aside from working for AP in the first place.

  The messages begin with LaPorta passing along a tip from a “senior American intelligence official” who was “vetted by Ron Nixon.” Nixon is an Associated Press vice president.

  

  Next, editor Lisa Leff asked if the wire service could run with the narrative despite having a single source – which is against AP‘s rules for anonymous sources.

  “that call is above my pay grade,” LaPorta replied.

  

  Another AP reporter, Vanessa Gera, suggests moving forward with the report, writing, “I can’t imagine a US intelligence official would be wrong on this.“

  

  Leff then asks PaPorta if he is “in position to work up an urgent” – to which he replies, “No, I’m actually at a doctor’s appointment. What I passed is all I know at the moment.”

  

  Then, Gera and Leff decide to run with it.

  

  In short, LaPorta – a former USMC infantryman, was fired after forwarding a tip from a vetted source, and then demurring when asked if he thought they should run with it.

  He has since been ordered not to comment on the situation, saying that he “would love to comment on the record, but I have been ordered by the AP to not comment.” As such, Zero Hedge has not reached out for comment.

  Oddly (or maybe there’s a perfectly good reason for it), journalist John Leichester’s name was also on the byline of the article in question despite being nowhere in the slack conversation – though he wasn’t fired.

  While LaPorta said Nixon had vetted his source, Nixon later said he did not know that the source was being cited for the missile story, according to people who spoke to David Bauder, an Associated Press reporter.

  The Associated Press has taken additional disciplinary action but declined to say against whom that action was taken. There have been no reports of any person besides LaPorta losing a job, including John Leicester, who was also listed on the byline.

  According to Bauder, Leicester was not involved with the anonymously sourced material being placed into the story. –The Epoch Times

  Most importantly, however, who was the anonymous ‘senior US intelligence official’ that fed LaPorta a false narrative which risked WWIII?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 19:20

• Federal Court Strikes Down Another Provision Of New York's New Gun Control Law
  Federal Court Strikes Down Another Provision Of New York’s New Gun Control Law

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  I have previously written about how New York has proven time and time again as the gift that keeps on giving for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and gun-rights groups. New York Democrats continue to pass laws that are virtually guaranteed to be struck down and further reinforce Second Amendment rights. The latest provision involves the possible criminal prosecution for possessing a gun on private property if owner has not approved such possession on the premises.

  

  New York Democrats have passed a series of laws that led to catastrophic losses in federal court, including the recent major ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. This includes openly gaming litigation to the irritation of individual justices.

  After each loss, the same politicians circle the firing squad again and pass the next round of questionable gun limits. New York Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul promised such legislation within an hour of the release of Bruen.  It passed with the help of a special session in the resumption of this inexorable cycle and has already resulted in court losses. Now there is a new such ruling against the law.

  In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022), the Supreme Court rejected the prior New York law under the Second Amendment to publicly carry firearms for self-defense. The Court held that New York’s “proper cause” licensing regime unconstitutionally infringed this right. New York responded roughly a week later with Senate Bill S51001 (June 30, 2022, Extraordinary Session). The new law created a target rich environment for new challenges.

  The new decision comes from Judge John Sinatra (W.D.N.Y.) in Christian v. Nigrelli: where the court ruled that the private property exclusion violates the Second Amendment.

  The state might have been able to reinforce an important right of private business owners to exclude guns with a reasonable drafting of the law. Instead, it sought to use the issue to effectively ban guns from “sensitive” and privately owned areas.

  Gov. Kathy Hochul again made the case against her own state in ill-considered comments where she proclaimed that S51001 “makes ‘no carry’ the default for private property” by “establish[ing] that private property owners must expressly allow a person to possess a firearm, rifle, or shotgun on their property[.]” That default is the problem.

  The provision at issue is § 265.01-d:

  Criminal possession of a weapon in a restricted location.

  1. A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in a
  restricted location when such person possesses a firearm, rifle, or shotgun and enters into or remains on or in private property where such person knows or reasonably should know that the owner or lessee of such property has not permitted such possession by clear and conspicuous signage indicating that the carrying of firearms, rifles, or shotguns on their property is permitted or has otherwise given express consent.

  Plaintiff Brett Christian complained that he is:

  “unable to carry firearms on his person throughout the State because of S51001’s designation of private property, even private property open to the public, as “restricted locations.” Christian Dec. ¶¶ 10, 11. Christian brings his firearm with him on private property open to the public, such as weekly visits to gas stations and monthly visits to hardware stores. Christian Dec. ¶ 10. He intended to continue to do so, but for the enactment and enforcement of S51001. Christian Dec. ¶ 10. Moreover, since S51001 bars even “entering” these locations, Plaintiff will need to disable and store his firearms before driving his vehicle or walking into parking lots, which means in some instances, Plaintiff will need to stop carrying for selfdefense before he can get physically close enough to see if any “clear and conspicuous signage” Case 1:22-cv-00695-JLS Document 19-1 Filed 09/28/22 Page 14 of 30 10 exists permitting him to carry. Christian Dec. ¶ 11. Not only does this put Plaintiff at risk of uncomfortable situations with passersby observing him disable and store his firearms, but the fact he has to constantly disarm greatly reduces his ability to defend himself throughout the State. Christian Dec. ¶¶ 11, 12.”

  The court found a sufficient injury and a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the constitutional violation.

  “In sum, the vast majority of land in New York is held privately, and it encompasses homes, stores, businesses, factories, vacant land, hotels, parking lots and garages, grocery stores, pharmacies, medical offices, hospitals, cemeteries, malls, sports and entertainment venues, and so on. These are places that people exercising their rights, frequent every day when they move around outside their homes. The exclusion here makes all of these places presumptively off limits, backed up the by the threat of prison. The Nation’s historical traditions have not  countenanced such an incursion into the right to keep and bear arms across all varieties of private property spread across the land. The right to self-defense is no less important and no less recognized on private property.”

  Unfortunately, there is no evidence that New York is committed to ending its historical use of a circular firing squad on Second Amendment rights. Hochul used the law to rally support from voters despite this likely outcome. It is all crushingly predictable. Hochul won the election and yet another provision in the law was found unconstitutional. As a result, New Yorkers have once again strengthened Second Amendment precedent in support of gun rights.

  There is the opinion granting the preliminary injunction: Christian v. Nigrelli

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 18:55

• Beyond Disgusting: Former Beyond Meat Employee Shares Photos, Docs, That Appear To Show Mold, Dirty Conditions
  Beyond Disgusting: Former Beyond Meat Employee Shares Photos, Docs, That Appear To Show Mold, Dirty Conditions

  So much for skipping out on meat to get healthier…

  One of Beyond Meat’s “key” factories was “reportedly riddled with mold, bacteria and other health-related concerns”, the NY Post reported this week, citing evidence that was obtained from a former employee. 

  Leaked internal documents showed that the plant “tested positive for the harmful bacteria Listeria at least 11 times in the second half of 2021”. Both photographs and documents were provided by the former employee, who said they were “worried” about the conditions at the plant.

  

  Two other workers at the plant, which is located about an hour from Philadelphia, confirmed that Listeria had been found on the site. 

  Additional documents showed that contaminants like “string, metal, wood and plastic” had all been found in products that were produced at the plant as recently as last December. 

  Photographs posted by Bloomberg, who produced the original report, appear to show dirty conditions and mold. Bill Marler, a food-safety attorney, after viewing some of the photos, told Bloomberg: “Mold growth takes a while — that underscores a lack of cleanliness.”

  

  The company pushed back on the claims, however, telling Bloomberg that two inspections this year by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture had “found no instances of nonconformance with regulations.”

  But one spokesperson from the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture said that one of those two visits, performed in September, wasn’t a “complete plant inspection”. Instead, they called it an “effort to address an unpaid registration fee, which has since been paid.”

  The spokesperson said that the company’s standards “go above and beyond industry and regulatory standards”.

  “External third-party audits, including our most recent third-party audit in May 2022, gave the plant the highest-possible rating in each of the last three years,” the company concluded.

  So, who are you we to believe – the company, or our own lyin’ eyes?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 18:30

• Billionaire Mike Bloomberg Begs Forgiveness For BoJo Speech Bashing Beijing
  Billionaire Mike Bloomberg Begs Forgiveness For BoJo Speech Bashing Beijing

  Authored by Dorothy Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Michael Bloomberg, chair of the Pentagon’s advisory panel, apologized to attendees at an economic forum hosted by his company after former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s speech that singled out the communist Chinese regime.

  

  Bloomberg issued the apology on Nov. 17 at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum hosted by his corporation in partnership with the Singapore government.

  “Some may have been insulted or offended last night by parts of the speaker’s remarks referencing certain countries and their duly elected leaders,” Reuters reported Bloomberg said.

  “Those were his thoughts and his thoughts alone, not cleared in advance by anyone or shared with me personally,” Bloomberg told the conference, referring to Johnson’s remarks.

  “To those of you who were upset and concerned by what the speaker said, you have my apologies,” he added.

  According to the version released by Johnson’s spokesperson, the former prime minister described China and Russia as “two former communist tyrannies” to the gathering of business leaders, academics, and government officials from dozens of countries.

  “Let’s look at Russia and China. The two former communist tyrannies in which power has once again been concentrated in the hands of a single rule, two monocultural states that have been traditionally hostile to immigration and that are becoming increasingly nationalist in their attitudes,” Johnson said, according to his spokesman.

  Johnson said China and Russia “are willing to show a candid disregard for the rule of international law, and two countries that in the last year have demonstrated the immense limitations of their political systems by the disastrous mistakes they have made.”

  The spokesperson said Johnson’s criticism was only against the Chinese authorities, not the country or Chinese people.

  

  The Epoch Times reached out to Bloomberg LP for comment.

  Bloomberg, founder of Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News, didn’t specify whether his apologies were for the Chinese people or the communist regime.

  The billionaire has previously landed in the headlines for defending the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). In 2019, the entrepreneur said the party’s top leader Xi Jinping “is not a dictator.”

  “The Communist Party wants to stay in power in China, and they listen to the public … Xi Jinping is not a dictator. He has to satisfy his constituents, or he’s not going to survive,” Bloomberg said in a television interview with Firing Line in September 2019.

  Bloomberg was asked several times about his comment when he ran for U.S. president in 2020, and the former New York mayor avoided pinning the label of “dictator” on Xi.

  Xi has become the country’s most powerful leader since the first ruler Mao Zedong. Last month, Xi secured a record-breaking third term in office and installed allies in the Party’s top decision-making body during the 20th National Congress, further tightening his grip over the party and the country.

  In the opening remarks at the conference last Thursday, Bloomberg praised China’s vice chairman Wang Qishan, who attended via video link, as a “troubleshooter” and “problem solver.” The billionaire noted he met Wang almost two decades ago, when Bloomberg served as mayor of New York and Wang was mayor of Beijing.

  Bloomberg’s apology raised concern among activists who pointed to his position in the U.S. Department of Defense.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 18:05

• Thanksgiving Dinner Cost Soars 20% From 2021, Biden Admin Blames Climate Change & Putin
  Thanksgiving Dinner Cost Soars 20% From 2021, Biden Admin Blames Climate Change & Putin

  While spending time with family and friends at Thanksgiving remains important for many Americans, the cost of that indulgence has never been higher, up a stunning 20% from last year to $64.05 for the classic feast.

  

  The cost for the classic meal was the most affordable in the South – $58.42, followed by the Northeast – $64.02, Midwest – $64.26 and West – $71.37.

  “General inflation slashing the purchasing power of consumers is a significant factor contributing to the increase in average cost of this year’s Thanksgiving dinner,” said AFBF Chief Economist Roger Cryan.

  “Farmers are working hard to meet growing demands for food – both here in the U.S. and globally – while facing rising prices for fuel, fertilizer and other inputs,” said Cryan.

  Over the past two years, the grocery bill for a traditional Thanksgiving dinner has risen by 36.6%. All these changes are illustrated in the following chart from PoliticalCalculations blog:

  

  In the chart, we’ve ranked the cost of the individual items and groupings used by the Farm Bureau for their traditional turkey dinner menu from high to low according to their 2021 cost as you read from left to right. We’ve also tallied the cumulative cost of the meal, with the totals for each shown on the far right side of the chart.

  Ranking the data this way lets us see that the increase in the cost of turkey is once again responsible for most of the year-over-year increase in the cost of the meal. Here we see the cost of a 16-pound bird rose by 20.7% to $28.96 in 2022. This single item alone accounts for over 46% of the year-over-year increase in the total cost for the meal. Since 2020, the cost of turkey has increased by $9.57, making up 56% of the realized increase in Thanksgiving dinner ingredient costs over that time.

  Meanwhile, only the price of cranberries fell compared to last year, dropping by 13.8%. Every other Thanksgiving dinner items increased in cost during 2022.

  Among those items, a 1-pound veggie tray of carrots and celery registered the smallest year-over-year price increase of 7.3%. Every other item’s cost was up significantly, recording double-digit year-over-year price increases ranging from a low of 11.2% for sweet potatoes to a high of 69.4% for a 14-ounce package of cubed bread stuffing.

  During the last ten years, the cost of a traditional Thanksgiving dinner held steady within a relatively narrow range between $46.90 (2020) and $50.11 (2015). Thanks to the cumulative effect of President Biden’s inflation, celebrating Thanksgiving with a traditional turkey dinner has never been more costly for Americans.

  

  Of course, the Biden administration was quick to ascribe blame for this record surge in the cost of Americans’ most traditional meal.

  A USDA memo this month said turkey prices will be higher because of this year’s outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), which led to the death of 8 million turkeys in 2022. But USDA also said “Russia’s war on Ukraine and drought across the United States” are other factors that are “pushing up the price of Thanksgiving staples.”

  USDA told Fox News Digital that both the COVID pandemic and “Putin’s Price Hike” have boosted food prices around the world, and said Russia’s move against Ukraine cut off a “critical supply” of wheat, corn, barley and other grain. Russia’s war in Ukraine plus the pandemic have putt “pressure on food prices,” USDA said.

  As a reminder, a year ago, the St.Louis Fed offered this little beauty of a tweet, suggesting Americans switch from Turkey to Tofurkey to save some cash…

  As of the third quarter of 2021, a hearty Thanksgiving dinner serving of turkey costs $1.42.

  A tofurkey (soybean) dinner serving with the same amount of calories costs $0.66 and provides almost twice as much protein.

  

  Keep in mind that this plant-based meal would be almost 3 times larger by weight than the poultry-based meal and may either keep you at the dinner table longer or provide you with more leftovers.

  Remind us again who was responsible for soaring poultry and soybean prices back then?

  Spot the turkey…

  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 17:40

• Why Isn't Sam Bankman-Fried In Handcuffs Yet?
  Why Isn’t Sam Bankman-Fried In Handcuffs Yet?

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  To be honest, it’s kind of hard to try and entertain the innuendo and rumors that Democrats and the media are working to do damage control on behalf of Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of now-bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, because the idea is just so reprehensible.

  But they sure do keep giving us ammunition to make that suggestion, don’t they?

  

  Bankman-Fried and House Financial Services Committee Chair Maxine Waters

  Bankman-Fried – the second biggest donor to Democrats behind George Soros – has all but admitted that he squandered billions of dollars of other people’s money carelessly, writing “I fucked up” on Twitter in a mea culpa about two weeks ago, days after a run on his exchange exposed it to be a shell of what many perceived it to be.

  Institutional investors in FTX have written their stakes in the firm to $0.

  

  The $5 billion bank-run on FTX that started it all has many everyday crypto investors worried that their “investments” with FTX are total losses. For many, it was their life savings.

  Since then, Bankman-Fried’s former company continues to be at the center of extremely shady circumstances. It has seen a “substantial amount” of its assets go missing in the days after its blowup.

  The lawyer hired to oversee the liquidation of FTX, who also was in charge of the same task for Enron, has said “he’s never seen a company in worse shape than FTX.”

  “I have over 40 years of legal and restructuring experience. I have been the chief restructuring officer or chief executive officer in several of the largest corporate failures in history. . . . 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.”

  ---

  Get 50% off: If you enjoy this article, would like to support my work, I would love to have you as a subscriber and can offer you 50% off for life: Get 50% off forever

  ---

  To add insult to injury, Bankman-Fried has also admitted that his entire persona of being an altruist was a ruse, calling it a “dumb game we woke westerners play.”

  Now widely accepted by the public and most in the financial industry to have committed a massive $30 billion fraud that has spawned innumerable comparisons to Madoff and Enron, it’s unclear to me what more of an admission of guilt is needed to extradite Bankman-Fried to the United States and place him under arrest.

  I know I’m not the only one who can hear the drumbeat of potentially covering up for Bankman-Fried beating a little louder with every day that goes by and he isn’t shown being paraded off somewhere in handcuffs.

  Instead, the only photo I have seen of Bankman-Fried since his firm’s blowup has been one of him meandering around a grocery store in the Bahamas.

  

  ---

  For historical reference, Bernie Madoff was arrested on December 11, 2008.

  On December 11, 2008, financier Bernard Madoff is arrested at his New York City apartment and charged with masterminding a long-running Ponzi scheme later estimated to involve around $65 billion, making it one of the biggest investment frauds in Wall Street history.

  His arrest came two days after he admitted to his brother that he was running a fraud.

  “On December 3, he told longtime assistant Frank DiPascali, who had overseen the fraudulent advisory business, that he was finished. On December 9, he told his brother Peter about the fraud.”

  Between the beginning of December and his arrest on the 11th, he also confessed to his sons, who “turned him in”.

  This means, at the maximum, it was 11 days between Madoff being “turned in” and being arrested.

  For reference, FTX collapsed around November 8, 2022 and Binance turned down the company’s bailout on November 9, 2022. Bankman-Fried admitted to “fucking up” on November 10, 2022 and FTX filed for bankruptcy on November 11, 2022, which means it has already been 11 days since the bankruptcy filing – and nearly 2 weeks since the firm’s collapse.

  In the interim, instead of Bankman-Fried being brought to justice in the United States, we find out that “members of the House are requesting testimonies from Bankman-Fried, top executives from FTX and Alameda at a hearing in December.”

  “The fall of FTX has posed tremendous harm to over one million users, many of whom were everyday people who invested their hard-earned savings into the FTX cryptocurrency exchange, only to watch it all disappear within a matter of seconds.

  Unfortunately, this event is just one out of many examples of cryptocurrency platforms that have collapsed just this past year. That’s why it is with great urgency that I, along with my colleague ranking member McHenry, announce the Committee’s intention to hold a hearing to investigate the collapse of FTX.”

  Rep. Maxine Waters

  Not at a criminal court – at a congressional hearing. Not anytime soon – in December.

  In the interim, we are being treated to a cushy response from the media, who has hailed Bankman-Fried as anything other than a criminal. The New York Times wrote a widely criticized puff piece on Bankman-Fried 3 days after FTX filed for bankruptcy.

  The Washington Post’s take was that he was a pandemic fighter:

  

  ---

  For a party that seems to absolutely loathe billionaires, Democrats and their friends in the media sure are taking it soft on Bankman-Fried.

  Key democrats also took it soft on Theranos founder and former billionaire Elizabeth Holmes. After she drove an $8 billion fraud into the ground and was found guilty in a court of law, Democrat Cory Booker even wrote a letter pleading for a light sentence for her. Try to keep your lunch down while reading this:

  

  Now, what do these two frauds have in common?

  

  —

  Thank you for reading QTR’s Fringe Finance. This post is public so feel free to share it.: Share

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 17:15

• US Unveils $400M More In Weapons, Generators For Ukraine
  US Unveils $400M More In Weapons, Generators For Ukraine

  The White House has unveiled another $400 million in defense aid to Ukraine, which is also to include urgently needed generators as the national energy grid has been severely degraded by Russian airstrikes, leaving at least 10 million people without power. 

  This brings military aid committed thus far to more than $19 billion in weapons. Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced Wednesday in a statement, “Pursuant to a delegation of authority from the President, today I am authorizing our twenty-sixth drawdown of U.S. arms and equipment for Ukraine since August 2021. This $400 million drawdown includes additional arms, munitions, and air defense equipment from U.S. Department of Defense inventories.” 

  “This drawdown will bring the total U.S. military assistance for Ukraine to an unprecedented level of approximately $19.7 billion, since the beginning of the Administration,” the statement continued.

  

  Blinken underscored that the US coordinated the new aid with partner nations, “including the £50 million in air defense systems offered by UK Prime Minister Sunak,” according to the State Dept. readout.

  Meanwhile, there remain growing concerns over the US and Western partners greatly depleting their own stockpiles, as The Independent observes: 

  The continued push of weapons to Kyiv is raising questions about how long the U.S. and partner nations can continue to sustain the fight without an impact to military readiness. Many European nations have already expressed that they have pushed forward all the excess they can afford to send.

  The White House push for more defense aid comes as the administration grows nervous about GOP objections. “The flow of weapons comes as the Biden administrations seeks to pass an additional $37 billion in military and humanitarian aid for Ukraine during the post-election session of Congress, before Republicans take over control of the House in January,” The Independent writes.

  The Pentagon has lately emphasized it is prioritizing getting the Ukrainians ready for the harsh winter months. There’s also a push to keep providing advanced anti-air systems to protect against attacks on the electricity stations and facilities…

  Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin says the 2 NASAMS air-defense systems provided to Ukraine by the US have “a 100% success rate” against Russian missiles thus far. Delivery was this month. (Remarks from the start of another meeting of Ukraine’s partners to source arms for the war.) pic.twitter.com/rhIgXIRzIk

  — Andrew deGrandpré (@adegrandpre) November 16, 2022

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

  Currently an estimated half the national electricity grid has been degraded or destroyed due to repeat waves of Russian airstrikes. Parts of the capital on Wednesday were even said to lack water, which emergency services are working hard to restore.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 16:50

• Howls Of Outrage After New York Times Confirms SBF To Speak Alongside Zelenskyy, Yellen
  Howls Of Outrage After New York Times Confirms SBF To Speak Alongside Zelenskyy, Yellen

  As we discussed last night, Sam Bankman-Fried has now demonstrated that he is both a pathological liar and a sociopath, the kind who in “explaining” to his employees how he stole billions (over $4 billion according to new FTX CEO John J. Ray) from the now bankrupt FTX, an act which left it insolvent and without liquidity, called it “loans” which were “generally” not used for “large amounts of personal consumption” (just “small amounts” used for such trivial items as $40 million penthouses and private jets).

  

  And the only reason we don’t officially call him a criminal just yet, is because he has not yet confirmed he used client money from his exchange to fund his personal hedge fund, an act which would cost any other individual decades in jail… but not prominent democrats like SBF or Jon Corzine, of course. Plus it’s the US legal system’s job to do that, not ours. Although we are growing increasingly skeptical this prominent Democratic donor will ever see the inside of a courtroom.

  It’s not just us: with much of the entire world demanding to know how this corpulent 30-year-old still has not been thrown in prison, or at least charged with a variety of crimes, the NYT just confirmed to the entire world what a farce the one-time paper of record has become, and how it is willing to whore itself out for clicks – not to mention prominent Democrat donors – because moments after SBF tweeted that he will be speaking with Andrew Ross-Sorkin moderated NYT “summit” on Nov 30…

  I’ll be speaking with @andrewrsorkin at the @dealbook summit next Wednesday (11/30). https://t.co/QocjPtCVvC

  — SBF (@SBF_FTX) November 23, 2022

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

  … Sorkin quickly confirmed as much.

  A lot of folks have been asking if I would still be interviewing @SBF_FTX at the @nytimes @dealbook Summit on Nov 30…

  The answer is yes. 👇

  There are a lot of important questions to be asked and answered.

  Nothing is off limits.

  Looking forward to it… https://t.co/lShAqXLKGS

  — Andrew Ross Sorkin (@andrewrsorkin) November 23, 2022

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

  And so, instead of being under arrest, SBF will instead be treated like a luminary alongside other such other Democrat icons as Zelenskyy (who according to some may have been intimately familiar with FTX fund flows in the past year) and of course the woman who along with Ben Bernanke and Jerome Powell, made it all possible by blowing the biggest asset bubble of all time: Janet Yellen.

  And while we are certain that the NYT – which we assume is done writing puff pieces on behalf of SBF after it became a laughing stock last week – would be quick to mercilessly cancel and expel from its “prestigious” conference anyone who had misgendered some post-op transsexual, it is willing to give this thieving pathological liar and sociopath a forum in which to profess his innocence to the entire world, and by association with other Democrat “celebrities” such as this one…

  

  …  to boost his standing within a legal system that is clearly as much as joke as the venue that he will be sharing with the following individuals:

  

  Here are all the other “top business and policy leaders” at the NYT whitewashing summit:

  • Eric Adams, New York City mayor
  • Ben Affleck, Artists Equity C.E.O.
  • Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX founder
  • Gerry Cardinale, RedBird Capital Partners founder, managing partner and C.I.O.
  • Shou Chew, TikTok C.E.O.
  • Larry Fink, BlackRock chairman and C.E.O.
  • Reed Hastings, Netflix founder and co-C.E.O.
  • Andy Jassy, Amazon president and C.E.O.
  • Van Jones, CNN host, author and Dream.Org founder
  • Scarlett Lewis, Jesse Lewis Choose Love Movement founder and mother of Sandy Hook shooting victim, Jesse
  • Mike Pence, 48th vice president of the United States and author of “So Help Me God”
  • Benjamin Netanyahu, former Prime Minister of Israel, current leader of the Likud party
  • Priscilla Sims Brown, Amalgamated Bank president and C.E.O.
  • Secretary Janet L. Yellen, U.S. Department of the Treasury
  • President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine
  • Mark Zuckerberg, Meta founder, chairman and C.E.O.

  The shocked, stunned and simply disgusted reactions are still coming in:

  “SBF needs to go to jail!”

  The New York Times: pic.twitter.com/ynSzdFdl0Q

  — Dr. Parik Patel, BA, CFA, ACCA Esq. (@ParikPatelCFA) November 23, 2022

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

  The @nytimes event right? Makes sense. 😂😂😂 https://t.co/mgMhc0YNrA

  — Dave Portnoy (@stoolpresidente) November 23, 2022

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

  I’ll be speaking with @SBF_FTX at the @dealbook summit next Wednesday (11/30) by hiding in one of the bathroom stalls and surprising him while he’s using the urinal.

  What questions should I ask him?

  — davis 🐺🦊 (@basedkarbon) November 23, 2022

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

  How did this dude steal billions of dollars and is now speaking at a summit as a free man?

  Make it make sense.

  — Chairman (@WSBChairman) November 23, 2022

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

  let’s hop on a spaces right now.
  Just me and you, 1 on 1.

  — Bitcoin Archive 🗄🚀🌔 (@BTC_Archive) November 23, 2022

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

  That CNBC, the NY Times and far-left extremist Andrew Sorkin would be protecting, apologizing for and promoting this guy is zero surprise. https://t.co/xhGh0gePV0

  — John Tuld (@BradHuston) November 23, 2022

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

  FTX SBF is scheduled to speak at a @nytimes business summit with Andrew Sorkin, after defrauding clients billions of dollars. More proof that paid off politicians grant you amnesty.

  — TaraBull (@TaraBull808) November 23, 2022

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

  SORKIN: “Internet trolls are scapegoating Sam, but we should celebrate entrepreneurs even when they fail. There’s nothing illegal about taking big risks.” https://t.co/mB9KkFsRdt pic.twitter.com/FKyTtdsfl9

  — Bitcoin is Saving (@BitcoinIsSaving) November 23, 2022

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

  My theory is that Andrew Sorkin is a sensible guy disgusted by the ruling class who tries to insult it by showing how bad it’s leading figures are. He’s surprised no one gets it but at least he makes a lot of money until that happens. https://t.co/ii9pGTz3R0

  — P.C. Outsider (@PhilOutsider) November 23, 2022

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

  PERFECT—ANDREW ROSS SORKIN IS MORE FULL OF SHIT THAN SAM IS. https://t.co/Y5PsRaRgVu

  — INVESTMENT HULK (@INVESTMENTSHULK) November 23, 2022

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

  “So, what’s your favorite color lol”

  — litquidity (@litcapital) November 23, 2022

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

  Damage control is in overdrive. We can’t be the only ones observing this? This is outrageous. https://t.co/OCTOMeOY3D

  — Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) November 23, 2022

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

  “This can’t get any worse!”

  Universe: “LOL, watch me!”

  — Helin ULKER (@beautyofhelin) November 23, 2022

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

  Hey @andrewrsorkin, can you also please invite AG Merrick Garland to the summit: we’d love to see him shake hands with SBF https://t.co/twLcOLQUtP

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 23, 2022

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

  When SBF flies safely back to the Bahamas after attending the @dealbook summit pic.twitter.com/qgYCyQMlUA

  — Ramp Capital (@RampCapitalLLC) November 23, 2022

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

  Is this really still happening @nytimes?

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2022

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

  In 2008, Bernie Madoff was arrested within 24 hours of his fraud being revealed.

  In 2022, Sam Bankman-Fried will be attending the NYTimes dealbook summit after his fraud was revealed.

  — Fintwit (@fintwit_news) November 23, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 11/23/2022 – 16:22

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• SBF Issues Another Rambling Apology And "Description Of What Happened", Comes Off As Disturbed Sociopath
  SBF Issues Another Rambling Apology And “Description Of What Happened”, Comes Off As Disturbed Sociopath

  He just can’t help himself: disgraced sociopath, record-breaking fraudster and prolific Democratic donor – not necessarily in that order – Sam Bankman-Fried, has issued another apology to his staff in a letter that outlined a crash in “collateral” to less than $9 billion from $60 billion.

  “I didn’t mean for any of this to happen, and I would give anything to be able to go back and do things over again,” the corpulent 30-year-old who may or may not be in the Bahamas apologized yet again in the message sent to employees Tuesday, although he really should be apologizing to the millions of clients whom he wiped out. Alas, like the recurrent ramblings of a psychopath, Sam’s takeaway was that the implosion at FTX was the side-effect of an unfortunate bank run, and had nothing to do with SBF’s actions; that’s because SBF still refuses to take any responsibility for what happened and makes zero admission that the factors that led to this historic bankruptcy were in his control all along. Sam claims that he didn’t “realize the magnitude of risk.” His main remorse – like that of any pathological individual – is that he got caught.

  Still don’t believe us he was a sociopath? Read this:

  I didn’t mean for any of this to happen, and I would give anything to be able to go back and do things over again. You were my family. I’ve lost that, and our old home is an empty warehouse of monitors. When I turn around, there’s no one left to talk to. I disappointed all of you, and when things broke down I failed to communicate. I froze up in the face of pressure and leaks and the Binance LOI and said nothing. I lost track of the most important things in the commotion of company growth. I care deeply about you all, and you were my family, and I’m sorry.

  No he isn’t, and if it wasn’t his fault, whose fault was it? Well, as he “describes” the sequence of events, you see it was all the market’s fault as a slide in digital-asset markets in spring roughly halved collateral from $60 billion to $30 billion, while liabilities were $2 billion. A combination of a credit squeeze, a further selloff in virtual coins and a “run on the bank” left collateral at $9 billion ahead of FTX’s Nov. 11 bankruptcy, he wrote. The estimate for liabilities had reached $8 billion by then. Here is how, in his words, what was initially a $58 billion overcollateralized balance sheet ended up having more liabilities than assets.

  

  “I did not realize the full extent of the margin position, nor did I realize the magnitude of the risk posed by a hyper-correlated crash,” Bankman-Fried said. He didn’t give exact details on the makeup of the collateral or the liabilities. If he did, it would look something like this chart from Morgan Stanley:

  

  What happens next is what any sniveling sociopath posing as a CEO would say: I had no idea any of this could happen:

  I did not realize the full extent of the margin position, nor did I realize the magnitude of the risk posed by a hyper-correlated crash.

  And it is here, that we get the first admission that something nefarious happened: i.e., loans  – to related parties, such as the $4 billion “given” from FTX to SBF – and the “secondary sales” which we now knows SBF pocketed some $300 million for personal use.

  The loans and secondary sales were generally used to reinvest in the business—including buying out Binance—and not for large amounts of personal consumption.

  And so, ladies and gents of the jury, would you consider a $40 million penthouse to be a “large amount of personal consumption.” And what about a private jet: in this day and age everyone needs one, how can one possibly define that as “large amount of personal consumption.” As for the meaning of “generally”, we are confident SBF’s close buddy Bill Clinton will give him the proper definition of that word.

  

  Prudently, there was zero mention in Sam’s meandering word salad that FTX had illegally commingled and sent billions in customer funds to SBF’s personal hedge fund, Alameda, which despite frontrunning virtually every crypto transaction still lost $3.7 billion before 2022. That’s ok, Sam can discuss that in court.

  There was, however, the usual lies, including SBF’s increasingly warped representation of reality, which is to be expected: as noted above, he is after all, a sociopath.

  We likely could have raised significant funding; potential interest in billions of dollars of funding came in roughly eight minutes after I signed the Chapter 11 docs. Between those funds, the billions of dollars of collateral the company still held, and the interest we’d received from other parties, I think that we probably could have returned large value to customers and saved the business.

  Narrator: none of this happened, and none of this will happen either:

  Maybe there still is a chance to save the company. I believe that there are billions of dollars of genuine interest from new investors that could go to making customers whole. But I can’t promise you that anything will happen, because it’s not my choice.

  That’s right: it is now all in the hands of the person who presided over the Enron bankruptcy and who thinks your fraud is way worse.

  And speaking of fraud, there was one sentence in the whole letter where this pathological liar may have told the truth, if inadvertently:

  … None of this changes the fact that this all sucks for you guys, and it’s not your fault, and I’m really sorry about that. I’m going to do what I can to make it up to you guys—and to the customers—even if that takes the rest of my life. But I’m worried that even then I won’t be able to.

  No, you won’t be able to, but when it comes to “the rest of your life”, both the “guys” and the customers who you left with nothing because of your infinite greed, fraud and incompetence, they all have an idea where you can spend it.

  Whether or not that happens will depend on just how broken the US legal system is, where a few million in donations to prominent democrats may be all it takes to get a lifetime “get out of jail” card.

  SBF’s full letter to his now former employees is below

  

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 23:20

• Sperm Count Among Men Has Dropped 60 Percent Globally Over Past 45 Years: Study
  Sperm Count Among Men Has Dropped 60 Percent Globally Over Past 45 Years: Study

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

  Sperm counts worldwide have halved over the past 45 years, according to a study published on Nov. 15 in the journal Human Reproduction Update.

  

  The study was conducted by an international team of researchers led by professor Hagai Levine of Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s Hadassah Braun School of Public Health.

  They aimed to examine trends in sperm count among men from all continents and analyzed 223 studies based on sperm samples taken from over 57,000 men across 53 countries including the United States, Europe, and Australia between 1973 to 2018.

  Previously, a 2017 study conducted by the same team of researchers reviewed sperm count data in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. The new analysis updates that review to include data from Central and South America, Asia, and Africa for the first time.

  Researchers in the latest study found an “appreciable decline” in sperm count during that time period.

  Specifically, researchers found that men in South America, Asia, and Africa shared a similar decline in total sperm counts and concentration as was previously observed in their study concentrated across Europe, North America, and Australia.

  Sperm Counts Fall Over 62 Percent

  Overall, results showed the mean sperm count fell by 51.6 percent between 1973 and 2018 across men from all continents, dropping on average by 1.2 percent per year from an estimated 101.2 million per milliliter to 49 million per milliliter from 1973 through 2018.

  Total sperm counts fell by 62.3 percent during the same period.

  Men are considered to have a low sperm count if they have less than 15 million sperm per milliliter or less than 39 million sperm total per ejaculate, according to the Mayo Clinic.

  Additionally, they found that data from the year 2000 showed a decline in sperm concentrations of more than 2.6 percent per year, doubling compared to the previous decline of 1.16 percent annually from 1972.

  Researchers said the “substantial and persistent decline is now recognized as a significant public health concern” and that further research on the causes of the decline is urgently needed to prevent further disruption of male reproductive health.

  “We hope that the new evidence provided here will receive attention not only from clinicians and scientists but also from decision-makers and the general public,” the researchers wrote.

  Men who suffered from infertility were excluded from the study.

  Researchers did note limitations to their study, however, including how the data was collected and reported as standards and methods for counting sperm have changed markedly over time. That makes it harder to compare the latest sperm counts to historical data. Additionally, researchers noted that complete elimination of all selection/recruitment bias was impossible because they were not able to collect semen samples at random.

  ‘Not a Cause for Panic’

  “I think this is another signal that something is wrong with the globe and that we need to do something about it. So yes, I think it’s a crisis, that we [had] better tackle now, before it may reach a tipping point which may not be reversible,” Levine, the leading author of the research, told The Guardian.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 23:00

• Russia Threatens To Slash Gas Exports Over Ukraine Theft Of Moldova Supplies
  Russia Threatens To Slash Gas Exports Over Ukraine Theft Of Moldova Supplies

  Russia’s energy giant Gazprom on Tuesday accused Ukraine of stealing natural gas supplies intended for Moldova by siphoning it off during transit. Gazprom is now threatening to halt deliveries via the key the Sudzha route. 

  “The volume of gas supplied by Gazprom to the ‘Sudzha’ gas measuring station (GMS) for transit to Moldova via Ukraine exceeds the physical volume transmitted at the border of Ukraine with Moldova,” Gazprom’s statement said.

  

  The allegation further specified that the Ukrainian government stole 52.52 million cubic meters of gas which was intended for Moldova. Gazprom said that amount of gas never left Ukraine’s territory while in transit.

  According to the fresh statement as presented in state media: 

  The Russian energy company further warned that if the transit imbalance persists then it would begin slashing gas supply to the Sudzha GMS for transit via Ukraine from 10 am (7am GMT) on November 28, “in the amount of the daily underderlivery.”

  Ukraine has a sprawling network of natgas transmission pipelines from Russia that feed into Europe, which now ironically enough remain the only key supply route to western and central European countries following the Nord Stream sabotage blasts. 

  Despite the raging war which has been on for nine months, some 42 million cubic metres (mcm) per day still transits through Ukraine via the Sudzha route.

  Gas inflow for transit from Russia to Europe in Ukraine from February 1 to November 14, 2022, by entry point(in million cubic meters):

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Moldova is very heavily dependent on Russia for its energy supplies, and has been suffering rolling blackouts of late. On Monday donor countries gathered in Paris where they pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to help salvage Moldova’s energy infrastructure, and to prevent political destabilization at such a sensitive time. Moldova has recently applied for EU membership.

  Western officials have long accused Russia of seeking to takeover Moldova amid its “special operation” in Ukraine. International media has tended to blame tiny Moldova’s energy woes on Moscow and its ‘weaponizing’ energy.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 22:40

• The US Pledges "Climate Reparations" To Other Countries While Americans Freeze And Become Homeless
  The US Pledges “Climate Reparations” To Other Countries While Americans Freeze And Become Homeless

  Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

  More people than ever are facing dire circumstances, and we’re just getting started with this economic disaster. And what is our government doing?

  Why, they’re giving our money away.

  To other countries, no less.

  

  The U.S. government agreed to pay “climate reparations.”

  But the plight of our own countrymen seems to be less important than those in other countries affected by climate change. The United States has just agreed to pay up to a billion dollars to poor countries for “climate reparations.” As per an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal:

  The use of climate policy to soak Americans keeps getting worse, and the United Nation’s climate conference in Egypt ended this weekend with agreement on a new fund to pay reparations to poor countries. Welcome to the latest climate shakedown.

  The 2015 Paris accord suggested rich countries compensate poor countries for climate damage—the rationale being that industrialization has increased temperatures and led to natural disasters. Poor countries finally forced discussion of a formal mechanism to pay climate reparations onto this year’s U.N. conference agenda.

  …on Thursday Europe abandoned the U.S. by proposing a deal, and Mr. Kerry rolled over.

  Wealthy countries will now set up a fund to cover climate damage for the least developed countries—i.e., not China or middle-income nations. This will be financed from “a broad donor base” and “mosaic of solutions,” such as international development banks and taxes on aviation, shipping and fossil fuels.

  Some reports suggest that the US will be on the hook for up to a billion dollars. In October, it was reported that the total amount due would be $4.3 trillion.

  That’s the sum the US and other major carbon polluters will face at the COP27 climate summit in Egypt next month.

  Well, other polluters except for China.

  China is not contributing jack sh*t. It’s essential to note that out of all the polluters in the world, China is the worst offender, creating 30% of the world’s carbon emissions.

  Yet, they’re exempt from this outrageous bill. Not one thin dime shall they pay. I’m not a fan of China’s dystopian policies and government, but at least they aren’t causing shortages and suffering in their own country in order to virtue signal how green they are.

  In the end, it’s just the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Says the WSJ:

  Countries might also shake down U.S. fossil-fuel producers in their own courts. Climate reparations will merely serve as another form of global income redistribution. The Biden Administration’s surrender shows again that the religion of climate change is progressive penance for the sin of being prosperous.

  In doing this, they ignore the plight of everyday Americans who can’t afford to run their heat or keep their homes.

  Meanwhile, Americans are truly suffering.

  We’ve repeatedly discussed the effects our current economic crisis is having on Americans. We talked about how they’re skipping meals and how they can’t afford medical care. We’ve been warning for years that they are struggling to meet their most basic needs. We live in a nation that destroyed itself during the Covid pandemic and has left its people hanging out to dry, with no jobs, no money, and no hope.

  This isn’t some abstract concept about the planet.

  This is real. And it’s happening to folks in our own communities.

  Read these personal statements about how the economy is crushing Americans.

  Here’s how the economy is affecting housing.

  Sheba Everett is a single mother living in Durham, North Carolina, an area that is facing massive increases in the cost of living due to new companies coming to the region. Lower-income people are rapidly being displaced. She works full-time as a teacher with multiple side gigs to keep a roof over the heads of herself and her daughters. They were making ends meet until she got an eviction notice. A local newspaper shared her story:

  The September eviction letter caught them by surprise, she said, even though all the annual leases were converted in the last two years to month-to-month leases. Everett asked about it in March when her lease changed and said she was told it was to help tenants struggling in the post-pandemic economy. Now, everyone is in dire straits, trying to find affordable housing when the only units available are condemned or too small, she said.

  “It will be three years in March (since they moved into their current home), so the prices were still somewhat reasonable (before), and so I tried to find something similar, and it’s just like double the price, so there’s just no way I can survive or stay in Durham or any of that.

  I don’t know what I’m going to do, and I tried to get a loan to buy a house. Actually, in my neighborhood that I grew up in, I found a house — a five-bedroom house; it was (roughly) 1,400 square feet — in my old neighborhood that I grew up in; I was ecstatic. It was $300,000 (but) I didn’t get approved for enough to buy that house. We’re basically stuck right now. … I just couldn’t believe I’m a teacher, and I can’t afford to even live in the neighborhood that I grew up in.

  I’ve reached out to the housing agencies, but since we’re in a crisis right now — one of the worst that we’ve seen in our lifetime — they’re backed up. I am one of many numbers. I’ve gotten on a couple of waiting lists, and even those things, they definitely will keep a roof over our head, but it’s not anything that actually fits my family’s needs. It’ll keep us from being homeless.

  I’ll work five jobs and pay for a super-expensive place where I literally can barely breathe, but I can’t uproot my children from their home without giving it my all, because like I said, it’s way more than just a house.

  As a single mom myself, I know exactly how difficult it is to have to uproot your children in the midst of financial problems. It’s heartbreaking to see them suffer because of money. When you don’t have much money, a home is the one thing that you strive to provide, no matter what.  Losing that security is almost unbearable.

  (Disaster comes in many forms. Check out our free QUICKSTART Guide to better understand the four levels it can reach.)

  Here’s how the economy is affecting utilities.

  The high cost of energy is causing exorbitant heat bills as we move into winter.

  As the first frigid weather of autumn chills the Northeast, many people are faced with a tough decision: deal with the surging costs of heating their homes or live without it.

  Home heating prices are skyrocketing yet again this winter, up 18% nationwide on top of last year’s 17% spike, according to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA).

  Charmaine Johnson works in the call center at Philadelphia’s Heater Hotline, part of a non-profit that assists low-income families with their heating systems and bills. Johnson, 63, can relate to the concerns she’s hearing all day. She, too, is struggling to afford her heating bills…

  …Johnson says she doesn’t qualify for government assistance with her heating bills. As inflation also pushes up her food budget and other expenses, she is bundling up and keeping the heat turned down, hoping to stretch that oil for as long as possible.

  “It’s miserable,” she said. “It’s like living in an igloo.”

  The elderly and children are the most likely to suffer when folks can’t afford to turn their heat to a reasonable level. Some senior citizens living on fixed incomes are talking about keeping their thermostats at a nippy 50-55 degrees.

  It doesn’t matter how you heat, this year, you are going to pay more. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts that:

  …heating a home with natural gas will cost an extra 25% this winter, and heating with electric will run 11% higher. The steepest hike will be on heating oil, which is expected to be 45% more expensive than last winter, squeezing roughly 5 million households, mostly in the Northeast.

  Many of our most vulnerable citizens are facing a long cold winter.

  But by all means, let’s stash a billion dollars or so in a fund for other countries.

  Imagine what we could do with a billion dollars here at home. Imagine the people who could be fed, housed, and sheltered. Sure, it wouldn’t solve all of our problems. It wouldn’t undo the damage done to our economy by disastrous lockdown policies.

  But wouldn’t it be better to help the folks at home before pledging tons of money to others?

  I don’t hate other countries. I don’t hate poor countries. I’ve spent a lot of time traveling the world, and I want to see other countries be prosperous too. But it cannot come at the expense of our own people, who have paid tax after tax after tax but still can’t turn their heat above 5o degrees in the winter.

  Is it just me? Do you feel that this is a terrible use of American money, or do you think it’s a good call? If you could decide where to distribute a billion dollars as a government official, where would you direct it? And how the heck does China get off scot-free?

  *  *  *

  Want uninterrupted access to The Organic Prepper? Check out our paid-subscription newsletter.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 22:20

• Goldman's Q3 Hedge Fund Monitor: Like A Herd Of Deer In Headlights
  Goldman’s Q3 Hedge Fund Monitor: Like A Herd Of Deer In Headlights

  Goldman’s Ben Snider has published his latest quarterly Hedge Fund Trend Monitor report, which is one of Goldman’s most widely followed research reports (and mercifully, it doesn’t include any forecasts, so there is no way Goldman can be catastrophically wrong unlike its year-ahead forecasts). This year, Goldman analyzed the holdings of 786 hedge funds with $2.3 trillion of gross
  equity positions at the start of 4Q 2022 ($1.5 trillion long and $730 billion short). It’s available in the usual place for pro subscribers.

  What the report found is that as the Fed attempts to navigate the US economy toward a soft landing, hedge fund portfolios were in a “holding pattern” with quarterly position turnover dropping to a new low during 3Q as PMs had literally no idea what to do or how to trade so they just stood there like deer in headlights (see more below).

  The total magnitude of changes to sector tilts was the smallest since 2019, and most tilts sit near their 10-year averages. Hedge fund exposure to Growth vs. Value returned to its 20-year average. Net leverage remained at low levels, with funds using ETFs and futures to manage their exposures to a macro-driven market characterized by elevated correlations. Single stock short interest remains close to the record lows reached in 2000 and last year.

  In contrast with light market exposures, hedge fund long portfolios carried an unusually large tilt away from Momentum. Momentum has recently been very negatively correlated with the direction of the equity market, as reflected by the sharp Momentum reversal alongside the market rebound in early November. While the Hedge Fund VIP basket of the most popular long positions has declined by 29% YTD…

  

  … funds appear convicted in their favorite stocks, while aggressively shorting the year’s best S&P performer: the energy sector in general and Exxon in particular. Eventually they will figure out what the right trade is.

  

  The average hedge fund holds 71% of its long portfolio in its top 10 positions, the highest concentration on record outside of 4Q 2018. Tech and Comm Services account for nearly half of the VIP list and 8 of the top 10 stocks. While funds paused their shift away from China ADRs during 3Q, BABA is still the only representative in the VIP list

  although in contrast with light market exposures, hedge fund long portfolios carry an unusually large tilt away from Momentum.

  Below, we summarize some of the key findings:

  MSFT supplanted AMZN as the most popular hedge fund long position, while UBER and NFLX entered the top five. META fell out of the top five for the first time since 2014.

  

  The VIP list contains the 50 stocks that appear most often among the top 10 holdings of fundamental hedge funds. While the basket has outperformed the S&P 500 in 58% of quarters since 2001 with an average quarterly excess return of 34 bp, the past two years have been a complete disaster.

  

  There were 15 new constituents to the HF VIP list: APG, CEG, ET, FLEX, LBRDK, LLY, LSXMK, NVDA, PGR, SPGI, TDG, TMO, UTHR, VMW, WDAY.

  But what we found more remarkable is that in the VIP mirror list, the Very Important Short Positions (VISP) for hedge funds, the top name was none other Exxon – our favorite long since the summer of 2020 when it dropped to the $30s – which has doubled this year (and quadrupled since it was kicked out of the Dow Jones). And judging by how much short covering XOM still faces, not to mention how much more buying lies in stock as hedge funds rotate from being short to going long energy, Exxon may very well double again from here.

  

  Going back to hedge fund flows in Q3, Goldman notes that a rotation from Consumer Discretionary to Consumer Staples was the largest shift among sectors (for the reason why, just as Target which saw an exodus of clients who ended up going to “cheaper” WalMart for their purchases).

  Industrials remains the largest net overweight relative to the Russell 3000, though only one stock (TRU) ranked among Goldman’s Rising Stars list of the stocks with the largest increase in hedge fund popularity during 3Q (which of course is negative for reasons we have explained every single year since 2013). Four Industrials (GXO, RHI, JCI, IAA) appeared on the list of Falling Stars

  Here are some of the most notable charts from the report (which is available to pro subs in the usual place)

  Hedge fund equity market exposure is exceptionally low…

  

  And yet, short interest for the typical stock remains extremely low…

  

  But not so at the index level: hedge funds are extremely short equity futures…

  

  … which they are doing by shorting ETFs: there is more short activity in ETFs than usual

  

  As a result the average stock correlation is very elevated…

  

  Funds entered 4Q 2022 with long portfolios tilted away from Momentum…

  

  The tilt away from Momentum has been a headwind to fund returns for most of this year, but was rewarded during the sharp Momentum reversal this month. As we noted after the CPI miss, Goldman’s long/short S&P 500 Momentum factor (GSMEFMOM) returned 20% in 2022 through November 3rd but this month experienced a sharp reversal ranking in the 1st percentile since 1980

  

  The hedge fund tilt away from Momentum is particularly notable in light of the negative recent correlation between Momentum and the broad equity market. Momentum has also outperformed in other major periods of market stress in recent years, including 2009, 2012, 2016, and 2020. In light of this relationship, it is unlikely that Momentum will fully unwind its recent outperformance unless the market and economic outlooks improve substantially. While light hedge fund net leverage suggests funds are not optimistic about the near-term path of the market, their tilt away from Momentum appears to conflict with this view.

  

  In a time of record uncertainty, hedge fund are doing the only thing they know: doubling down on their existing positions and praying for the best: as shown below, HF portfolio density has recently risen to near record highs.

  

  A logical extension: portfolio turnover decreased to new record lows in 3Q as traders froze, terrified to buy or sell anything.

  

  Funds remain tilted toward “real economy” sectors and away from tech…

  

  More in the full Hedge Fund Tracker note available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 22:00

• Illinois Has Created No Net New Jobs In 20 Years
  Illinois Has Created No Net New Jobs In 20 Years

  Authored by Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner via Wirepoints.org,

  Illinois has many deep, structural issues that continue to be ignored by those in power. Among them is one that impacts people’s lives deeply – Illinois’ lack of job creation. 

  A Wirepoints review of employment growth across the 50 states shows Illinois’ economy hasn’t created any net new employment in more than 20 years. In fact, Illinois has lost 106,697 net jobs since 2000, according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

  Those job losses put Illinois third-last in the country when comparing employment in 2022 vs. employment in 2000. Only Michigan, which suffered massive auto industry losses during the Great Recession, and Mississippi fared worse than Illinois. 

  In contrast, a state like Florida grew its employment rolls by 2.9 million, or 40 percent. Texas has grown employment by over 4 million, the most in the country.

  

  Illinois stands out even among its neighbors, which many might expect to fare poorly as Midwestern states. But aside from Michigan, all created jobs. Missouri, Wisconsin, Kentucky and Iowa all increased employment by more than 100,000 each. Indiana led Illinois’ neighbors with an increase in employment of more than 250,000, or a growth of 9 percent.

  

  Compared to the nation’s five largest states (Illinois only recently fell to the 6th-largest state in the country), Illinois’ problems stand out even more. Struggling states like New York and Pennsylvania managed to increase employment by 4 to 6 percent since 2000.

  

  Texas and Florida, meanwhile, blow everyone else out of the water with employment growth of around 40 percent. Their stellar numbers are a function of their focus on pro-business, pro-growth policies.

  Employment growth in the short term

  With Gov. Pritzker’s big win this November, it’s worthwhile to see how well employment has fared under his tenure. As the numbers show, the negative has trend continued.

  Illinois failed to create any net new jobs and in fact employment is down by 156,000 compared to when the governor took office in January 2019.

  

  Illinois ranks 44th in the nation with worse numbers than all of its neighbors – including Michigan.

  A problem of jobs

  Wirepoints recently reported that Illinois’ unemployment rate was the nation’s highest for the second month in a row in October. Compared to Illinois’ 4.6 percent rate, all of its neighbors are faring far better – most notably Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa and Missouri where unemployment rates are 1 to 2 percentage points lower.

  

  Illinois’ status as the extreme outlier in unemployment makes sense considering just how poor it’s been at creating employment over the last several years and even decades.

  The nation’s highest property taxes, crippling pension debts, the increased powers of government unions, constantly expanding red tape, chronic corruption and an increasing outflow of key companies and residents all make the creation of jobs impossible.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 21:40

• Inflation-Shocked Americans Plan To Cut Back On Christmas Gifts, Donations To Charity
  Inflation-Shocked Americans Plan To Cut Back On Christmas Gifts, Donations To Charity

  As Americans feel the Grinch of inflation and wages struggle to keep up with consumer prices, retailers and charities nationwide are preparing for a light holiday season, the Wall Street Journal reports.

  

  U.S. consumers and businesses have trimmed spending plans for gifts, charitable contributions and holiday events, data show. The penny-pinching threatens to spoil the year-end for many, especially firms and nonprofits that tally their largest share of sales and donations in November and December. -WSJ

  According to an October Census Bureau survey of households, 41% of Americans, or around 95 million people, said they were having difficulties paying for essential household expenses, vs. 29% a year earlier.

  “We’re hopeful for a strong giving season, but we’re not counting on it,” said said Thomas Tighe, chief executive of Direct Relief, a medical-assistance nonprofit that typically takes in around $2 billion per year in donated medicine, cash and supplies which they distribute around the world.

  Despite a strong job market, a little cushion in savings accounts, and early signs that inflation may be slowing, the high cost of living has unnerved Americans. According the Deloitte consulting’s 37th annual holiday shopping survey, people plan to buy an average of nine gifts this year v s. 16 last year, and plan to spend less time shopping than they did last year.

  According to the University of Michigan, household sentiment over the past six months is comparable to the credit-crisis, when unemployment was off the charts and the financial system was at the precipice. The Journal notes that the index “echoes wary levels of the 1970s, when inflation climbed to double digits.”

  

  In an August Bankrate survey of 2,415 adults, 84% of holiday shoppers will employ tactics to save money this year using coupons, discounts, buying less, and shopping for cheaper items or just making presents themselves.

  Meanwhile, the Toy Association – which represents companies that make 96% of all toys sold in the US, says this will be a season of price cuts. What’s more, analytics firm DataWeave predicts apparel prices are set to fall for thousands of retail items. Of note, Gap Inc. is offering discounts as high as 60%.

  High inflation seemed to restrain holiday-season shopping over the past eight decades. Eleven times since World War II, the consumer-price index has equaled or exceeded 6% around holiday time; this year it was at 7.7% as of October. Consumer spending had an average growth rate of 1.2% in those years, compared with a rate of 3.4% in years with lower inflation, Commerce Department data show.

  American consumer spending has been on a downward trend for months. After jumping by more than 8% last year, adjusted for inflation, consumer spending grew less than 2% during the first nine months of this year. -WSJ

  Wells Fargo financial planning specialist Michael Liersch, who heads up the bank’s local advisers in branches around the US, said he was taken aback by just how many families are talking about scaling back this year.

  “If you recall 10, 20 to 30 years ago, there was a notion where families had relatives give essential items. Moving back into that. Less discretionary items, more needs,” he said.

  Charity slowing

  While the month between Thanksgiving and Christmas typically accounts for 20-30% of charitable donations according to the Giving USA Foundation, Salvation Army officials are worried. Commissioner Kenneth G. Holder told the Journal that people are facing a tough holiday season, “particularly those who have to make choices between buying toys, putting food on the table or paying utilities.”

  Meanwhile, requests for assistance with people in need are up 25% to 50% from last year, Holder said.

  

  According to a survey of 2,000 Americans by crowdfunding platform Kiva, 44% blamed a lack of funds for giving less to charity, while 42% said donating was for “the privileged.”

  Both the Association of Fundraising Professionals and nonprofit GivingTuesday say that despite fundraising totals overall were up 6.2% (which didn’t keep pace with inflation), the number of donors fell steely in the second quarter, primarily driven by declines in donations of less than $500.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 21:20

• "Inverse" Migration: Why Are So Many US Citizens Moving To Mexico?
  “Inverse” Migration: Why Are So Many US Citizens Moving To Mexico?

  Authored by Nick Corbishley via NakedCapitalism.com,

  As life gets prohibitively expensive for many people living in the US (and other rich countries), relatively cheaper countries like Mexico are becoming increasingly attractive. But for local people the costs are growing.

  

  Between January and September of 2022, Mexico issued 8,412 Temporary Resident Cards (TRT) to US residents, 85% more than in the first three quarters of 2019, according to a Mexican government migration report. Many are choosing to live in Mexico City. Such rapid growth rates have not been seen since comparable data became available in 2010. The number of Americans receiving permanent residency during that period has also risen sharply (48%), to 5,418.

  But this may be just a fraction of the real number of American expats choosing to settle in Mexico. As the Mexican government has said for years, the number of Americans moving to its shores is likely far greater than the official figures suggest. According to data from the Ministry of Tourism (Sectur), over 10 million US citizens arrived as visitors through September this year, 24% more than in the same period of 2019. However, the Mexican authorities do not know exactly how many of those chose to stay.

  A Growing Trend

  In 2020, the US State Department estimated that 1.5 million USians were living in Mexico, more than double the number a decade earlier. That was before Usians began moving to Mexico at an even faster pace.

  But why are so many choosing to move across the Southern border in the first place?

  One reason is that it is remarkably easy. Mexico is at most a four- or five-hour flight away from most US cities. It has also been one of the most welcoming countries since the COVID-19 pandemic began, having implemented fewer COVID-19 travel restrictions than just about any other country on the American continent. Nor has it introduced vaccine passports. This has made it particularly attractive to digital nomads looking for affordable destinations with few COVID-19 restrictions.

  Mexico is also remarkably cheap, as long as you are earning dollars, euros or some other hardish currency.

  “Obviously, if you can earn in dollars and spend in pesos, you can triple your income,” Marko Ayling, a content creator and writer living in Mexico City told El País. “And that is very attractive to a lot of people who have the luxury of being able to work remotely.”

  Unlike Mexicans in the United States, Americans can work in Mexico for up to six consecutive months on their tourist visas as long as they are paid from overseas. And, although technically not allowed, many choose to return to the US for a short period, then return to Mexico and renew their six-month period in the country, and that way continue working.

  But it is not just Americans that are opting to live in Mexico. In fact, Mexico is apparently now the preferred destination for those moving abroad, beating off the likes of Indonesia, Vietnam, and even the popular expat hub Thailand. That’s according to this year’s edition of Expat Insider, an annual report published by InterNations, an expat community founded in 2007 that has been gathering data on expat/rich migrant flows and experiences for more than a decade.

  Among the biggest draws highlighted by the survey are ‘the ease of settling in’ and ‘finances’. Of vital import to many people choosing to move abroad are how acccessible visas are to live and work in the countries, safety, and how expensive daily life is. Mexico may have not topped the ranking in all aspects, but it still came out on top with a higher average score.

  The country also placed third on International Living‘s list of the best places to retire, just behind Panama (#1) and Costa Rica (#2). The accompanying report highlighted one of the key attractions for many retiring Americans: affordable heathcare:

  A big part of the lower cost of living in Mexico is the healthcare. There are two government-run programs, including one (INSABI) that is basically free to Mexican citizens and foreigners with residence (there can sometimes be some small out-of-pocket expenses). This system is designed for those without the means to pay for any other healthcare and has facilities all around the country. Another government option is called IMSS, which costs about $500 per year per person. However, with IMSS pre-existing conditions are not covered.

  There is also private healthcare, with clinics and hospitals with all the modern equipment and technology, and doctors of every specialty trained in the latest techniques and procedures. In fact, Mexico is a major medical and dental tourism destination for that reason. You can pay cash at a private facility (costs are a fraction of the U.S.—try $50 to $70 for a specialist visit, $300 for an MRI) or use local or international insurance.

  Of course, Mexico has been a popular retirement destination for USians for decades, with places like San Miguel de Allende, Puerto Vallarta, Oaxaca, Cabo San Lucas and Chapala/Ajijic particularly in demand. But as life grows more expensive and more precarious for working- and middle-class USians, this trend is likely to intensify.

  As a Brit living in Barcelona and married to a Mexican woman, I can understand the lure that draws people to Mexico. It is a beautiful, vibrant, exotic country with a bewitching color scheme, a rich culture and a diverse geography. The food is delectable and the people by and large warm, welcoming and supportive (in Spanish we would use the word “solidario,” meaning they have solidarity with others). The weather in the Valley of Mexico is temperate all year round. The biggest concern I personally would have about living in Mexico, which is something my wife and I are seriously considering, is its escalating water crisis.

  The decision to switch one’s country of residence is usually a deeply personal one and is often triggered by both pull and push factors. Not only are you moving to somewhere new but you are also moving away from somewhere established and familiar, where many of your friends and family live. Speaking as someone who has spent the best part of his adult life living abroad, it is a huge step. I would be very interested to know from US readers who, live Yves, are thinking of leaving the US what their main motives are for doing so.

  Security Concerns

  Ironically, this gathering exodus to Mexico is happening at the same time that the US Federal Government is issuing blanket travel warnings for many Mexican states. In August the State Department issued alerts for 30 of Mexico’s 32 states, six of which (Colima, Guerrero, Michoacán, Sinaloa, Tamaulipas and Zacatecas) it warned US travelers against visiting altogether, due to the high risk of being kidnapped or attacked.

  There is no doubt that security remains the primordial issue in Mexico, as it does in many other Latin American countries. Although the number of people dying in the war on and for drugs has ebbed slightly in the past two years, the country still boasts some of the highest homicide rates on the planet, with Zamora de Hidalgo at 196 per 100,000 people, Zacatecas at 107, and Tijuana at 103. Also, regions that were traditionally relatively safe, such as Puebla or Quintana Roo, have recently been caught up in the spiral of violence.

  But for the most part, the danger zones are in small pockets of states close to the US border, where most of the drugs are trafficked, or parts of the Sierra Madre Occidental, where many of the drugs are grown. They are not, as the US travel alerts suggest, uniformly sweeping across states.

  Another common misconception is that Mexico City, being one of the largest conurbations in the world, must also be one of the most dangerous places in Mexico. Yet in reality, Mexico City has largely escaped the worst of the cartel violence, for a slew of reasons outlined in a recent article by British expat journalist Ion Grillo. They include the fact that while the drug gangs have a presence in the capital, they do not control it:

  [W]hile the mobsters are certainly here, they do not operate as they do in their strongholds. Mexico City is not a strategic turf to produce drugs (like in the Sierra Madre), or to traffic drugs to the United States (like on the border).

  In Culiacán, gangsters exert an immense control of their territory, with lookouts on every corner and gunmen lurking in safehouses. In the capital, however, Sinaloa operators can disappear into the urban sprawl. It’s more a place to make deals, meet with contacts in the federal government, and launder money.

  There’s also talk of a pax-mafiosi in the capital, an agreement between the big narcos not to fight here. I haven’t heard this straight from the mouth of crime figures, but this is possible, even perhaps as an informal understanding that they do business and not go to war like back in Tijuana.

  Another factor is that Mexico is a heavily centralized country and all the federal agencies are here, along with the bulk of the governing class of politicians and heads of big business. These powers-that-be don’t want a mess on their own doorstep. The federal forces won’t allow a convoy of a hundred hitmen to blaze up Insurgentes avenue like they get away with doing in Zacatecas.

  The extensive use of cameras and the mobilization of one of the largest unified city police forces in Latin America have also helped to keep a check on the violence. As Grillo documents, not only is Mexico City one of the less dangerous cities in Mexico; it is getting safer and is already less dangerous than some US cities:

  The Mexico City [murder rates] don’t refer to the whole urban sprawl of 22 million but to the official capital district, now called CDMX, which has about 9.2 million people. The Mexican government keeps a database of the murder numbers from police and prosecutor records, and there is another database from morgues and death certificates.

  The police count recorded a peak of 1597 murder victims here in 2018, dropping to 1006 last year. That gives Mexico City a murder per capita rate of about 10.9 per 100,000 in 2021. This year the number has dropped further still.

  Comparing the 2021 figures, Mexico City still has a higher murder rate than New York (which had about 5.7 homicides per 100,000), but it is lower than Portland (12.9), Dallas (14.6) or Minneapolis (22.1).

  The most murderous U.S. cities include Baltimore (57.5) and St Louis (65.3), which have extremely high levels considering the wealth and power of the United States.

  Both Mexican President Andrés Manuel Lopéz Obrador (aka AMLO) and Mexico City mayor Claudia Sheinbaum, who is hotly tipped to succeed AMLO in 2024, have seized on this success to try to attract yet more visitors and expats to the city.

  “How much we have advanced on the issue of security,” said AMLO in a recent daily press conference. “Because of this, thousands of foreigners have arrived to live in Mexico City…They are welcome.”

  The Downsides

  But not everybody is so thrilled. As many national and international newspapers have reported in recent months, the continuous arrival of digital nomads from the US, the EU and other rich economies is making life more expensive in Mexico City neighborhoods such as La Condesa and La Roma, as well as in Guadalajara, Puerto Vallarta, San Miguel de Allende and Oaxaca.

  In the verdant and unusually walkable barrio of La Condesa, a popular spot among well-heeled foreigners, apartment rents surged by 32% between January and June alone, according to a report from real estate marketplace Propiedades.com.

  As many locals complain, living in Mexico may seem incredibly cheap to the new arrivals but only because they’re getting paid in dollars, euros or some other relatively hard currency. For those paying in pesos life is getting more and more expensive as the digital nomads drive local rents and prices vertiginously higher. For local landlords and real estate investors, the pickings are rich.

  “What is happening is the people who can no longer to afford to live in the cities of their own countries end up moving to where they can afford to live,” Sandra Valenzuela, a Mexico City-based activist and artist, told El País. “In the end, it is a problem that is moving as the people move.”

  For the moment, Mexico’s government is keeping the welcome mat out. In late October, Mexico City’s government unveiled an alliance with Airbnb Inc. and the country’s UNESCO office to promote the capital as a choice destination for remote workers. Mayor Sheinbaum said the city council wants to promote it even more and that the economic benefits of the influx would reach communities beyond the traditional tourist hubs.

  It is a story that has already unfolded in many other places, including my home city of Barcelona. As happened here, tenants rights groups are up in arms, denouncing the alliance with Airbnb as part of an “aggressive touristification” of Mexico City and calling for tough regulation of the home rental company.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 21:00

• MSNBC Guest Calls Musk Man-Child, Says Existence Of Billionaires 'Inconsistent With Democracy'
  MSNBC Guest Calls Musk Man-Child, Says Existence Of Billionaires ‘Inconsistent With Democracy’

  An MSNBC contributor says that the existence of billionaires is a “policy choice” that is “antithetical” to democracy, and called Elon Musk a man-child.

  

  In a Monday appearance on “Morning Joe,” author, political analyst and Hunger Games host cosplayer Anand Giridharadas suggested that people simply shouldn’t be allowed to accumulate that much money.

  “I think something we often forget as Americans is that billionaires exist as a class of people who have that much money at our collective pleasure, right?” he said, adding “It is a policy choice to allow some people to accumulate that much money, hundreds of billions of dollars, in the case of people in the United States before everybody has the chance to live with dignity, right?”

  Then he opined on Elon Musk.

  “Elon Musk is — is you know, is a sort of adolescent in his 50s,” continued the guy with platinum hair. “Everybody can see that. I don’t think anybody would say Elon Musk is a normal 51-year-old man, who has bought this platform that he himself calls a global Town Square, certainly functions has that kind of social importance,” he continued. “And because of what is so evidently his own feeble limitations, he’s just not — he’s a limited man. His limitations become all our problem.”

  Watch:

  As the Daily Caller notes:

  Giridhardas also criticized Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who announced he would be giving away most of his fortune, over planned layoffs at the online retail giant, and CEO Samuel Bankman-Fried of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, who was a donor to Democratic causes and officials. He also took note of former President Trump’s announcement that he would seek the Republican nomination for the 2024 presidential election.

  “Trump, who I always have appreciated — he’s not even necessarily an actual billionaire — but I’ve always appreciated the nakedness. Unlike some of these other guys he doesn’t do a very good job of pretending that he’s for the public benefit,” Giridharadas continued. “He certainly ran on a campaign of smashing the system in 2016, but — but he is very nakedly revealing what I think is true of this group in general, which is that their existence as — as billionaires is sort of antithetical to our flourishing as a democracy.”

  May the odds be ever in your favor.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 20:40

• Special Counsel Investigating Trump Is 'Tool To Attack A Political Enemy': FBI Veteran
  Special Counsel Investigating Trump Is ‘Tool To Attack A Political Enemy’: FBI Veteran

  Authored by Eva Fu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In appointing a special counsel to investigate former President Donald Trump, the Justice Department (DOJ) has turned its law enforcement apparatus into a “tool to attack a political enemy,” according to FBI veteran Marc Ruskin.

  

  Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden administration appointee, on Nov. 18 made the announcement in Washington, handing former DOJ prosecutor Jack Smith the task to oversee investigations related to Trump’s handling of classified records and parts of the probe into the events surrounding Jan. 6, 2021.

  Trump has denied wrongdoing and characterized Garland’s move as a “horrendous abuse of power” and the “latest in the long series of witch hunts.”

  The timing of the appointment is significant, Ruskin said, noting how it dovetailed with pledges by House Republicans to investigate President Joe Biden and his administration once the GOP takes the gavel in January.

  “Using the legal system in baseless investigations and prosecutions has been a hallmark of the anti-Trump campaign since before 2016,” Ruskin, who served 27 years with the FBI and is a contributor for The Epoch Times, said in an interview.

  

  ‘Bait-and-Switch’

  Ruskin believes that the special counsel investigation serves a particular purpose.

  “It’s an old trick,” he said. “They’ll be hoping to divert attention from the congressional investigations and focus instead on a baseless special counsel investigation, because there’s no question that the legacy media is going to jump on board and give this front page attention, while the investigations being conducted by Congress will either be ignored or relegated to the back of the newspaper.”

  U.S. Code 28 CFR § 600.1 prescribes that the DOJ should appoint a special counsel in an investigation where there is a conflict of interest or other extraordinary circumstances, under which it would be in the public interest for an outside special counsel to step in.

  In the Friday press conference, Garland described the appointment of Smith, a registered independent, as a matter of public interest, citing Trump’s presidential candidacy and Biden’s interest in entering the race. Ruskin, however, didn’t feel convinced that there were sufficient grounds to warrant such a move.

  “They really haven’t articulated facts which justified the appointment of any kind of counsel,” he said.

  

  Some Trump critics have argued that the special counsel appointment suggests that the Justice Department is intent on bringing the case to indictment. Ruskin dismissed this claim as “a fabrication in order to justify a difficult-to-justify investigation.”

  “The argument is the old ‘where the smoke there must be fire’ reasoning, which is fallacious reasoning,” he said. “It’s a fallacy which has been propagated in order to justify what is arguably a politically motivated investigation seeking to create an advantage for the Democratic Party in the upcoming elections.”

  With the Jan. 6 probes dragging on for nearly two years, Ruskin said that he doesn’t expect anything tangible coming out of the continuing investigations.

  “They’ve come up with basically nothing. It really defies credibility to even suggest that this is a bonafide, legitimate investigation,” he said.

  Ruskin said that the news from Friday confirmed his belief that the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid was a “fishing expedition to obtain anything related to January 6.”

  Such a tactic, which Ruskin called a “bait-and-switch,” is no different from using “tainted evidence” in his view.

  “It’s like the fruit of the poisonous tree,” he said. “You shouldn’t be able to use facts obtained via subterfuge in order to accomplish [something] unrelated to the goals.”

  Hunter Biden Probe

  Having won back the House with a slim majority, Republicans have wasted no time flagging a raft of probes they plan to unleash in the new year, with a top focus being Biden’s alleged involvement in his son Hunter’s foreign business deals.

  “This is an investigation of Joe Biden, the president of the United States, and why he lied to the American people about his knowledge and participation in his family’s international business schemes,” Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the incoming chairman of the House Oversight Committee, told reporters on Nov. 17. The announcement prompted a retort from the White House, which called it politically-motivated rehashing of “long-debunked conspiracy theories.”

  Republicans on the committee on the same day released a report claiming to have uncovered evidence of federal crimes tied to the Biden family, which include conspiracy to defraud the United States, wire fraud, violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Action, tax evasion, money laundering, and violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.

  But Republicans looking into the possible abuses by the DOJ and FBI could face strong resistance from the agencies, according to Ruskin. This is especially so if the House GOP wants to look into ongoing matters like the FBI Trump raid, in which case the bureau could cite the ongoing investigation to refuse disclosing information.

  But Ruskin sees the FBI’s handling of Hunter Biden laptop as a potential starting point.

  An “obvious avenue of inquiry,” he said, is “why Justice [Department] and the bureau have sat on for two years without making any progress.”

  Earlier this year, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) revealed claims from FBI whistleblowers, alleging that the bureau leadership at the local level purposely delayed an examination of the Hunter Biden laptop until after the 2020 election, around a year after the FBI obtained the laptop in December 2019.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 20:20

• Egg Prices At Grocery Stores Hyperinflate Ahead Of Thanksgiving
  Egg Prices At Grocery Stores Hyperinflate Ahead Of Thanksgiving

  Egg supplies are tightening nationwide as more than 37 million egg-laying hens have died this year due to the severe bird flu outbreak, accounting for a whopping 10% of production. The result has been soaring egg prices at the supermarket ahead of the holiday season. 

  “Prices for eggs climbed more than 10% from September to October, according to the latest Consumer Price Index data. Prices in October were 43% higher than the same month a year ago. Eggs had the biggest jump by far on a monthly and yearly basis in any category in the US Department of Agriculture’s food price outlook,” Bloomberg reported. 

  Consumers paid an average of $3.42 for a dozen Grade A, large eggs last month — up from $1.82 a year earlier. 

  

  Readers have been well-informed this year about the devastating bird flu outbreak ravaging commercial poultry farms nationwide. 

  

  “The recent spike is extraordinary in the shell-egg as well as egg-product markets,” Bill Lapp, president of Advanced Economic Solutions, a consulting firm specializing in food economics, told CNBC. 

  Besides eggs, food inflation remained at the highest levels since the late 1970s, crushing the pocketbooks of Americans as they drain their savings and rack up credit card debt to buy essentials. Breakfast was the cheapest meal of the day but has since become expensive, thanks to soaring egg, bread, meat, and orange juice prices. 

  

  The last bird flu outbreak was in 2015. This current outbreak appears much worse in terms of just egg prices. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 20:00

• Kari Lake Gives Update, Says "Whistleblowers Are Coming Forward"
  Kari Lake Gives Update, Says “Whistleblowers Are Coming Forward”

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Arizona Republican governor’s candidate Kari Lake issued a Monday update, saying her attorneys are working to obtain more information and “whistleblowers are coming forward” after reports of poll issues on Election Day in Maricopa County.

  “Attorneys are working diligently to gather information,” said Lake, a former local news anchor who was backed by former President Donald Trump. “Whistleblowers are coming forward and the curtain is being lifted. Whether done accidentally or intentionally. It is clear that this election was a debacle that destroyed any trust in our elections.”

  

  Authorities Maricopa County are, according to Lake, “still counting ballots” after “printer problems, tabulation errors, three-hour-long lines and even longer and confusing instructions given by election officials made this election day the most chaotic in Arizona’s history.”

  For the past several days, Lake has been posting videos of voters complaining about their experiences during Election Day to her Twitter page.  She’s said that Republican voters were disenfranchised when they tried to cast ballots in Maricopa County, the state’s most populous county.

  Officials in Maricopa County said on Nov. 8 there were problems with vote-tabulation machines and asked voters to drop their ballots inside dropboxes. Later that day, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Gates and county Recorder Stephen Richer blamed an issue with printers for the problem and later said that the glitch would not stop anyone from voting.

  Letter

  Over the weekend, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s office sent a letter asking Maricopa County for answers about the apparent voting problems. The memo said that it has fielded hundreds of complaints about how authorities conducted the election during the in-person voting phase.

  “These complaints go beyond pure speculation, but include first-hand witness accounts that raise concerns regarding Maricopa’s lawful compliance with Arizona election law,” the letter said, asking for a response before Nov. 28. Gates, in an interview with local media, said his office would comply.

  “We’re reviewing this with our attorneys right now and I don’t have anything further to say at this point, but we will certainly before we hold the canvass,” he told KTAR on Monday.

  Gates stated that around 70 of the county’s 223 vote centers suffered problems on Nov. 8. Technicians were able to solve the problem by the same afternoon, he remarked.

  

  The letter said that Maricopa needs to provide a “full report” for the “myriad problems that occurred in relation to Maricopa County’s administration of the 2022 General Election.”

  Hobbs Declares Victory

  Last week, Democrat gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs, the Arizona secretary of state and chief election official, declared victory. Lake has not conceded yet and it appears that she will not do so anytime soon, according to her video.

  “Arizonans who choose to make their voice heard on election day should not be disenfranchised or punished for choosing to vote in person,” Lake said Monday. “Yet they were I want you to know Arizona. I will continue fighting until we restore confidence and faith in our elections.”

  And Lake, in reacting to the attorney general’s recent letter to Maricopa County, told the Daily Mail on Sunday she still believes “I will become governor, and we are going to restore honesty to our elections.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 19:40

• "Concerns Have Abated": FalconX Resumes Use Of Silvergate Network As Crypto Bank Amasses Large Short Interest
  “Concerns Have Abated”: FalconX Resumes Use Of Silvergate Network As Crypto Bank Amasses Large Short Interest

  Like almost every other equity related to crypto this month, Silvergate Capital has been punished badly. 

  As we noted last week, the stock has had a triumphant fall from grace, plunging from highs of $160 per share in early 2022 to lows near $24 over the last few trading sessions, as each day new ugly crypto-related headlines cross the wires.

  But for Silvergate, which is known as the largest and most well known regulated crypto bank in the United States that also can allow customers to send cash in real time, it looks as though business may be returning to normal…somewhat.

  This morning it was announced that institutional cryptocurrency platform FalconX would be resuming its use of the Silvergate payment network. It had suspended use of the network last week. 

  

  “Concerns have abated,” the platform told its clients in a memo. The halting of use of Silvergate was consistent “with our standard process to pause and reassess operations in these scenarios,” the company wrote, according to a Tuesday morning Bloomberg note. 

  Meanwhile, Silvergate Chief Executive Officer Alan Lane said earlier this year that the bank “remains committed to supporting customers during a challenging period for the digital-asset industry,” Bloomberg reported. 

  On his LinkedIn page Monday, Lane wrote: “I’ve said before that our business was built to support our customers during growth and market transformation. And we remain steadfast in that commitment to you, our customers.”

  In the interim, as Silvergate continues to weather the storm, its stock has amassed a massive 12% of its float short, even despite the plunge in shares, according to S3.

  Recall, about a week ago Silvergate confirmed it had little exposure to the FTX blowup. 

  Lane, Chief Executive Officer of Silvergate, said:

  “In light of recent developments, I want to provide an update on Silvergate’s exposure to FTX. As of September 30, 2022, Silvergate’s total deposits from all digital asset customers totaled $11.9 billion, of which FTX represented less than 10%. Silvergate has no outstanding loans to nor investments in FTX, and FTX is not a custodian for Silvergate’s bitcoin-collateralized SEN Leverage loans. To be clear, our relationship with FTX is limited to deposits.“

  

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 19:20

• Joe Biden & The "Transformational" Presidency
  Joe Biden & The “Transformational” Presidency

  Authored by William Anderson via The Mises Institute,

  Much is made of the failure of Republicans to make predicted gains in the recent midterm elections, but, as Ryan McMaken has pointed out, Congress plays a much-diminished role in national governance to the point that even had the so-called red wave actually occurred, it is doubtful that much would have changed regarding Joe Biden’s presidency. In fact, most of what Biden has done in his two years in office has been outside of congressional legislative matters.

  

  McMaken points out:

  This all combines to mean we should expect very little change on policies at the federal level. For example, we can expect to keep hearing plenty about the evil of fossil fuels. The administration will continue to press for less drilling for oil and gas, and the war on coal will continue. The administration will continue to issue new edicts for “fighting global warming.” 

  As McMaken notes, Biden has used executive orders liberally, sometimes using a twisted interpretation of federal law, and then unleashing his regulatory and law enforcement agencies to get his desired results. For example, federal banking regulators and the Securities and Exchange Commission have pressured banks and other lenders not to led to the oil and gas industry, citing the fealty to fighting climate change as the reason.

  Note that the administration is doing this not via congressional authorization, but rather through its own self-serving “interpretation” of existing federal law. Likewise, Biden’s infamous student loan forgiveness order was not through such relief passed by Congress, but rather using a 2003 federal law that permits the US secretary of education to employ “expansive authority to alleviate the hardship that federal student loan recipients may suffer as a result of national emergencies.” What constitutes a “national emergency” must be in the eyes of the beholder, as any reason will do—and, so far, the courts have signed off on this vast expansion of executive power. This is reminiscent of Franklin Roosevelt’s perverse interpretation of the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act to undergird his gold seizure from Americans and devaluate the dollar.

  (Biden has not been the only recent president to liberally employ executive orders for questionable reasons. Donald Trump used existing law to raise tariffs against Chinese products, claiming that his actions meant that the Chinese were now helping to pay for their exports to the USA. Once upon a time—before turning over some of its authority to the executive branch—Congress had sole authority to set tax rates.)

  Biden’s reckless actions have come in part because progressives in the 1930s convinced Congress to give away much of its authority to the executive branch, the action well described by Paul Craig Roberts and Lawrence Stratton in their book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions. The authors described a scene in which Congress was passing bills not even yet written and acceding their authority to the president as a response to the economic calamity of the early 1930s.

  The New Deal, which was Franklin Roosevelt’s set of policies ostensibly to combat the Great Depression (although one easily can argue that the New Deal was the main reason the depression lasted for a decade), made FDR a “transformational” president, a title that Biden actively is seeking for himself. Encouraged by historical writers such as Jon Meacham and Doris Kearns Goodwin, Biden wants to become an icon like Roosevelt, although the “hook” today is not economic depression (yet) but rather the so-called climate emergency.

  Unfortunately, becoming a presidential icon requires that the executive branch impose severe economic damage to the country. Roosevelt’s New Deal, far from pulling the USA out of the Great Depression, left it mired it in what economist Robert Higgs called “regime uncertainty,” which resulted in high unemployment and a dearth of capital investment. Biden’s version of the so-called Green New Deal points the economy in the same direction. Writes Thomas Woods:

  In the old days, progressives claimed to be trying to improve the standard of living of the ordinary person. Everything they advocated would have had the opposite effect, but at least they claimed to be making his life better.

  Now they’re not even claiming that.

  You will be poorer, they’re telling you. Your electricity bills will be higher. The price of your car will be higher. And according to them, higher prices are in fact a good thing, because they’re supposedly a sign of a strong economy.

  His claims notwithstanding, Biden’s objective to have a “transformational” presidency is to make Americans worse off now in exchange for the remote possibility that the Green New Deal will allow for future generations to have better weather. Biden’s grandiose view of himself and his policies are egged on in part by Meacham’s flattery:

  He has been described as Joe Biden’s “historical muse”, an occasional informal adviser to the US president and contributor to some of his major speeches including the inaugural address.

  In March, Jon Meacham put together a meeting between Biden and a group of fellow historians at the White House that lasted more than two hours. What did he learn about the 46th president?

  “He’s like an upside down iceberg,” the Pulitzer prize-winning historian says by phone. “You see most of it and that’s not spin: there’s just not a lot of mystery to Joe Biden. The last four or five minutes of his press conference in the East Room [on 25 March] when he talked about democracy and autocracy, that was pretty much it.”

  As the average American family struggles to keep up with inflation and the Biden administration deliberately makes it more difficult for them to live a semblance of normal lives, historians such as Meacham are telling Biden to expand his reach and his authority in fundamentally changing how Americans live. Indeed, in Biden’s first two years, he has brought about fundamental change to American life, but that change has been harmful.

  Robert Higgs in his article “No More Great Presidents” lays out the modern historians’ standard for “greatness”:

  The lesson seems obvious. Any president who craves a high place in the annals of history should hasten to thrust the American people into an orgy of death and destruction. It does not matter how ill-conceived the war may be. 

  So far, Biden has not launched the USA into a foreign war, although he has almost single-handedly financed (with US tax dollars, of course) the proxy war between Ukraine and Russia, using the Russian invasion as his justification for doing everything he can to prolong the fighting. However, by shackling the energy industries, blaming businesses for the inflation his government created, and doing whatever he can to make daily life difficult for ordinary people, one can say that Biden is at war with people who have no means by which to fight back.

  Even had the red wave passed over the electorate earlier this month, it would have changed the Biden presidency very little, if at all. That is how powerful the executive branch under Biden has become. And Biden will continue to listen to the “historians” who fawn over his every word and tell him that he, too, can be a “great” president.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 19:00

• China Pauses Purchases Of Some Russian Oils Ahead Of Price Cap
  China Pauses Purchases Of Some Russian Oils Ahead Of Price Cap

  While we wait for the US and EU to unveil details of the Russian oil price caps which will be implemented in two weeks (we may have a lot to to wait after John Kirby said that “It’s not just about the dollar figure. It’s about the implementation, of course, making sure as many countries as possible can sign on to that,” he tells reporters, clearly stalling as nobody in the west knows just how badly such a price cap could backfire and send prices soaring), China is not taking any risks as its crude buyers – who have emerged as the biggest buyers of Russian oil in 2022 taking advantage of western sanctions and buying up Russian oil with discounts as large as $30 below spot – have paused purchases of some Russian oil as they too wait for details of a US-led cap to see if it presents a better price.

  As Bloomberg reports citing “traders with knowledge of the matter”, several cargoes of Russian ESPO crude for December-loading remain unsold and there’s hesitation among sellers and Chinese buyers to close deals before more clarity on the exact price cap level is known, according to traders with knowledge of the matter.

  The Russian oil price cap is set to be implemented alongside European Union sanctions on Russian crude on Dec. 5, with those adhering to the measure gaining access to insurance, banking and shipping services from the bloc. The cap is designed to keep crude flowing from the OPEC+ producer to prevent a global supply shock but crimp the Kremlin’s revenues as it wages war in Ukraine.

  However, Russia has reiterated that it won’t sell to nations that implement the cap, potentially sending oil sharply higher (back in July JPMorgan said that “Oil Price Could Hit “Stratospheric” $380 If Russia Retaliates To G7 Oil Price Cap“). Instead, Moscow will redirect supply to “market-oriented partners” or reduce production, according to Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak. In other words, the status quo will continue, since to this day Russian oil makes its way to European markets, only instead of being bought directly from Russia, it comes by way of China or India instead, with Europe paying a substantial premium to where oil would trade if all these artificial trade barriers did not exist.

  ESPO, or Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean oil is popular with China’s independent refiners due to the high diesel yield and short shipping distance. Traders said many market participants appear open to referencing the price cap — even if they don’t officially support it — provided the level isn’t too dislocated from current prices.

  Should the level be set too low, however, the party responsible for shipping and insurance coverage — which can be the seller or buyer, depending on contract terms — may need to seek services from non-EU providers, thereby complicating the process and drastically changing the economics of the deal.

  At the same time, and as Zoltan Pozsar explained back in March, adding to buyers’ concerns is that banks that finance crude purchases are wary of the looming sanctions and soaring freight rates. Service providers are weighing their possible exposure to the EU penalties and how best to navigate restrictions when they take effect in less than two weeks.

  Ahead of the price cap, Russian seaborne fuel exports soared to the highest since at least 2017 as the nation’s refiners rushed to do deals before EU restrictions on imports and shipping come into force. The nation’s average daily exports of oil products from Nov. 1 to 10 jumped 22% from the prior month to around 3.17 million barrels, according to estimates from data and analytics firm Kpler.

  

  Ironically, Bloomberg also reported previously that the largest oil companies in China – whose dependence on cheap Russian oil has soared this year – are seeking help from Beijing to keep Russian imports flowing after new sanctions on Moscow that are set to kick in next month. State-owned oil refiners are worried about their ability to work out the payment channels, logistics and insurance needed to keep buying from the OPEC+ producer after Dec. 5.

  

  China and India have become key outlets for Russian crude after most other buyers shunned the OPEC+ producer following its invasion of Ukraine. Both China and India have, in turn, become major sources of Russian oil to Europe, only instead of calling it Russian oil they sell it as – drumroll – China and Indian oil. And that allows Europe’s virtue signalers to sleep at night.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 18:40

• How Money From Gates And FTX Bought Scientific Silence
  How Money From Gates And FTX Bought Scientific Silence

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  Looking back, it’s utterly bizarre how the world of science could have gone so silent even as the world locked down and lives were shattered by the billions by governments the world over. The silence was deafening. We went from a March 2, 2020, letter signed by 800 public health experts associated with Yale University—which warned against quarantines and closures—to a strange disappearance of nearly all clear voices a few weeks later. And so things stood for the better part of two years.

  

  Governments were allowed to create vast carnage based on a novel experiment with absolutely no precedent in history and no scientific literature that backed it. Even the World Health Organization’s pandemic plan included nothing like lockdowns as a solution to a widespread pathogen. At the time, it was obvious to me and others that the silence was due not to broad agreement with the policies but to something else.

  That something, sad to say, was money.

  We are more and more discovering the heightened role that the crypto exchange FTX played in funneling money to major public health outposts and academics at Johns Hopkins and Stanford University, as well as its family connections to the Columbia University department of public health. And before that funding spigot opened up, there was the Gates Foundation which had clearly pivoted from seemingly nonpartisan research to full support for the lockdowns.

  To be sure, there is no one explanation for the disaster. The whole profession had already been infected by the intellectual virus of mechanistic rationalism and modeling. The idea was that if you slap some math and equations together and let the computer take over, you can gain a picture of disease outcomes under various scenarios. Such models are easily manipulated with small changes in variables.

  Deborah Birx relied on these entirely in her push to get the Trump administration to greenlight the lockdowns. And there can be no doubt about that history now that Trump’s Twitter account is alive again. The end of the censorship allows us to see how he was pressured to throw out his best instincts and instead adopt a lockdown policy, not just for two weeks but for months after, even to the point of criticizing Governor Brian Kemp of Georgia for opening up that Trump considered to be “too soon.”

  (As an aside, the restoration of Trump’s account also allows us to see that his last two tweets urged all Jan. 6, 2021, protesters on Capitol to stay peaceful and respect the blue. It’s no wonder the ancien régime at Twitter wanted his account blocked and blasted away.)

  Having studied this trajectory closely, it seems impossible to overlook the political motives here. No question that many elites in many places had whipped themselves up into a frenzy to the point that they were willing to crush the whole of society and even give up two years of education for kids in order to drive Trump from office. The plot was to get him to make the initial call himself based on telling him lies about virus severity and the effectiveness of lockdowns. No question that he was hornswoggled.

  However, in addition to these factors, one cannot neglect financial factors. Quite plainly, the grant money at the time and for two years later was clearly on the side of lockdowns and the Democrat Party, plus the elite media and their narrative line that openness equals death and lockdowns/masking/mandates were public-spirited.

  Vast numbers of scientists who could have and should have spoken out remained silent, or, worse, lent their voices in support of the outrage. Much of the reason has to do with how science is funded at the university level. It’s all about getting the next grant. It’s tragic but there is a strong motivation here to curate one’s opinions in a way that paves the way for future funding sources.

  This is why it is not necessary that every sellout scientist be in receipt of direct funds from Gates, FTX, or the pharmaceutical industry. All that needs to happen to control a whole sector of opinion is for the word to get out on the streets that a funding source is there with countless millions and is ready to fork over.

  As a result, even the smartest and most credentialled people can be easily made to fall in line. And no question that FTX quickly picked up the reputation of somehow being concerned about “pandemic planning” and so the whole of the industry lined up with their palms out. After all, FTX promised $100 million in grants!

  This is why, the Washington Post reports, “The shock waves from FTX’s free fall have rippled across the public health world, where numerous leaders in pandemic-preparedness had received funds from FTX funders or were seeking donations.”

  The seeking part is key here. But so is the money trail. FTX funded the later stages of the single biggest trials for repurposed therapeutics for COVID. Countless lives hung in the balance on these trials. Many physicians the world over had experienced great outcomes in dire circumstances from generic drugs such as HCQ, Ivermectin, fluvoxamine, and others, especially when used with other vitamins and zinc. Testing them was crucial.

  The results were backed by a predictable media blitz: such therapeutics don’t work. Meanwhile, the study has been severely criticized not only for poor study construction but also for the conflicts of interests of top researchers who also consulted with pharmaceutical companies.

  This is all very significant because there is a strong sense that the reason for the neglect of therapeutics—by the National Institutes of Health, Gates Foundation, and also major media, which smeared anyone who suggested there might be a better way—might all trace to the economic motive of shutting down cheap alternatives to vaccines.

  Independent journalist Alexandros Marinos has mapped out the timeline of the study:

  

  The Gates Foundation was first in, followed by Rainwater and FastGrants. FastGrants is a program established by the Charles G. Koch Foundation that also ended up giving money to Imperial College modeler Neil Ferguson, who first drove lockdown propaganda in the UK and United States. FTX modeled its own grant-giving program on FastGrants and then picked up the funding burden later in the process. (There is supreme irony here: the lie all over the internet was that the Great Barrington Declaration was funded by Koch, whereas in fact that money stream was going to the opposition!)

  In addition, the Post notes, FTX “awarded $1.5 million to Stanford University’s Center for Innovation in Global Health in July for seed grants intended ‘to catalyze research and innovations that prepare for and help prevent the next pandemic.’”

  Also: “The Future Fund’s commitments included $10 million to HelixNano, a biotech start-up seeking to develop a next-generation coronavirus vaccine; $250,000 to a University of Ottawa scientist researching how to eradicate viruses from plastic surfaces; and $175,000 to support a recent law school graduate’s job at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.”

  We don’t know how much money Gates/FTX gave to JHU’s Center for Health Security (which had sponsored Event 201) but it was enough to cause the Center’s head Tom Inglesby to completely reverse his earlier position against lockdowns to become a leading champion of them.

  “Overall, the [FTX] Future Fund was a force for good,” Inglesby told the Post. “The work they were doing was really trying to get people to think long-term … to build pandemic preparedness, to diminish the risks of biological threats.”

  Following the money trail from FTX to the public health establishment will undoubtedly reveal more in the way of information, especially considering that Sam Bankman-Fried’s brother Gabe ran a lobbying organization entirely devoted to “pandemic planning.”

  No question that this whole machine became an industrial behemoth over two years. When I first started Brownstone Institute, my phone and email began to blow up with offers of money and funding, but always with a proviso. I had to connect our scientists with their network of scientists in an already established system.

  There was no question in my mind what was going on: I was being told to play ball in exchange for large checks to make this fledgling nonprofit work. In some way, this astonished me: I was being offered a path to riches provided I would gut the whole mission! And this was happening even before we had published any of our research!

  So, yes, I saw how this system works firsthand. Of course I completely rejected the idea simply because going along would defeat the whole point of founding an institute in the first place. And yet the presumption on the part of the contacts was that surely this was just another racket in a space full of them and I would be happy to give up all principles for generous funding. I never considered it even for one instant.

  There is a grotesque tragedy to all of this. Great people gave up all their principles and integrity in exchange for grants and grease from big shots who used their money and power to wreck the world over two years, and they were able to do it with very little professional opposition. And yet here we are today. Who are the real stars in the world of science today? Not those on the Gates/FTX gravy train. It is the men and women who stuck their necks out to do the right thing.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 18:20

• Humans Could Live On The Moon "This Decade": NASA Official
  Humans Could Live On The Moon “This Decade”: NASA Official

  The NASA official in charge of the Orion lunar spacecraft program says humans could live on the moon for lengthy periods this decade.

  

  Speaking with the BBC, Howard Hu told host Laura Kuenssberg that Wednesday’s launch of the Artemis rocket, which carries Orion, was a “historic day for human space flight,” according to the BBC.

  Orion is currently about 134,000km (83,300 miles) from the Moon.

  The 100m-tall Artemis rocket blasted off from the Kennedy Space Center as part of Nasa’s mission to take astronauts back to Earth’s satellite.

  Sitting atop the rocket is the Orion spacecraft which, for this first mission, is uncrewed but is equipped with a ‘manikin’ which will register the impacts of the flight on the human body.

  Wednesday’s flight followed two previous launch attempts in August and September that were aborted during the countdown because of technical woes. -BBC

  “It’s the first step we’re taking to long-term deep space exploration, for not just the United States but for the world,” said Hu, adding “And I think this is an historic day for Nasa, but it’s also an historic day for all the people who love human space flight and deep space exploration. “

  “I mean, we are going back to the Moon, we’re working towards a sustainable program and this is the vehicle that will carry the people that will land us back on the Moon again.”

  Program manager for Orion at NASA, Howard Hu, tells #BBCLauraK they believe humans will be living on the Moon by the end of the decadehttps://t.co/Z1BCKTGMHl pic.twitter.com/hSuELrAnrK

  — BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) November 20, 2022

  According to Hu, if the current Artemis flight was successful, the next one will be manned, while a third would be where astronauts could actually land on the Moon.

  The current mission was proceeding well, he told the BBC, with all systems working and the mission team preparing for the next firing of Orion’s engines (what is known as a burn) at lunchtime on Monday to put the spacecraft into a distant orbit of the Moon.

  Mr Hu admitted that watching the mission from Earth was not unlike being an anxious parent, but he said seeing the images and the videos coming back from Orion “really gives that excitement and feeling of, ‘wow, we are headed back to the Moon'”. -BBC

  Recommended reading for life on the moon…

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 18:00

• California Workers Win $125,000 After Vaccine Discrimination Lawsuit
  California Workers Win $125,000 After Vaccine Discrimination Lawsuit

  Authored by Juliette Fairley via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Five months after filing a lawsuit against the Goleta Water District in Santa Barbara, attorneys have secured a six-figure award in favor of five plaintiffs resulting from the utility’s restrictive COVID-19 employee vaccine mandate.

  “This was fairly early on that they offered this judgment that the plaintiffs were the prevailing parties, which means they did not want to litigate this case clearly and go to discovery,” said Mariah Gondeiro, an Advocates for Faith & Freedom lawyer.

  “I believe that we can use it in other cases as a precedent.”

  

  Advocates for Faith & Freedom, a nonprofit law firm, filed their lawsuit in June alleging that the mandate discriminated against their clients who have religious beliefs that prevented them from submitting to the injection.

  The settlement resulted not only in Goleta Water District paying $125,000 to five plaintiffs, plus attorney’s fees, but also in agreeing to a judgment in which the plaintiffs prevailed.

  

  “It’s not really surprising because the reality is we’re starting to see this across the country,” Gondeiro told The Epoch Times. “Government officials are being held accountable for their discriminatory policies and I am hopeful that we’re going to continue to see these types of decisions because what they did was wrong, and they hurt a lot of people’s lives.”

  Two of the employees remain water district workers. Three have moved on.

  “They didn’t want to have to pay for testing and the ones that have already left don’t want their jobs back,” Gondeiro said.

  Because they requested and were granted religious exemptions, the five plaintiffs had to choose between unpaid leaves of absence or paying for bi-weekly COVID-19 tests on their own time.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 17:40

• Biden Extends Student Loan Repayment Freeze Until June 30
  Biden Extends Student Loan Repayment Freeze Until June 30

  The Biden administration has extended the payment pause on student loan bills yet again. The relief has been in place since the start of the Covid pandemic and was set to expire at the end of the year. 

  Bloomberg reported the White House extended the student loan repayment freeze until June 30, 2023. This allows tens of millions of borrowers to skip out on payments, as restarting repayments early next year would’ve been messy for the administration, which has promised forgiveness. 

  I’m confident that our student debt relief plan is legal. But it’s on hold because Republican officials want to block it.

  That’s why @SecCardona is extending the payment pause to no later than June 30, 2023, giving the Supreme Court time to hear the case in its current term. pic.twitter.com/873CurlHFZ

  — President Biden (@POTUS) November 22, 2022

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

  Any restart of repayments would’ve unleashed a student debt default wave for millions of borrowers. 

  “Unless the [Education] Department is allowed to provide debt relief, we anticipate there could be a historically large increase in the amount of federal student loan delinquency and defaults as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic,” James Richard Kvaal, Department of Education undersecretary of education, said in a recent court filing.

  Biden’s student loan forgiveness program calls for $10,000 cancellation of federal loans per borrower who made less than $125,000 in 2020 or 2021, which is now at the mercy of the courts.

  Around 16 million people have been approved for federal student loan forgiveness — and some have already been emailed – though no debt cancellation has been completed due to litigation. Biden has asked for the Supreme Court to intervene.  

  Currently, tens of millions of borrowers don’t have to make a payment until June of next year while the Biden administration is trying to fulfill its promise to cancel debt and avert a massive default wave that would surely hurt the president’s ratings ahead of the 2024 elections. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 17:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Truth About Ivermectin
  The Truth About Ivermectin

  Authored by Marina Zheng via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Ivermectin has been hailed as a “wonder drug” and, according to the UNESCO World Science Report, a critical component of “one of the most triumphant public health campaigns ever waged in the developing world.”

  

  However, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and affiliated health authorities have vociferously recommended against ivermectin as a potential treatment for the virus.

  Though the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved ivermectin for human use in treating conditions caused by parasites, it has also insisted that ivermectin “has not been shown to be safe or effective” when it comes to treating COVID-19.

  In a social media message that has gone viral, the FDA labeled it as a drug for horses and not fit for human consumption: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

  You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it. https://t.co/TWb75xYEY4

  — U.S. FDA (@US_FDA) August 21, 2021

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

  The post made headlines and was one of the FDA’s most successful social media campaigns. Yet, research findings seem to contradict the public health organization’s recommendations.

  A growing body of research shows that ivermectin is an essential treatment for COVID-19. Many doctors have praised the drug for its broad yet effective antiparasitic, antiviral, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, and autophagic properties.

  Ivermectin: Antiparasitic Beginnings

  Ivermectin made its name through its significant benefits in treating parasitic infections.

  In 1973, Satoshi Omura and William C. Campbell, working with the Kitasato Institute in Tokyo, found an unusual type of Streptomyces bacteria in Japanese soil near a golf course.

  In laboratory studies, Omura and Campbell discovered that this Streptomyces bacteria could cure mice infected with the roundworm Heligmosomoides polygyrus. Campbell isolated the bacteria’s active compounds, naming them avermectins, and the bacteria was thus called S. avermitilis.

  Despite decades of searching worldwide, researchers have yet to find another microorganism that can produce avermectin.

  It was changing one of the bonds of avermectin through a chemical process that produced ivermectin, which was proven successful in treating onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis, both of which are debilitating diseases common in the developing world.

  

  Though its broad antiparasitic functions are not well understood, it is known that ivermectin penetrates parasites’ nervous systems, turning off their neurons’ actions, possibly deactivating and killing them.

  As part of a donation campaign launched in 1988 by Merck & Co., Inc., the manufacturer of ivermectin, the drug was used in Africa to treat river blindness. Also called onchocerciasis, river blindness is a tropical disease caused by Onchocerca volvulus worms. It is the second-most common cause worldwide of infectious blindness.

  The Onchocerca worms mature in the skin of an infected individual (“the host”). After mating, female worms can release into the host’s skin up to 1,000 microfilariae a day; the female worms live for 10 to 14 years. The presence of these worms can lead to scarring in the tissues and, when microfilariae invade the eye, can cause visual impairment or complete loss of vision.

  The World Health Organization estimates that 18 million people are infected globally, and 270,000 have been blinded by onchocerciasis.

  When Merck distributed ivermectin in areas hardest hit by the disease, treatment benefited the residents’ overall health and led to economic recovery. Ivermectin replaced previous drugs that had devastating side effects.

  “Ivermectin proved to be virtually purpose-built to combat Onchocerciasis,” Omura wrote in a study he co-authored in 2011.

  Ivermectin has also proven effective against lymphatic filariasis, known as elephantiasis. Parasitic worms transmitted through the bite of an infected mosquito can grow and develop in lymphatic vessels, which regulate the body’s water balance. When certain vessels are blocked, the areas—typically the legs and genitals—can swell, with the legs enlarging to elephant-like stumps.

  Worldwide, more than 120 million people are infected, 40 million of whom are seriously incapacitated and disfigured.

  The World Health Organization listed ivermectin as an essential drug and has advised many countries to run annual campaigns to rid people of these parasites. Such recommendations are a solid testament to ivermectin’s safety.

  For their work, including the discovery of avermectin, in 2015, Omura and Campbell were among three recipients of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

  It is an indispensable drug for the underdeveloped world, with about 3.7 billion doses administered as part of global campaigns during the past 30 years. To this day, ivermectin remains a staple drug of tropical areas and an essential drug in treating onchocerciasis, lymphatic filariasis, strongyloidiasis, and scabies.

  Ivermectin and COVID-19

  Analyses of studies on ivermectin have found it effective as a prevention, a treatment for acute COVID-19, and in advanced stages of infection by the virus.

  1. Ivermectin as a Prophylaxis

  Prophylaxis intervenes in the first phases of COVID-19 infection, which is mainly asymptomatic, when the virus replicates to increase its viral load—symptom onset occurs after the viral load peaks.

  Ivermectin can be effective in the early stages of infection. Outside the cells, ivermectin can attach to parts of the virus, immobilizing it and preventing it from entering and infecting human cells.

  Ivermectin can also enter the cell to prevent the virus from replicating. SARS-CoV-2 needs cell replication machinery to make more of the virus; ivermectin attaches and blocks a protein critical to this process, preventing viral production.

  Additionally, ivermectin can be absorbed from the skin and stored in fat cells for a long time.

  “Because it’s lipid soluble, it is stored and slowly released, [so] once you’ve taken a prophylactic dose, and I think it’s like the cumulative dose of about 400mg, that your risk of getting COVID is close to zero and you can actually stop it for a while,” said Dr. Paul Marik, a widely published critical care specialist with 500 peer-reviewed papers to his name, in an interview with The Epoch Times.

  

  Marik co-founded the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), a group of physicians formed in the early days of the pandemic and dedicated to treating COVID-19. According to interviews, many of the group’s doctors have successfully treated COVID-19 with ivermectin. The organization’s other co-founder, Dr. Pierre Kory, has written a book about ivermectin’s use and controversy during the pandemic.

  Dr. Sabine Hazan, a gastroenterologist with 22 years of experience in clinical research, told The Epoch Times that she would advise ivermectin use for only a short time in critical patients rather than recommending the use of it as a prophylaxis.

  Continuous use of ivermectin—as with all drugs—can make the body dependent on the drug rather than working to fix itself.

  2. Ivermectin for Early and Acute COVID

  Many peer-reviewed studies have found that ivermectin, when used by itself or in conjunction with other therapies in symptomatic patients, reduces ventilation time, time for recovery, and the risk of progressing to severe disease. (pdf 1, pdf 2, pdf 3)

  This is likely due to ivermectin’s anti-inflammatory role in multiple pathways, achieved by clearing out the viral particles by immobilizing them, reducing inflammation, and improving mitochondrial action.

  Suppose the early viral replication is not controlled and cleared out soon enough by the body’s immune system. In that case, the infection can become severe or even hyperinflammatory, possibly leading to systemic organ failures.

  Ivermectin can also directly interact with immune pathways, suppressing inflammation and reducing the chances of developing a cytokine storm. A cytokine storm occurs when the immune system is hyperactive and hyperinflammatory. Though ivermectin can help to clear out the virus and its particles, the inflammatory state of the tissues and the organs can often cause more damage than the virus itself.

  Ivermectin also likely improves gut health, which plays an essential role in immunity by preventing bacteria and viruses from infecting people via the gut.

  In a published study, Hazan hypothesized that ivermectin helps COVID-19 patients by increasing the levels of Bifidobacteria—a beneficial bacteria—in the gut.

  As the CEO and founder of her own genetic sequencing research laboratory, ProgenaBiome, Hazan noticed that the Bifidobacteria levels in her stools would increase after she took ivermectin. Critical COVID patients would have “zero Bifidobacteria,” which can often be a sign of poor health.  

  In her peer-reviewed study on hypoxic patients, she observed that COVID patients with low oxygen levels from the cytokine storms in their lungs would improve within hours of administering ivermectin.

  “When people die of COVID, they die from the cytokines—they couldn’t breathe anymore. It’s almost like an anaphylactic reaction. So when you give them ivermectin at the moment they’re about to crash, you’re boosting the Bifidobacteria [and increasing their oxygen],” Hazan said.

  She explained that ivermectin is a fermented product of Streptomyces bacteria. Streptomyces are within the same group Bifidobacteria are from, which may explain why ivermectin temporarily boosts Bifidobacteria.

  Ivermectin also helps with mitochondrial function. During severe COVID-19, patients often experience pulmonary dysfunctions due to lung inflammation, reducing oxygen flow. This can cause stress to the mitochondria, leading to fatigue, and, when severe, may cause cell and tissue death. Ivermectin has been shown to increase energy production, indicating that it is beneficial to the mitochondria.

  Furthermore, ivermectin can bind to the spike protein—a distinctive structural feature of the COVID virus which has a crucial role in its pathogenesis. In systemic disease, the spike protein can enter the bloodstream and bind to red blood cells to form blood clots. Ivermectin can prevent blood clots from forming in the body.

  3. Ivermectin for Long COVID and Post-Vaccine Symptoms

  The number of studies supporting ivermectin to treat long COVID and post-COVID-19 vaccine symptoms is limited. However, doctors treating these conditions have observed successful results with ivermectin.

  An Argentinian study published in March 2021 is the only peer-reviewed study evaluating ivermectin for long COVID.

  Researchers found that in patients reporting long COVID symptoms—including coughing, brain fog, headaches, and fatigue—ivermectin alleviated their symptoms.

  Mechanistically, ivermectin can improve autophagy. This process is usually switched off during COVID-19 infections. By switching autophagy back on, ivermectin can help cells clear remnant viral proteins out, returning stability to the cell.

  Like acute and severe COVID-19, chronic spike protein triggers inflammation, and ivermectin can reduce such responses by suppressing inflammatory pathways and lessening the damage to tissues and blood vessels.

  The Changing Public Health Messaging on Ivermectin

  The NIH’s stance on ivermectin has changed several times.

  Early in the pandemic, there was little information on ivermectin as a potential treatment for the virus.

  The first study that mentioned ivermectin as a potential COVID-19 treatment came from Australia in April 2020. Researchers administered ivermectin to SARS-CoV-2-infected monkey kidney cells in the laboratory and found the drug beneficial in very high doses. However, the researchers concluded that further study was needed. Many health agencies, including the NIH, the CDC, and other global health regulators concluded that ivermectin could kill the virus only at toxic levels.

  Even now, NIH’s statement on ivermectin for COVID-19 reads: “Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures. However, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggest that achieving the plasma concentrations necessary for the antiviral efficacy detected in vitro would require administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans.”

  In October 2020, the first clinical study showing the benefits of ivermectin was published by the journal CHEST. The study found ivermectin to reduce mortality rates in COVID-19 patients and garnered immediate attention.

  The study’s lead author, Dr. Jean-Jacques Rajter, is a critical care doctor specializing in pulmonary medicine.

  Rajter gave a testimony (pdf) of his findings to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs in December 2020.

  The day after he saw the Australian study, one of his COVID patients dramatically deteriorated from breathing normally at room oxygen levels to requiring intubation. The patient’s son pleaded with Rajter to save his mother using whatever options available. Rajter recognized that  hydroxychloroquine would be ineffective in the advanced stages of COVID. After much deliberation, he tried ivermectin.

  “The patient deteriorated as expected for about 12 more hours but stabilized by 24 hours and improved by 48 hours. After this, two more patients had similar issues and were treated with the ivermectin-based protocol. Based on experience, these patients should have done poorly, yet they all survived,” the testimony read.

  More clinical studies were published, showing the benefits of ivermectin as a prophylactic treatment. (pdf 1, pdf 2).

  The findings encouraged the use of ivermectin among doctors desperate to find a cure.

  Meanwhile, by October 2020, research into COVID-19 vaccines and the use of remdesivir to treat the virus was already in full swing.

  According to the FDA, specific criteria should be met for the EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) to be granted for vaccines and medications, including that there are “no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.”

  Some doctors say that if ivermectin’s use for COVID had been approved, it would have made the EUAs for vaccines and remdesivir null and void.

  Following the Australian study, the FDA published a statement, “FAQ: COVID-19 and Ivermectin Intended for Animals,” highlighting the use of ivermectin in animals and advising against the use of ivermectin for COVID-19.

  The NIH also discouraged the use of ivermectin, albeit briefly. On Jan. 14, 2021, the NIH changed its statement, writing that there was no evidence to recommend or disapprove the use of ivermectin. However, in April 2022, the statement changed to strongly disapproving of using ivermectin.

  “We [Marik, Kory, and Dr. Andrew Hill, a virologist and consultant to the WHO] had a conference with NIH in January of 2021. We presented our data, and Andrew Hill presented the data he had done…there were a number of studies at that point, which were very positive,” said Marik.

  Health Authority Overreach

  Despite the NIH’s neutral statement on ivermectin for most of 2021, the FDA actively campaigned against using ivermectin in COVID-19 patients. On Aug. 26,  2021, the CDC sent an emergency warning against using ivermectin; a few weeks later, the American Medical Association and affiliated associations called for an end to ivermectin use.

  Many doctors were thus discouraged from using ivermectin, and pharmacies refused to prescribe it. State health agencies warned against using ivermectin, and medical boards removed the medical licenses of doctors who prescribed ivermectin, alleging misinformation.

  Yet using the FDA’s statement against ivermectin to ban its use in COVID-19 cases would be considered an overreach. Since the FDA approved ivermectin in 1996, this made the drug acceptable for off-label use.

  “The fact that it’s not FDA approved for COVID is irrelevant because the FDA endorses the use of off-label drugs at the clinician’s discretion,” said Marik.

  As an ironic side effect of the messaging on ivermectin, people suddenly found themselves unable to access ivermectin, and some turned to veterinary-grade ivermectin.

  Though veterinary ivermectin is the same product as medicinal ivermectin, the manufacturing standard is not the same as it is for human-grade pharmaceuticals.

  Contradictory Research and Campaigns

  Though the initial research in 2020 showed promising results for ivermectin, published studies reported conflicting findings by the following year.

  The NIH has funded many studies on the effectiveness of ivermectin, the most recent being ACTIV-6.

  Individuals can participate in the study once they develop COVID by selecting ivermectin from four other drugs. The drug was sent to them via mail. This method means that some people in the study could have recovered by the time they received the ivermectin.

  There are some controversies regarding this study.

  The first is that the authors changed the primary endpoints during the study, which is heavily frowned upon as it can affect the validity and reliability of the outcome.

  Initially, the primary endpoint was the number of deaths, hospitalizations, and symptoms reported at day 14.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/22/2022 – 00:00

• AP Fires Reporter Who Risked Triggering WWIII With Polish Missile Misinformation
  AP Fires Reporter Who Risked Triggering WWIII With Polish Missile Misinformation

  Five days after the Associated Press cited an anonymous ‘senior US intelligence official’ in a story that claimed a Russian missile killed two Polish civilians, one of the two reporters behind the story was fired.

  

  Reporters James LaPorta (fired) and John Leichester (not fired) share the byline on the now-retracted report, which sparked an entire news cycle that included talk of invoking ‘Article 5‘ – the mutual defense agreement between NATO members – and which would have obligated other members to engage in collective defense, aka WWIII.

  As the day went on, President Biden popped out of a NATO / G7 briefing, and mumbled that “it’s unlikely” the projectile was fired from Russia. NATO then chimed in, saying it was more likely that the missile was fired by Ukrainian forces in self-defense (or was it?).

  AP later retracted the story, and issued the following correction which pinned blame on the anonymous intelligence official;

  In earlier versions of a story published November 15, 2022, The Associated Press reported erroneously, based on information from a senior American intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity, that Russian missiles had crossed into Poland and killed two people. Subsequent reporting showed that the missiles were Russian-made and most likely fired by Ukraine in defense against a Russian attack.

  According to Mediaite, AP requires two sources for confirmation on this type of reporting when both are anonymous. No word on who edited the piece or what their fate might be.

  On Monday, the Daily Beast reported that LaPorta had been sacked for erroneous reporting, while Leicester has, as of this writing, kept his job with the wire service.

  Remember when AP cited anonymous US intelligence officials to suggest that ZeroHedge was spreading Russian disinformation? Same energy, and wouldn’t be the first time ‘anonymous officials’ turned out to be bullshit.

  Meanwhile on James LaPorta’s Twitter feed…

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 23:40

• These Are The Most Stolen Vehicles In The US
  These Are The Most Stolen Vehicles In The US

  The National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) has released its annual Hot Wheels report which details the most stolen vehicle models in the United States.

  Notably, as Statista’s Martin Armstrong points out, while technology has reduced car theft over the past decades, it is experiencing something of a resurgence, primarily due to complacency from drivers.

  Thousands of cars are stolen across the U.S. every year because owners leave their keys or fobs inside their vehicles, inviting theft.

  In 2021, like in previous years, Honda has the undesirable reputation as the most-targeted car manufacturer. Interestingly, the Hondas most commonly stolen are far older than a lot of the other automobiles on this list. A 1997 Accord, for example, is the most commonly taken of that model, while the 2000 vintages of the Civic and the CR-V are seemingly the most vulnerable.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  At the top of the list overall though are two pickups: from Chevrolet and Ford with a combined 96,000 thefts recorded last year. Here, the 2004 and 2006 models, respectively, are stolen the most.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 23:20

• Victor Davis Hanson: The Strange Morality Of The Bay-Area Billionaire Left
  Victor Davis Hanson: The Strange Morality Of The Bay-Area Billionaire Left

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

  “Ya. Hehe. I had to be. It’s what reputations are made of, to some extent. I feel bad for those guys who get f—ed by it, by this dumb game we woke westerners play where we say all the right shibboleths and so everyone likes us.”

  – Sam Bankman-Fried

  

  The FTX Bitcoin empire of 30-year-old CEO Sam Bankman-Fried is in shambles. Or more specifically, his “dumb game” cryptocurrency exchange has destroyed thousands of lives. Electronically, he may have robbed perhaps a million investors, and along with them hundreds of large institutional investors. 

  Mysteriously, only after the conclusion of the midterm elections, did we suddenly learn that this left-wing “philanthropist” and benefactor of Democratic politics, this megadonor to the quid pro quo puff-piece media, this con artist protected from federal securities regulators, had drained off, lost, hidden, or spent billions of dollars of other people’s money. 

  As a result, the Bahamas-basking, tax-avoiding, polyamorous sybarite, and heartthrob of progressive moralists, now claims he has no wherewithal to honor his financial commitments to his own investors. Preliminary postmortem auditors sigh that they have never encountered a greater financial mess than what Bankman-Fried has left in his wake. 

  How does the most sophisticated financial system in the history of civilization allow a virtue-signaling nerd to nearly wreck it? Where were the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, the IRS, and all the other alphabet soup agencies that supposedly exist so that someone like Bankman-Fried does not? Where is Merrick Garland and his special prosecutors, the FBI with its televised SWAT swoops and leg irons?

  For all the performance-art boasts of simply doing good for others by doing far better for himself, Bankman-Fried may soon be revealed to be one of the great, dissolute con artists in American history. Like the infamous Charles Ponzi, “Bankman” may become our eponymous word in the 21st century for electronically driven, pyramid-scheme theft. 

  His Stanford-Silicon Valley moral veneer was shiny but otherwise razor thin. Yet Bankman-Fried told at least one truth when he explained to obsequious media what his ilk easily does to fool purported suckers who send him cash, while he avoided federal and media oversight: “This dumb game we woke westerners play where we say all the right shibboleths and so everyone likes us.” 

  Well, not everyone. Instead, he might qualify his “everyone” as the like-minded, cynical, left-wing politicos, the kindred media hacks at the Washington Post and New York Times, and brethren investor toadies who helped him render Bernie Madoff a small-potato sinner in comparison.

  Bankman-Fried had showered Joe Biden in 2020 with millions of dollars in campaign donations and did so again with larger sums to congressional candidates in 2022. His public relations arm of FTX exuded the usual virtue speak—including promised impending multibillion-dollar gifting—for utopian, Democratic, and progressive causes. And the media on spec gushed about their pet grunger as he sought to buy protection from Democratic fixers. 

  “Effective Altruism,” Ponzi-Style

  Yet Bankman-Fried is merely one in a long line of Bay Area social-justice hypocrites and frauds. They share in common loud but cynical left-wing politics. They choreograph their personas to win exemption from left-wing government regulators, to guarantee puff pieces from a toady media, and to romance the rich, left-wing elite. Consider how the Washington Post gushed of the scam artist: 

  Harnessing the enormous wealth created by FTX, the cryptocurrency exchange that Sam Bankman-Fried had founded, they undertook a project to spend potentially billions of dollars on pandemic prevention, a long-neglected priority on Capitol Hill even amid the coronavirus crisis. The plan, drawn from the brothers’ adherence to a philosophy called effective altruism, sought to maximize philanthropic giving in ways that can have the most impact.

  Bankman-Fried surely has had “the most impact.” If he had worn a suit, and said the wrong “shibboleths,” he would now be behind bars. 

  What were the moral seeds of FTX? Bankman-Fried grew up on the progressive, moralistic Stanford campus, the son of two crusading Stanford law professors who often wrote about morality and the dispossessed. 

  SBF, as he is known, was groomed and prepped at an exclusive nearby Hillsborough private academy before being packed off to MIT. Progressive souls like Bankman-Fried distrust capitalism so much that, in his case, he retreated to the Bahamas to maximize its rewards. There he embraced a hedonistic lifestyle, tax breaks and lack of regulations, all in order to better short taxpayers of hundreds of millions of dollars in income tax revenue. 

  Such vulture capitalism is predicated on the presumption that young, loudly left-wing Bay Area hipsters in ratty clothes are the cool “good guys” if they have deep Democratic pockets and talk of “equity” and “fairness.” And so, they use the system to defeat the system—defined in their view as toxic traditional mores and values.

  Indeed, Bankman-Fried’s mother, Stanford Professor Elizabeth Fried was a “utilitarian,” perhaps best defined as advocating any means necessary to achieve what she felt were the best ends for everyone. She moonlighted from her supposedly full-time job by running “Mind the Gap,” a central collection agency for Silicon Valley dark money to be funneled secretly to the “right causes.” The means of getting the millions was always excused by the ends of how it was used.

  Apparently, some of her fund’s wherewithal was dripped in by some in her son’s stash circle—or rather his investors’ cash. Mind the Gap’s specialty was funding “to get out the vote.” To understand these dark-money operations in 2020, simply reread Molly Ball’s obnoxious Time magazine story of February 2021—a long boast of how stealth left-wing money, a toady progressive media, an army of lawyers, and social media combined to change voting laws, modulate the Black Lives Matter/Antifa street protests, and warp dissemination of news to craft a good utilitarian “conspiracy” that saved us from Donald Trump. 

  Will the Bankman-Fried family now atone, and try to give back to the robbed and deluded any of the real money that was funneled into Democratic candidates from the massive fraud? Does the water flow uphill?

  So how can the progressive embryos of Silicon Valley, Stanford University, Bay Area prep schools, and progressive humanitarian politics birth such an utter fraud who destroyed so many? Rather the question might be reversed, how could all that not?

  Performance Art Grifting

  In the context of Bankman-Fried, we recall another kindred Bay-Area erstwhile momentary billionaire charlatan. Do we remember the now felonious and prison-bound young prodigy and Hillary-Clinton aficionado Elizabeth Holmes? She, too, was birthed and swam in similar Stanford-Silicon Valley waters. 

  

  GLENN CHAPMAN/AFP via Getty Images

  Her scheme was Theranos. That was the pretentiously named fake-blood testing corporation that duped some of the most powerful investors in the United States to fork over billions of dollars to a twentysomething con artist. Holmes, like Bankman-Fried, was sired in the orbit of Stanford. She eschewed the slob props of Banksman-Fried, and instead preferred copy-catting Steve Jobs’ slicker all-black outfits.

  Holmes assembled on her fake corporate board some of the biggest names associated with Stanford University and Silicon Valley, whose brands masked what was likely the greatest corporate medical fraud in American history.  

  There is a pattern here of the “good” people doing “good” things with their “good” money that turns out very badly for everyone else. 

  Silicon Valley multibillionaire and fellow leftist Mark Zuckerberg prefers T-shirts, sneakers, and jeans to the Bankman-Fried bum-look or Holmes’ Apple black-draped getup. He is now laying off thousands of Facebook employees as his Meta disaster erodes his stock value and takes his net worth down tens of billions of dollars. 

  But it was just two years ago that Zuckerberg answered the utilitarian call of fellow leftists to use his mega money and power to stop the prince of darkness, Donald Trump. So Zuck, as he is known, poured $419 million into pro-Biden left-wing activist groups. That unprecedented sum was used to absorb the work of state election officials in key precincts to ensure the right people voted in the right way to ensure the right winner.

  Leftists still brag how the good mega-money sandbagged dullard Republicans and helped to give Biden the election.  

  Zuckerberg recently confessed that his left-wing company had also worked with the FBI to suppress online social media expression. Translated, that meant that the FBI partnered with Facebook to quash news deemed not helpful to the Biden election cause, such as the all-too-true revelations from the incriminating Hunter Biden laptop that was falsely passed off as “Russian disinformation.”

  Is that a very liberal, civil libertarian thing to do—to weld the state and the media to punish political enemies and censor the news? Was the FBI-Facebook fusion a sort of “electronic insurrection” designed to warp democracy—absent the buffoonish cow horns and face paint? Might Zuckerberg have passed on channeling his dark money to “nonprofit” leftist organizations, and instead banked it to save a few of his now laid-off employees?

  This column could become endless if it referenced all the Silicon Valley and Stanford progressive politico saints with feet of clay. Do we remember Tom Steyer, the Silicon Valley zillionaire, Stanford University board member, and former left-wing green presidential candidate, who spent $191 million without winning a single delegate? 

  At least candidate Michael Bloomberg got a few delegates at roughly $18 million a pop for the hundreds of millions of virtuous dollars he blew up in 2020. Steyer used his 2020 campaign to lecture us on ending the fossil fuel economy—but only after he had made a fortune in financing dirty coal burning plants in the impoverished Third World. 

  Posh Virtue

  What is going on? 

  The 21st-century globalized economy saturated the corridor between San Francisco and San Jose with wealth never before seen or imagined. Its beneficiaries discovered a number of things about the arts of becoming and staying ultra-rich.

  One, they never needed to worry about the essentials of life that troubled the other 99 percent of the country—affordable fuel, food, and housing, safe streets, and a fair and legal immigration system. 

  Or to put it another way, they could pose as progressive utopians—preening their moral superiority to the media, pouring money into the Democratic Party, funding foundations and PACs devoted to woke causes, climate change, and diversity, equity, and inclusion—and all the time never subject to the ramifications of their own exalted agendas. 

  They could not have cared less about crippling $6 a gallon gas, the exorbitant kilowatt cost of air conditioning, out-of-reach $1,000-a-square foot bungalow housing, the mayhem on San Francisco streets, or the reparatory elite university admissions policies that drastically curtailed working-class male admissions. Their wealth guaranteed them leverage, and leverage ensured exemptions. 

  But Bay Area morality was not just a pragmatic matter of the exempt elite force-feeding utopia down the throats of others who had no such immunity. Boutique, rich leftism also provided penance for the anointed, a mechanism that alleviated any residual guilt of talking like Eugene Debs while living like Marie Antoinette. 

  The multimillionaire, social justice warrior House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) assumed, as one of the Bay Area’s liberal icons, that she had a right to break quarantine and sneak off to her private hairdresser, or cluelessly boast of her $13 a pint ice cream, home delivered to her $24,000 twin imported refrigerators—all in the midst of a near depression as the national COVID-19 shutdown ruined millions of small business and devastated the educations of tens of millions of children. 

  As a member of the classy Bay Area elite, she knew the bankrupt political morality of the Left all too well: acts like tearing up the Trump State of the Union speech on national television veneered her privilege and made her one of the proverbial good people fighting for us from one of her various mansions. 

  Bay Area ZIP codes have produced the now-familiar rich, liberal politicians whose exempt lives are not damaged by the ideology that damages others. Consider the billionaire Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who for two decades was chauffeured by a Chinese spy while head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, or multimillionaire former Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), now ensconced in Rancho Mirage as a registered foreign agent for a Chinese surveillance firm, or multimillionaire Gavin Newsom, who bragged how the COVID lockdowns might greenlight “progressive capitalism,” as he pushed social distancing and mask-wearing—while he palled around with lobbyists, maskless, at the French Laundry.

  Sam Bankman-Fried is the ultimate dangerous and ridiculous expression of the most toxic and creepy culture in America. If he did not exist, someone like him would have to be invented.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 23:00

• Do These Documents Prove That Call Of Duty Is A Government PsyOp?
  Do These Documents Prove That Call Of Duty Is A Government PsyOp?

  Authored by Alan Macleod via MintPressNews.com,

  Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II has been available for less than three weeks, but it is already making waves. Breaking records, within ten days, the first-person military shooter video game earned more than $1 billion in revenue. Yet it has also been shrouded in controversy, not least because missions include assassinating an Iranian general clearly based on Qassem Soleimani, a statesman and military leader slain by the Trump administration in 2020, and a level where players must shoot “drug traffickers” attempting to cross the U.S./Mexico border.

  

  The Call of Duty franchise is an entertainment juggernaut, having sold close to half a billion games since it was launched in 2003. Its publisher, Activision Blizzard, is a giant in the industry, behind titles games as the Guitar Hero, Warcraft, Starcraft, Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater, Crash Bandicoot and Candy Crush Saga series.

  Yet a closer inspection of Activision Blizzard’s key staff and their connections to state power, as well as details gleaned from documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal that Call of Duty is not a neutral first-person shooter, but a carefully constructed piece of military propaganda, designed to advance the interests of the U.S. national security state.

  In the first five minutes the new Call of Duty has you pilot the missile that kills Soleimani lol

  — sad because the female faceapp of me isnt fuckable (@websiteidi0t) October 20, 2022

  MILITARY-ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX

  It has long been a matter of public record that American spies have targeted and penetrated Activision Blizzard games. Documents released by Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA, CIA, FBI and Department of Defense infiltrated the vast online realms such as World of Warcraft, creating make-believe characters to monitor potential illegal activity and recruit informers. Indeed, at one point, there were so many U.S. spies in one video game that they had to create a “deconfliction” group as they were wasting time unwittingly surveilling each other. Virtual games, the NSA wrote, were an “opportunity” and a “target-rich communication network”.

  However, documents obtained legally under the Freedom of Information Act by journalist and researcher Tom Secker and shared with MintPress News show that the connections between the national security state and the video game industry go far beyond this, and into active collaboration.

  In September 2018, for example, the United States Air Force flew a group of entertainment executives – including Call of Duty/Activision Blizzard producer Coco Francini – to their headquarters at Hurlburt Field, Florida. The explicit reason for doing so, they wrote, was to “showcase” their hardware and to make the entertainment industry more “credible advocates” for the U.S. war machine.

  “We’ve got a bunch of people working on future blockbusters (think Marvel, Call of Duty, etc.) stoked about this trip!” wrote one Air Force officer. Another email notes that the point of the visit was to provide “heavy-hitter” producers with “AFSOC [Air Force Special Operations Command] immersion focused on Special Tactics Airmen and air-to-ground capabilities.”

  “This is a great opportunity to educate this community and make them more credible advocates for us in the production of any future movies/television productions on the Air Force and our Special Tactics community,” wrote the AFSOC community relations chief.

  Francini and others were shown CV-22 helicopters and AC-130 planes in action, both of which feature heavily in Call of Duty games.

  Yet Call of Duty collaboration with the military goes back much further. The documents show that the United States Marine Corps (USMC) was involved in the production of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 and Call of Duty 5. The games’ producers approached the USMC at the 2010 E3 entertainment convention in Los Angeles, requesting access to hovercrafts (vehicles which later appeared in the game). Call of Duty 5 executives also asked for use of a hovercraft, a tank and a C-130 aircraft.

  This collaboration continued in 2012 with the release of Modern Warfare 4, where producers requested access to all manner of air and ground vehicles.

  Secker told MintPress that, by collaborating with the gaming industry, the military ensures a positive portrayal that can help it reach recruitment targets, stating that,

  For certain demographics of gamers it’s a recruitment portal, some first-person shooters have embedded adverts within the games themselves…Even without this sort of explicit recruitment effort, games like Call of Duty make warfare seem fun, exciting, an escape from the drudgery of their normal lives.”

  Secker’s documentary, “Theaters of War: How the Pentagon and CIA Took Hollywood” was released earlier this year.

  The military clearly held considerable influence over the direction of Call of Duty games. In 2010, its producers approached the Department of Defense (DoD) for help on a game set in 2075. However, the DoD liaison “expressed concern that [the] scenario being considered involves future war with China.” As a result, Activision Blizzard began “looking at other possible conflicts to design the game around.” In the end, due in part to military objections, the game was permanently abandoned.

  FROM WAR ON TERROR TO FIRST-PERSON SHOOTERS

  Not only does Activision Blizzard work with the U.S. military to shape its products, but its leadership board is also full of former high state officials. Chief amongst these is Frances Townsend, Activision Blizzard’s senior counsel, and, until September, its chief compliance officer and executive vice president for corporate affairs.

  Prior to joining Activision Blizzard, Townsend spent her life working her way up the rungs of the national security state. Previously serving as head of intelligence for the Coast Guard and as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s counterterrorism deputy, in 2004, President Bush appointed her to his Intelligence Advisory Board.

  As the White House’s most senior advisor on terrorism and homeland security, Townsend worked closely with Bush and Rice, and became one of the faces of the administration’s War on Terror. One of her principal achievements was to whip the American public into a constant state of fear about the supposed threat of more Al-Qaeda attacks (which never came).

  

  Before she joined Activision Blizzard, Frances Townsend worked in Homeland Security and Counterterrorism for the Bush White House. Ron Edmonds | AP

  As part of her job, Townsend helped popularize the term “enhanced interrogation techniques” – a Bush-era euphemism for torturing detainees. Worse still, Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan, the officer in charge of the notorious Abu Ghraib prison, alleged that Townsend put pressure on him to ramp up the torture program, reminding him “many, many times” that he needed to improve the intelligence output from the Iraqi jail.

  Townsend has denied these allegations. She also later condemned the “handcuff[ing]” and “humiliation” surrounding Abu Ghraib. She was not referring to the prisoners, however. In an interview with CNN, she lamented that “these career professionals” – CIA torturers – had been subject to “humiliation and opprobrium” after details of their actions were made public, meaning that future administrations would be “handcuffed” by the fear of bad publicity, while the intelligence community would become more “risk-averse”.

  During the Trump administration, Townsend was hotly tipped to become the Director of National Intelligence or the Secretary of Homeland Security. President Trump also approached her for the role of director of the FBI. Instead, however, Townsend took a seemingly incongruous career detour to become an executive at a video games company.

  ENTER THE WAR PLANNERS

  In addition to this role, Townsend is a director of the NATO offshoot, the Atlantic Council, a director at the Council on Foreign Relations, and a trustee of the hawkish think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a group MintPress News has previously covered in detail.

  Funded by weapons companies, NATO and the U.S. government, the Atlantic Council serves as the military alliance’s brain trust, devising strategies on how best to manage the world. Also on its board of directors are high statespersons like Henry Kissinger and Conzoleezza Rice, virtually every retired U.S. general of note, and no fewer than seven former directors of the CIA. As such, the Atlantic Council represents the collective opinion of the national security state.

  Two more key Call of Duty staff also work for the Atlantic Council. Chance Glasco, a co-founder of Infinity Ward developers who oversaw the game franchise’s rapid rise, is the council’s nonresident senior fellow, advising top generals and political leaders on the latest developments in tech.

  Game designer and producer Dave Anthony, crucial to Call of Duty’s success, is also an Atlantic Council employee, joining the group in 2014. There, he advises them on what the future of warfare will look like, and devises strategies for NATO to fight in upcoming conflicts.

  Anthony has made no secret that he collaborated with the U.S. national security state while making the Call of Duty franchise. “My greatest honor was to consult with Lieut. Col. Oliver North on the story of Black Ops 2,” he stated publicly, adding, There are so many small details we could never have known about if it wasn’t for his involvement.”

  Oliver North is a high government official gained worldwide infamy after being convicted for his role in the Iran-Contra Affair, whereby his team secretly sold weapons to the government of Iran, using the money to arm and train fascist death squads in Central America – groups who attempted to overthrow the government of Nicaragua and carried out waves of massacres and ethnic cleansing in the process.

  REPUBLICANS FOR HIRE

  Another eyebrow-raising hire is Activision Blizzard’s chief administration officer, Brian Bulatao. A former Army captain and consultant for McKinsey & Company, until 2018, he was chief operating officer for the CIA, placing him third in command of the agency. When CIA Director Mike Pompeo moved over to the State Department, becoming Trump’s Secretary of State, Bulatao went with him, and was appointed Under Secretary of State for Management.

  There, by some accounts, he served as Pompeo’s personal “attack dog,” with former colleagues describing him as a “bully” who brought a “cloud of intimidation” over the workplace, repeatedly pressing them to ignore potential illegalities happening at the department. Thus, it is unclear if Bulatao is the man to improve Activision Blizzard’s notoriously “toxic” workplace environment that caused dozens of employees to walk out en masse last summer.

  After the Trump administration’s electoral defeat, Bulatao went straight from the State Department into the highest echelons of Activision Blizzard, despite no experience in the entertainment industry.

  

  Trump stands with then-CIA Chief Operations Officer Brian Bulatao at CIA Headquarters, May 21, 2018, in Langley, Va. Evan Vucci | AP

  The third senior Republican official Activision Blizzard has recruited to its upper ranks is Grant Dixton. Between 2003 and 2006, Dixton served as associate counsel to President Bush, advising him on many of his administration’s most controversial legal activities (such as torture and the rapid expansion of the surveillance state). A lawyer by trade, he later went on to work for weapons manufacturer Boeing, rising to become its senior vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary. In June 2021, he left Boeing to join Activision Blizzard as its chief legal officer.

  Other Activision Blizzard executives with backgrounds in national security include senior vice president and chief information security officer Brett Wahlin, who was a U.S. Army counterintelligence agent, and chief of staff, Angela Alvarez, who, until 2016, was an Army chemical operations specialist.

  That the same government that was infiltrating games 10-15 years ago now has so many former officials controlling the very game companies raises serious questions around privacy and state control over media, and mirrors the national security state penetration of social media that has occurred over the same timeframe.

  WAR GAMES

  These deep connections to the U.S. national security state can perhaps help partly explain why, for years, many have complained about the blatant pro-U.S. propaganda apparent throughout the games.

  The latest installment, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II, is no exception. In the game’s first mission, players must carry out a drone strike against a character named

  The latest installment, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II, is no exception. In the game’s first mission, players must carry out a drone strike against a character named General Ghorbrani. The mission is obviously a recreation of the Trump administration’s illegal 2020 drone strike against Iranian General Qassem Soleimani – the in game general even bears a striking resemblance to Soleimani.

  

  The latest Call of Duty game has players assassinate a General Ghorbrani, a nebulous reference to Iranian General Qassem Solemani, pictured right

  Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II ludicrously presents the general as under Russia’s thumb and claims that Ghorbrani is “supplying terrorists” with aid. In reality, Soleimani was the key force in defeating ISIS terror across the Middle East – actions for which even Western media declared him a “hero”. U.S.-run polls found that Soleimani was perhaps the most popular leader in the Middle East, with over 80% of Iranians holding a positive opinion of him.

  Straight after the assassination, Pompeo’s State Department floated the falsehood that the reason they killed Soleimani was that he was on the verge of carrying out a terror attack against Americans. In reality, Soleimani was in Baghdad, Iraq, for peace talks with Saudi Arabia.

  These negotiations could have led to peace between the two nations, something that the U.S. government is dead against. Then-Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi revealed that he had personally asked President Trump for permission to invite Soleimani. Trump agreed, then used the opportunity to carry out the killing.

  Therefore,, just as Activision Blizzard is recruiting top State Department officials to its upper ranks, its games are celebrating the same State Department’s most controversial assassinations.

  This is far from the first time Call of Duty has instructed impressionable young gamers to kill foreign leaders, however. In Call of Duty Black Ops (2010), players must complete a mission to murder Cuban leader Fidel Castro. If they manage to shoot him in the head, they are rewarded with an extra gory slow motion scene and obtain a bronze “Death to Dictators” trophy. Thus, players are forced to carry out digitally what Washington failed to do on over 600 occasions.

  

  A mission from “Call of Duty: Black Ops” has players assassinate a hostage-taking Fidel Castro

  Likewise, Call of Duty: Ghosts is set in Venezuela, where players fight against General Almagro, a socialist military leader clearly modelled on former president Hugo Chavez. Like Chavez, Almagro wears a red beret and uses Venezuela’s oil wealth to forge an alliance of independent Latin American nations against the U.S. Washington attempted to overthrow Chavez and his successor, Nicolás Maduro, multiple times. During the sixth mission of the game, players must shoot and kill Almagro from close range.

  The anti-Russian propaganda is also turned up to 11 in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2019). One mission recreates the infamous Highway of Death incident. During the First Iraq War, U.S.-led forces trapped fleeing Iraqi troops on Highway 80. What followed was what then-Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Colin Powell described as “wanton killing” and “slaughter for slaughter’s sake” as U.S. troops and their allies pummeled the Iraqi convoy for hours, killing hundreds and destroying thousands of vehicles. U.S. forces also reportedly shot hundreds of Iraqi civilians and surrendered soldiers in their care.

  Call of Duty: Modern Warfare recreates this scene for dramatic effect. However, in their version, it is not the U.S.-led forces doing the killing, but Russia, thereby whitewashing a war crime by pinning the blame on official enemies.

  

  A mission in “Call of Duty: Modern Warfare” has players recreate the infamous highway of death

  “Call of Duty, in particular, has been flagged up for recreating real events as game missions and manipulating them for geopolitical purposes,” Secker told MintPress, referring to the Highway of Death, adding,

  In a culture where most people’s exposure to games (and films, TV shows and so on) is far greater than their knowledge of historical and current events, these manipulations help frame the gamers’ emotional, intellectual and political reactions. This helps them turn into more general advocates for militarism, even if they don’t sign up in any formal way.”

  Secker’s latest book, “Superheroes, Movies and the State: How the U.S. Government Shapes Cinematic Universes,” was published earlier this year.

  GAME OVER

  In today’s digitized era, the worlds of war and video games increasingly resemble one another. Many have commented on the similarities between piloting drones in real life and in games such as Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Prince Harry, who was a helicopter gunner in Afghanistan, described his “joy” at firing missiles at enemies. “I’m one of those people who loves playing PlayStation and Xbox, so with my thumbs I like to think I’m probably quite useful,” he said. “If there’s people trying to do bad stuff to our guys, then we’ll take them out of the game,” he added, explicitly comparing the two activities. U.S. forces even control drones with Xbox controllers, blurring the lines between war games and war games even further.

  The military has also directly produced video games as promotional and recruitment tools. One is a U.S. Air Force game called Airman Challenge. Featuring 16 missions to complete, interspersed with facts and recruitment information about how to become a drone operator yourself. In its latest attempts to market active service to young people, players move through missions escorting U.S. vehicles through countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, serving up death from above to all those designated “insurgents” by the game.

  Players earn medals and achievements for most effectively destroying moving targets. All the while, there is a prominent “apply now” button on screen if players feel like enlisting and conducting real drone strikes on the Middle East.

  U.S. Armed Forces use the popularity of video games to recruit heavily among young people, sponsoring gaming tournaments, fielding their own U.S. Army Esports team, and directly trying to recruit teens on streaming sites such as Twitch. The Amazon-owned platform eventually had to clamp down on the practice after the military used fake prize giveaways that lured impressionable young viewers onto recruitment websites.

  Video games are a massive business and a huge center of soft power and ideology. The medium makes for particularly persuasive propaganda because children and adolescents consume them, often for weeks or months on end, and because they are light entertainment. Because of this, users do not have their guards up like if they were listening to a politician speaking. Their power is often overlooked by scholars and journalists because of the supposed frivolity of the medium. But it is the very notion that these are unimportant sources of fun that makes their message all the more potent.

  The Call of Duty franchise is particularly egregious, not only in its messaging, but because who the messengers are. Increasingly, the games appear to be little more than American propaganda masquerading as fun first-person shooters. For gamers, the point is to enjoy its fast-paced entertainment. But for those involved in their production, the goal is not just making money; it is about serving the imperial war machine.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 22:20

• Taibbi: YouTube Censors Reality, Boosts Disinformation – Part 1
  Taibbi: YouTube Censors Reality, Boosts Disinformation – Part 1

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  As subscribers by now are aware, I’m very upset about YouTube’s recent decision to censor a factually accurate video about “rigged election” comments produced for this site by Matt Orfalea. The company has given Matt a strike and labeled his/our work “misinformation,” an insult I’ve decided not to take lying down. I’m going to search for new ways to embarrass the company until they reverse their decision. As it happens, today offers an excellent opportunity.

  CBS This Morning today came out with a story claiming they obtained a copy of Hunter Biden’s laptop, sent for an “independent forensic review,” and determined it “appears genuine.” This follows up confirmation from The New York Times back on March 16th, and more importantly, the exhaustive earlier work of Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger confirming key emails in his book, The Bidens.

  Matt did an exceptional job back in March in the video above, compiling clips of people who went on air and with absolute certainty proclaimed the laptop “a lie,” “altered or fake,” “pure distractions,” and of course, “RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION.”

  Whether or not you thought the actual content of the story was important, the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop affair was a crossroads moment in the history of modern censorship. YouTube played a major role in this event.

  This was a case in which major news media — including CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and countless other outlets — actively embraced disinformation, in the form of a group letter from 50-plus former intelligence officials saying the laptop story (they referred to a “laptop op”) had the “classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” All the aforementioned news agencies fell for this, as did Twitter (which blocked access to it, in what then-CEO Jack Dorsey later admitted was a “total mistake”) and Facebook (whose increasingly adrift founder Mark Zuckerberg later told Joe Rogan the story was throttled down at the suggestion of the FBI).

  YouTube also pushed this disinformation campaign. It still does. Despite the total absence of evidence ever existing that the laptop was either fake or part of a Russian “information operation” and a growing pile of evidence that the laptop is real, YouTube continues to leave unmolested on its site countless videos promoting the conspiracy theory — that’s what it is, let’s be clear — that the laptop story is both bunk and an intelligence op.

  Here’s a brief sample of materials they still have up, unmarked as “misinformation” or “disinformation”:

  1. Are Trump allies peddling Russian disinformation about the Bidens? PBS October 16, 2020 Judy Woodruff: “Today we learned more about concerns expressed by the President’s most senior advisors, that the President’s personal attorney was peddling Russian disinformation.” Nick Schifrin: “The bottom line is we cannot confirm the story, Judy, but… the Biden campaign says that this is Russian disinformation, and disinformation experts I talk to tell me that pro-Russian actors have been packaging their disinformation next to apparently legitimate information.” The irony, of course, is that PBS and YouTube were the ones pushing disinformation here.

  2. Hunter Biden tabloid story raises disinformation campaign fears, CBS October 15, 2020 “Experts say it has all the hallmarks of information laundering…,” said correspondent Norah O’Donnell, before quoting former FBI agent Eric O’Neil saying, “This looks like your classic disinformation campaign.”

  3. US investigating if emails connected to Russia disinformation against Biden, CNN October 16, 2020 This is a beauty. Wolf Blitzer introduces correspondent Alex Marquardt by talking about how there are “fears that [the laptop story] could actually be part of Russia’s latest and very massive disinformation campaign in the US presidential election.” To which Marquardt answers, “Massive indeed Wolf,” before going on to “report” that “we are being told by two people who’ve been briefed on what the FBI is doing, that they’re looking into whether these unverified emails about Hunter Biden that were published earlier this week by the New York Post… are part of this bigger Russian disinformation effort in the 2020 election.” We have no proof this campaign existed, no proof this story was connected to it, and no proof of it being “bigger” than any other campaign. Unflagged by YouTube.

  4. Bash On Pushing Of Disinformation On Biden: This Looks, Walks, & Talks Like Russian Intelligence, MSNBC October 19.2020 This piece is extraordinary because it’s almost exactly the same message as the one written by the 50 “former” intelligence officers. Nicolle Wallace starts off humorously, scoffing at the idea that someone is “suggesting somehow that Joe Biden is a corrupt politician — one of the most vetted politicians in this country.” Jeremy Bash, a former CIA chief of staff now posing as a media figure, concurs. “This looks like Russian intelligence. This walks like Russian intelligence,” adding that the laptop story “looks like a classic Russian playbook, disinformation campaign.” If you go back and look, you will find countless instances of reporters using words like classic, hallmarks, earmarks, and disinformation campaign.

  5. Joe Biden on 60 Minutes, CBS. October 26, 2020 Remember, CBS just did a story contradicting their own earlier 60 Minutes piece in which Lesley Stahl berated then-President Trump that the laptop story “can’t be verified.” Indeed, CBS just by doing its new story proved that its previous position — that verification was impossible — was a lark. In their other 60 Minutes interview from that season, they soft-balled Joe Biden on the laptop story. CBS: “Do you believe [Hunter’s laptop] is part of a Russian disinformation campaign?” BIDEN: “It’s just what it is. It’s a smear campaign.”

  There are plenty more of these. If you want to widen the criticism to Google, these “Russian disinformation” stories still pop up high in searches (see here, here, here, here, and here, for instance). YouTube and Google now become exhibit A in the ultimate truth about any attempt to “moderate” content at scale. If you make even a good-faith effort to weed out “disinformation,” relying on official bodies to help, what you’ll be left with is… official disinformation.

  But this isn’t a good-faith effort to weed out untruths. YouTube has become a place that censors true content but traffics in official and quasi-official deceptions. It’s become indistinguishable from a state censorship bureau. If they feel they’re right about their decisions, they should be happy to explain themselves to people me. Until then, they can expect more love letters from this address.

  Subscribers should know I don’t believe in letting things like this go, but I also don’t believe in annoying faithful readers. In the future, if there are similar entries in this campaign, I’ll make them public but won’t clog your email with notices. The idea is to be a pain in Google’s backside, not yours.

  Subscribe to TK News

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 22:00

• Carriers In "Panic Mode' As Recession Bites, China Bookings Plummet
  Carriers In “Panic Mode’ As Recession Bites, China Bookings Plummet

  Byh Mike Wackett of The Loadstar

  Ocean carriers are said to be in “panic mode” as bookings from China to North Europe and the US west coast tank, causing FAK rates to plunge to new depths.

  Despite aggressive blanking that has reduced weekly capacity on the tradelanes by more than a third, the lines have failed to slow the precipitous fall in short-term rates and, are arguably fuelling the fire by offering sub-economic spot rates via their digital platforms.

  For example, rates from Shanghai, Tianjin and Shenzhen to the Le Havre-Hamburg range of container hubs in North Europe, of $1,000 per 20ft and $1,800 per 40ft are now widely available for prompt shipment.

  And some carriers are said to be prepared to reduce rates further for volume, and relax or even waive demurrage and detention conditions.

  The speed of the rate erosion on the Asia-North Europe tradelane is making a mockery of the spot market indices, which have been unable to keep pace; for instance, the lowest reading this week is Drewry’s WCI, which recorded a 14% decline, to $2,687 per 40ft, for its North Europe component.

  “The westbound market seems like it’s in panic,” a UK-based forwarding executive told The Loadstar this week.

  “I am getting approximately 10 emails a day from random agents offering very low rates. Today, I had $1,800 into Southampton, which is crazy; it seems to be panic,” he said. “There hasn’t been a Christmas rush on westbound and I put that down to the recession. As a country, we are not buying like we used to during the pandemic.”

  He said he was hearing that carriers were blanking sailings right up to Chinese New Year, which falls on 21 January, to drive up rates, but, he added, “personally, I don’t think that the volume is there”.

  He continued: “This is all reflected in the number of hauliers contacting us asking for work – again, emails every day saying they have capacity from all ports.”

  Meanwhile, on the transpacific, short-term rates from China to the US west coast are sinking to sub-economic levels, dragging down long-term rates as carriers are forced to offer customers temporary reductions on contract rates.

  

  Indeed, Israeli carrier Zim told The Loadstar this week it had been obliged to agree pricing reductions with transpacific contracted customers to protect its business.

  “The demand and volume was not there, so we had to deal with a new reality and engage with our customers,” said CFO Xavier Destriau.

  According to the latest reading of Xeneta’s XSI spot index, its US west coast component was flat this week, at $1,941 per 40ft, having declined by 20% so far this month, while east coast rates were down 6% on the week, according to Drewry’s WCI, at $5,045 per 40ft.

  The one bright spot for carriers remains the transatlantic, where lines continue to enjoy short-term rates of between $6,500 and $7,600 per 40ft from North Europe to the US east coast, according to the spot rate indices.

  However, the outlier tradelane is showing signs of succumbing to the general rate demise, as port congestion unwinds on the US east coast, the port of Liverpool resumes normal working after industrial action and, not least, that carriers are deploying more capacity.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 21:40

• NY Times Takes Rare Look At Apparent Ukrainian War Crimes
  NY Times Takes Rare Look At Apparent Ukrainian War Crimes

  The New York Times has in an extremely rare moment (or perhaps more like unprecedented) conducted an in-depth visual investigation of a likely war crime against surrendered Russian troops conducted by Ukrainian forces. Multiple videos from different angles, including drone footage, emerged last week showing the incredibly disturbing scenes as Ukrainian forces were recapturing the village of Makiivka in the Luhansk region. 

  The videos show ten apparently unarmed Russian soldiers lying facedown on the ground, who early on are seen moving and in a position of surrender as at least four Ukrainian troops stand nearby outside of a house in a farmyard. 

  By the end of the footage, eleven Russians had been shot dead at close range, in what Russia says was a summary execution of people who at that point (based on their surrender) effectively become non-combatants based on accepted international laws of war. 

  

  The Russian Defense Ministry has said the videos confirm “deliberate and methodical murder” of its soldiers by the Ukrainian side, also with the Russian Foreign Ministry calling the act “merciless” and “shocking”.

  Surprisingly, the videos were initially made public by Ukrainian news sources and soldiers themselves, and were shared widely on social media, as they purportedly showed the ‘heroism’ of Ukrainian soldiers as they clawed back territory in eastern Ukraine. 

  But The New York Times described, “The videos show the grisly before-and-after scenes of the encounter earlier this month, in which at least 11 Russians, most of whom are seen lying on the ground, appear to have been shot dead at close range after one of their fellow fighters suddenly opened fire on Ukrainian soldiers standing nearby.”

  The United Nations has called for a formal investigation into the videos, with a statement from the UN Human Rights Office quoted in Reuters saying, “We are aware of the videos, and we are looking into them.”

  “Allegations of summary executions of people hors de combat should be promptly, fully and effectively investigated, and any perpetrators held to account,” the statement continued, in reference to people legally designated “outside of combat”.

  The Times report details the sequence of events beginning as follows:

  One soldier, with his rifle drawn, tentatively approaches the structure where the Russian soldiers are sheltering. The soldier with the machine gun provides cover. Several gunshots are heard — though it’s not clear from where — and the soldier slowly backs away from an outhouse, drawing out the Russian soldiers at gunpoint.

  

  The report comments that soon after the Russian soldiers emerge from the building, it is clear that an orderly surrender has taken place, with many of the prone Russian solders moving around on the ground after giving up their arms, clearly alive. 

  But soon after the entire scene turns to carnage:

  Two of the Ukrainians standing by appear to be relaxed and are pointing their rifles toward the ground…

  As an 11th Russian soldier emerges from the outhouse, he opens fire, aiming at one of the Ukrainian soldiers. The Ukrainians are taken by surprise. The cellphone camera jolts away as the Ukrainian soldier filming the scene flinches. A frame-by-frame analysis of what happens next shows the Ukrainian soldier standing beside him raise his rifle and aim toward the Russian gunman.

  By the time the dust settles, all of the Russian soldiers – and not just the gunman who emerged from the outhouse – lie dead, apparently shot in the head at close range, pools of blood forming around them.  

  “The video ends and it’s unclear what happens next. But a second aerial video of the location shows the bloody aftermath,” the NYT writes. “The Russian soldiers are lying motionless, apparently dead, most of them positioned as they were when they surrendered. Blood is pooling around them, and some appear to be bleeding from the upper body or head. The soldiers are dressed in the same uniforms with the distinctive red straps and blue marking.”

  

  The footage, as well as the NY Times’ confirmation of the event, is now going viral inside Russia, causing fury and an angry denunciations, while at the same time Ukrainian officials have suggested the initial surrender had been “staged” by the Russian side in order to set a trap for the Ukrainian soldiers. Kiev has rejected the charges of war crimes from Moscow.

  Russia has consistently complained that the West routinely ignores clear evidence of Ukrainian war crimes, while only putting Russian forces under the microscope. This NY Times investigation is an almost unprecedented moment where the “paper of record” is actually hinting that the Kremlin has a valid point.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 21:20

• Hunter Biden Laptop Repairman Reveals "Chilling" Warning From FBI Agent
  Hunter Biden Laptop Repairman Reveals “Chilling” Warning From FBI Agent

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  John Paul Mac Isaac, the laptop repairman who allegedly found Hunter Biden’s laptop, revealed Monday that he is working with Republican lawmakers as they prepare to investigate the younger Biden after taking the House majority during this month’s midterms.

  

  Mac Isaac alleged in a Monday interview with Fox News that an FBI agent gave him a “chilling” warning when he first interacted with the bureau after finding the laptop. The Delaware-based laptop repairman said he recalled telling one agent that he would change their names when he published his book.

  “That’s when Agent Mike turned around and told me that, in their experience, nothing ever happens to people that don’t talk about these things,” Mac Isaac said, claiming that it was a veiled threat to keep silent.

  “I have been dealing with retaliation from multiple fronts for the past two years when what I did was leaked to the country. I’m expecting it, and I’m going to expect it to continue,” he added to Fox News while promoting his book.

  Republicans, he said, should hold “the FBI accountable for colluding with our mainstream and social media to block a story, a real story with real consequence,” and they should “get to the bottom of what the Biden family was up to when Joe Biden was vice president.”

  On Monday, a lawyer for Hunter Biden, Chris Clark, told CBS News that Mac Isaac did not have Hunter’s “consent to access his computer data or share it with others.” Some analysts said that it may have been the first time one of Hunter Biden’s lawyers confirmed that he left the laptop at the Delaware computer repair shop.

  Earlier this year, Mac Isaac recalled to the New York Post about how Hunter Biden arrived at his shop in Wilmington, Delaware, in April 2019.

  “I’m glad you’re still open,” Hunter Biden allegedly told him. “I just came from the cigar bar, and they told me about your shop, but I had to hurry because you close at seven.”

  “I need the data recovered off these, but they all have liquid damage and won’t turn on,” Mac Isaac recalled him saying.

  Other Details

  It came as CBS cited an independent expert as saying that the data sourced from Hunter Biden’s laptop is genuine, coming about two years after the NY Post and other news outlets, including The Epoch Times, reported on it. It’s not clear why CBS decided to publish its report Monday.

  

  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)

  The Epoch Times has contacted the FBI’s press office for comment.

  After Republicans recaptured the majority in the House, top GOP lawmakers indicated that they will investigate bank records and claims by whistleblowers that show connections between Hunter Biden and President Joe Biden.

  With weeks to go before the 2020 General Election, the New York Post published information sourced from the laptop, showing what Republicans and other critics say are shady business deals between the Biden family and individuals linked to the Chinese Communist Party and Ukrainian energy firms. The younger Biden, in a 2019 interview, has denied that he did anything wrong but acknowledged that such deals created a negative outward impression.

  Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), who is expected to chair the House Oversight and Reform Committee, told reporters last week that the committee will investigate not just Hunter Biden but also President Biden.

  “I want to be clear. This is an investigation of Joe Biden. That’s where the committee will focus in this next Congress,” Comer told reporters.

  “This committee will evaluate the status of Joe Biden’s relationship with his family’s foreign partners and whether he is a president who is compromised or swayed by foreign dollars and influence,” Comer said, adding that his committee has acquired suspicious activity reports filed by major banks.

  In response, the White House said in a statement last week House Republicans are engaging in partisan attacks against Biden’s family members. The administration accused the GOP of trafficking in “long-debunked conspiracy theories,” without elaborating.

  “President Biden is not going to let these political attacks distract him from focusing on Americans’ priorities,” Ian Sams, a spokesman for the White House Counsel’s office, told news outlets.

  Weeks after the 2020 election, the younger Biden said that Delaware prosecutors were investigating his tax affairs, although he hasn’t been charged with a crime. Since then, few details have been publicly disclosed about that investigation.

  As Republicans conduct their investigation, it’s not clear how many Americans will consider it a top priority.

  Fewer than 30 percent of voters said in a recent poll that Hunter Biden should be a top priority for the next Congress, with about 52 percent of Republicans expressing an interest in investigating him. For months, other polls showed that President Biden’s approval rating has remained largely underwater amid high inflation, fears of a recession, and a surge of violent crime nationwide.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 21:00

• What Reopening? China's Covid Restrictions Are Actually Tightening
  What Reopening? China’s Covid Restrictions Are Actually Tightening

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

  After the initial market euphoria over China’s reopening from Covid lockdowns, reality is settling in. Reopening isn’t as easy as turning on a water tap. It takes months of preparation to increase hospital resources, put jabs in the arms of senior citizens and shift the public narrative about the pandemic.

  In fact, instead of loosening, China’s restrictions on social activities have strengthened in recent weeks. That should argue for investors to curb their enthusiasm.

  

  Confusion. Chaos. More than a week after Beijing fine-tuned its Covid Zero strategy, local governments are struggling to balance the need to control the pandemic while also limit the economic damage. Shijiazhuang, a closely-watched city that had experimented with a version of “living with the virus,” has reversed course, suspending schools and asking residents to stay at home for five days. As infections multiplied, subway rides in some big cities such as Beijing, Guangzhou and Chongqing have tumbled.

  The result is that Goldman Sachs’s Effective Lockdown Index has increased in recent weeks, despite Beijing’s new order to reduce the need for mass testing and citywide shutdowns.

  

  The reality is that conditions are just not there yet to allow Beijing to live with the virus.

  For example, officials have told hospitals designated to treat Covid patients to strengthen their capabilities, including increasing the share of ICU beds to 10%. To reach the target, China needs to add 30,000 ICU beds, a 50% increase from current levels, according to the estimate of Capital Economics’ Julian Evans-Pritchard. To put the number in perspective, only 6,370 ICU beds were added to hospitals nationwide in 2020.

  Reported severe cases and deaths remain low. The three deaths acknowledged over the weekend were all people over 87 years old with pre-existing illnesses. The bad news is that this is the most vulnerable part of the population Beijing is struggling to get vaccinated.

  Among those 80 years and older, only 66% have been fully vaccinated, and 40% have taken a booster, which provides comparable protection to two mRNA does. That’s considerably lower than the vaccination rate of at least 95% among other Asian countries, such as Singapore and South Korea, when they fully reopened the economy, according to Evans-Pritchard.

  China’s current vaccine coverage among this group of 36 million people is closer to Hong Kong’s when it suffered a deadly and disruptive reopening earlier this year.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 20:40

• Qatar And China Make History With 27-Year LNG Supply Deal
  Qatar And China Make History With 27-Year LNG Supply Deal

  By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

  Qatar’s state firm QatarEnergy signed on Monday the longest-term contract in the history of the LNG industry in a deal to supply LNG to Chinese state energy giant Sinopec for 27 years.

  

  QatarEnergy will supply China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation (Sinopec) with 4 million tons per annum (MTPA) of LNG to China from the North Filed East (NFE) expansion project, just as global competition for LNG intensifies amid a European rush to secure non-Russian gas supply.

  “This is the first long-term SPA from the NFE project to be announced, and marks the longest gas supply agreement in the history of the LNG industry,” said Saad Sherida Al-Kaabi, Qatar’s Minister of State for Energy Affairs and President and CEO of QatarEnergy.  

  Qatar has traditionally preferred long-term supply deals with customers, at which Europe balked earlier this year. But more recently, even European companies have started negotiations for longer-term supply with LNG providers. 

  China, for its part, is looking to secure LNG to avoid more spot buying amid uncertainties over the Asian spot prices in the coming years. 

  Today’s sale and purchase agreement (SPA) also represents the first long-term LNG offtake agreement from the NFE Expansion project. Qatar’s North Field East and North Field South (NFS) projects are expected to come online in 2026 and 2027, respectively.

  Qatar announced last year the world’s largest LNG project, which is set to raise its LNG production capacity from 77 million tons per annum (mmtpa) to 110 mmtpa. The Gulf gas and oil producer also plans another expansion phase at the North Field, the world’s largest natural gas field, which it shares with Iran. The second expansion phase will be the North Field South Project (NFS), set to further increase Qatar’s LNG production capacity from 110 mmtpa to 126 mmtpa, with an expected production start date in 2027.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 20:20

• "Users Have A Right To Know": Class Action Lawsuit Sheds Light Onto Google's Opaque Data-Mining Practices
  “Users Have A Right To Know”: Class Action Lawsuit Sheds Light Onto Google’s Opaque Data-Mining Practices

  It turns out that big tech companies may not be as committed to your privacy as their PR departments would have you believe – go figure.

  The latest example of this reality appears to be Google, who was revealed last week by MarketWatch to have data-mining practices that employees say that they sometimes “don’t understand and can’t describe”.

  The report cited a class action lawsuit alleging that Google “violated promises not to collect data of those using the browser without signing into their Google accounts”. Documents recently became unsealed in the case, offering a look into how privacy is discussed internally at Google. 

  In the lawsuit, one unnamed employee seemed to make it clear that Google’s privacy policies are opaque, stating: “I don’t have the faintest idea what Google has on me. The fact what we can’t explain what we have […] on users is probably our biggest challenge.” 

  

  “Users have a right to know,” one employee said. Another commented: “The reasons we provide are so high level and abstract that they don’t make sense to people.” A third employee said: “Consent is no longer consent if you think of ads as a product.”

  Additional employees seemed to solidify the ethos within the company. A former employee who recently left the company said: “I am more than willing to believe this is how executives talked to each other.”

  “Even people I was organizationally close to, knew well, and respected, were finding ways to justify that stuff to themselves,” they said about the company’s privacy teams. “The individual contributors [on Google’s privacy teams] are always idealistic people. Some of these quotes [from the case] look to me like things that idealistic people would say; others look like things management would say when the idealistic people aren’t around.”

  When asked by MarketWatch, Google responded to the report by stating that “privacy controls have long been built into our services and we encourage our teams to constantly discuss or consider ideas to improve them.” 

  As the report notes, ads are a material revenue generator for Google, making up $209.5 billion in sales for the company in its 2021 fiscal year. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 20:00

• What Elephant? AP Denies that There Is Any Evidence That Joe Biden Discussed Hunter's Business Dealings
  What Elephant? AP Denies that There Is Any Evidence That Joe Biden Discussed Hunter’s Business Dealings

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  For those of us who have written about the Hunter Biden scandal and the family’s influence-peddling operation for years, it is routine to read media stories denying the facts or dismissing calls to investigate the foreign dealings. However, this weekend, the Associated Press made a whopper of a claim that there is no evidence even suggesting that President Joe Biden ever spoke to his son about his foreign dealings. I previously discussed how the Bidens have succeeded in a Houdini-like trick in making this elephant of a scandal disappear from the public stage. They did so by enlisting the media in the illusion. However, this level of audience participation in the trick truly defies belief.

  

  The statement of the Associated Press at this stage of the scandal is breathtaking but telling: “Joe Biden has said he’s never spoken to his son about his foreign business, and nothing the Republicans have put forth suggests otherwise.”

  For years, the media has continued to report President Biden’s repeated claim that “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.” At the outset, the media only had to suspend any disbelief that the president could fly to China as Vice President with his son on Air Force 2 without discussing his planned business dealings on the trip.

  Of course, the emails on the laptop quickly refuted this claim. However, the media buried the laptop story before the election or pushed the false claim that it was fake Russian disinformation.

  President Biden’s denials continued even after an audiotape surfaced showing President Biden leaving a message for Hunter specifically discussing coverage of those dealings. The call is specifically referring to these dealings:

  “Hey pal, it’s Dad. It’s 8:15 on Wednesday night. If you get a chance just give me a call. Nothing urgent. I just wanted to talk to you. I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the Times, was good. I think you’re clear. And anyway if you get a chance give me a call, I love you.”

  But who are you going to believe, the media or your own ears.

  Some of us have written for two years that Biden’s denial of knowledge is patently false. It was equally evident that the Biden family was selling influence and access.

  There are emails of Ukrainian and other foreign clients thanking Hunter Biden for arranging meetings with his father. There are photos from dinners and meetings that tie President Biden to these figures, including a 2015 dinner with a group of Hunter Biden’s Russian and Kazakh clients.

  People apparently were told to avoid directly referring to President Biden. In one email, Tony Bobulinski, then a business partner of Hunter’s, was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.”

  Instead, the emails apparently refer to President Biden with code names such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is discussed as possibly receiving a 10 percent cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm; other emails reportedly refer to Hunter Biden paying portions of his father’s expenses and taxes.

  Bobulinski has given multiple interviews that he met twice with Joe Biden to discuss a business deal in China with CEFC China Energy Co. That would seem obvious evidence. In addition, the New York Post reported on a key email that discussed “the proposed percentage distribution of equity in a company created for a joint venture with CEFC China Energy Co.” That was the email on March 13, 2017 that included references of “10 held by H for the big guy.”

  The Associated Press later revised the line after an outcry from some of us. It now ends “there is no indication that the federal investigation involves the president.”  The revision creates a new problem. Rather than simply stating the fact, AP seems to struggle to shield the President. There is every indication that “the federal investigation involves the president.” Not only is the President discussed in key emails under investigation, but the grand jury heard testimony that the “Big Guy” is Joe Biden.

  That brings us back to Houdini’s trick of making his 10,000 pound elephant Jennie disappear every night in New York’s Hippodrome. He succeeded night after night because the audience wanted the elephant to disappear even though it never left the stage.

  I previously wrote about how the key to the trick was involving the media so that reporters are invested in the illusion like calling audience members to the stage. Reporters have to insist that there was nothing to see or they have to admit to being part of the original deception. The media cannot see the elephant without the public seeing something about the media in its past efforts to conceal it.

  The media is now so heavily invested in the trick that they are sticking with the illusion even after “the reveal.” The Associated Press story shows that even pointing at the elephant — heck, even riding the elephant around the stage — will not dislodge these denials. This is no elephant because there cannot be an elephant. Poof!

  N.B.: This column was revised to add discussion of the AP revision of the line on the investigation.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 19:40

• A Shocking 37% Of Real Estate Agents Couldn't Afford October Office Rent
  A Shocking 37% Of Real Estate Agents Couldn’t Afford October Office Rent

  The Federal Reserve has hiked 375bps in just six meetings this year. Mortgage rates have followed suit, skyrocketing from a low of 2.7% in February to 7.35% earlier this month. The aggressive tightening of monetary conditions has sparked an affordability crisis — sidelining millions of potential homebuyers while existing home sales crash to the worst level since 2008. 

  Higher borrowing costs triggered a sharp drop in mortgage applications and home sales in the back half of the year. Deal flow is drying up for many real estate agents, resulting in financial duress that may worsen into early 2023. 

  In October, a shocking 37% of real estate agents struggled to pay office rent — a 10% increase from the prior month, according to Yahoo, citing a new report via Redfin. The figure could worsen as the housing market rapidly cools via the Fed-induced demand side crunch. 

  Such rapid heating of the housing market during the pandemic era brought in an influx of new agents. The National Association of Realtors said membership hit an all-time high of 1.56 million in 2021 (pandemic boom year) — up from 1.49 million the year before. 

  While we don’t expect a similar 2008-09 housing crash, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas warned last week that home prices could plunge 20% next year due to affordability woes. 

  In October, existing home sales tumbled to 28.4% – its worst since 2008. 

  

  Absent the nadir of the COVID lockdowns, this is the lowest existing home sales SAAR since Dec 2011…

  

  Deal flow slump for agents comes as lagged Case-Shiller Index showed US housing prices dropped 1.3% from their June 2022 peak in August. This is the most significant monthly decline since the Lehman collapse.  

  

  The national home price index growth has slowed for five straight months (below 13% YoY for the first time since Feb 2021). The absolute drop in the growth rate of 2.62 percentage points is the largest ever…

  

  Researchers at Goldman Sachs aren’t as bearish as the Dallas Fed, expect a 5-10% slump from peak to trough in home prices — with their official forecast model predicting a 7.6% decline. 

  

  The unprecedented explosion in mortgage rates and freezing of the housing market is terrible news for all those newly minted agents during the pandemic. Mounting financial hardships and slumping deal flow, with the inability to service office rent, could result in many leaving the industry, perhaps, returning to their old bartending jobs. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 19:20

• Authorities Looking Into Oregon Report That Falsely Claims Sky-High Child COVID-19 Hospitalization Rates
  Authorities Looking Into Oregon Report That Falsely Claims Sky-High Child COVID-19 Hospitalization Rates

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  Authorities in Oregon say they’re looking into a report they published that falsely claims sky-high COVID-19 hospitalization rates among children.

  “We are working with the company that completed the report, Rede Group, to look into that data question,” Jonathan Modie, a spokesman for the Oregon Health Authority, told The Epoch Times in an email on Nov. 19.

  Modie said authorities would be able to provide an update as early as Monday.

  The report in question was produced by a firm called the Rede Group as a contractor to the health authority, as outlined in a Senate bill that was passed this year.

  The bill says that the authority “shall study the state’s public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic” and prepare various reports, including one that includes “a broad review of the COVID-19 pandemic” and identification of areas in the public health response to the pandemic that need improvement.

  

  The 725-page report includes multiple instances of misinformation, including the false claim that COVID-19 hospitalization rates among children were as high as 47.4 percent.

  In a graph, the report depicts the hospitalization rates as above 30 percent for all childhood age groups, with the highest being 47.4 percent among children aged 12 to 17 as of June.

  According to Oregon Health Authority (pdf), the hospitalization rate in 2021 among children aged 0 to 9 was just 0.9 percent and the hospitalization rate among those aged 10 to 19 was 0.6 percent. A report issued in July (pdf) looking at the first six months of 2021 had the percentages at 0.6 and 0.3, respectively.

  Hospitalization rates are the percentage of people who test positive for COVID-19 who were admitted to a hospital.

  Robb Hutson, a spokesman for the Rede Group, told The Epoch Times via email that he would have the company’s data team look into the matter.

  States across the country, as well as federal officials and media outlets, have repeatedly put forth COVID-19 misinformation during the pandemic, including exaggerating the risk the disease poses to people and hyping vaccine effectiveness.

  Eric Happel, a Nike employee who has criticized Oregon’s COVID-19 restrictions, flagged the false information in the new report.

  He said the graph on hospitalization rates “is so wrong that everyone in OHA should know it’s wrong,” adding that “this is just so incompetent it is beyond embarrassing.”

  Happel also said he did not appreciate how the report does not address how school closures, which took place in many U.S. states in 2020 and into 2021, affected children apart from saying health officials had to “balance the potential benefit” of such measures “against the serious ramifications,” including “creating social isolation.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 19:00

• 9-12 More Months: How Long US Consumers Have Before The Bottom Falls Out
  9-12 More Months: How Long US Consumers Have Before The Bottom Falls Out

  During the Covid-19 pandemic, consumers socked away an unprecedented amount of cash thanks to government stimulus and a locked down economy. There was such a surplus that people were able to also pay down debt, buy new appliances, and take vacations once draconian lockdowns were lifted. And of course, businesses raised prices and hired more workers to meet the flood of demand.

  

  Now that we’re ‘enjoying’ inflation while wages have struggled to keep up, the question becomes – how long can consumers maintain this level of spending with their “excess” savings, which was estimated at $1.2 – $1.8 trillion heading into Q3 of this year?

  Around nine to twelve months, according to the Wall Street Journal.

  What’s more, consumers have already been loading up credit cards to supplement their incomes.

  

  A brief history of recent savings trends via the Journal;

  In 2019, before the pandemic hit, households saved 8.8% of their disposable income. That saving rate jumped to 16.8% in 2020, the highest annual saving rate on record, as government stimulus and unemployment benefits left many consumers flush with cash but with few opportunities to spend during lockdowns.

  In 2021 the saving rate moderated to 11.8%, and it has fallen further during 2022. The rate has been below 4% for seven straight months and in September it stood at 3.1%, near its lowest level since the 2008 financial crisis.

  In short; consumers are spending more and saving less of their monthly income thanks to inflation.

  

  What’s more, there are signs that consumers aren’t using their savings to pay down credit card debt like they used to – with the Federal Reserve Bank of NY reporting that credit card balances increased 15% YoY in the third quarter – the largest increase in more than two decades. Delinquencies, meanwhile, rose across all income groups.

  According to JPMorgan, at this rate the excess savings could be ‘entirely spent by the second half of next year.’

  Goldman economists estimate that households have depleted around 25% of their excess savings, and will have spent around 60% of it by the end of 2023.

  “The growth boost from strong balance sheets is probably mostly behind us but … elevated wealth levels will provide a backstop to spending for households that are hit with a negative economic shock,” they wrote last week.

  Analysts say a feature of this holiday spending season will be the divide between high-income households that still have savings and low-income households that have spent most of their rainy-day funds and are being squeezed by food, gasoline, and shelter inflation.

  Economists at the Federal Reserve last month said households in the top half of the income distribution held the lion’s share of excess savings in mid-2022 at $1.35 trillion, and the lower half of the income distribution held about $350 billion. -WSJ

  According to Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM US LLP, “It’s going to be an upscale holiday season, with strong spending in luxury names, experiential travel, upper-end resorts—and a more modest holiday season in bottom [income] quintiles.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 18:40

• CEO Of Ukrainian Crypto Firm Denies FTX–Ukraine Money-Laundering Allegations
  CEO Of Ukrainian Crypto Firm Denies FTX–Ukraine Money-Laundering Allegations

  Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times,

  Everstake, a Ukraine-based cryptocurrency firm, has been caught in the crosshairs of a controversial relationship involving Kyiv, Democrats, and the beleaguered FTX exchange that has captured the attention of Washington officials.

  

  As part of efforts to generate more funds for the war effort, the Ukrainian government launched “Aid for Ukraine,” a website that accepted cryptocurrency donations that would be converted into fiat money and then deposited at the National Bank of Ukraine. The contributions would be used to purchase a wide range of essential items, from medical supplies to military clothing.

  The Ministry of Digital Transformation partnered with FTX, Ukraine’s Kuna exchange, and Everstake to help facilitate crypto-denominated donations, which have totaled between $60 million and $100 million.

  Because of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s immense donations to Democrat lawmakers and the timing between the creation of the fund and President Joe Biden’s billions in financial and military assistance to Kyiv, there has been speculation of wrongdoing. Critics allege that Ukraine invested in FTX to funnel money to the Democratic Party.

  According to Everstake CEO Sergey Vasylchuk, it is a ridiculous assertion to think that the Ukrainian government would invest in private companies at a time of war and utilize critical resources for political payoffs, noting that Kyiv is “investing in the needs of families” with the aid it receives.

  “Technically, the Ministry of Digital Transformation mostly supported the information point of view,” he told The Epoch Times, adding that it was chaotic in the early days of the war, requiring the use of backups to receive funds.

  “It was messed up at the time,” the head of the staking service platform noted. “I never felt this was like a wonderful cheat. For me, when they say Ukraine invests in companies, I just ignore it.”

  Vasylchuk confirmed that he was never in contact with Bankman-Fried during the process, explaining that FTX maintained only a small role in the fundraising effort.

  “We have six people who were part of the compliance legal team” who helped get the Aid for Ukraine project off the ground, Vasylchuk averred.

  

  Sergey Vasylchuk, CEO of Everstake, a Ukraine-based cryptocurrency firm. (Courtesy of Everstake)

  Crypto has turned into a vital tool in the military conflict in Eastern Europe.

  In recent months, pro-Russia organizations have been accepting donations through cryptocurrency exchanges, raising millions of dollars in digital currencies that are then used to support Moscow’s military campaign.

  In the aftermath of the FTX collapse, there have been widespread concerns this would trigger a contagion effect. Cryptocurrency prices have plummeted, crypto-related firms have tumbled, and many parties that have been exposed to Bankman-Fried’s empire have experienced financial pressures.

  But Vasylchuk says that Everstake is weathering the storm because it maintains diversified assets and, depending on a treasure trove of web reports, the company uses various wallets to ensure the safety and security of its holdings.

  ‘UNITED24’

  Ukraine officials have also addressed the recent allegations, including Deputy Minister of Digital Transformation Oleksandr Bornyakov, who described the latest rumors as “nonsense.”

  “A fundraising crypto foundation @_AidForUkraine used @FTX_Official to convert crypto donations into fiat in March. Ukraine’s gov never invested any funds into FTX. The whole narrative that Ukraine allegedly invested in FTX, who donated money to Democrats is nonsense, frankly,” he wrote in a tweet last week.

  Aid for Ukraine was recently taken down and replaced with “UNITED24.”

  “UNITED24 was launched by the president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, as the main venue for collecting charitable donations in support of Ukraine. Funds will be transferred to the official accounts of the National Bank of Ukraine and allocated by assigned ministries to cover the most pressing needs,” the new website states.

  The website also informed visitors that “we are looking for companies or enterprises that can help Ukraine with specific needs.”

  

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a meeting with the U.S. secretary of state in Kyiv on Sept. 8, 2022. (Genya Savilov/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

  Washington Probing FTX-Ukraine Connections

  A growing number of U.S. officials are not convinced by these explanations.

  In a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, several House Republicans, led by Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), wrote that it had recently come to their “attention that billions of taxpayer dollars sent to Ukraine to assist with their war efforts were potentially invested in a crypto exchange that then made massive donations to Democrats” during the 2022 midterm election campaign.

  “While this partnership was touted as a way to assist Ukraine in cashing out crypto donations for ammunition and humanitarian aid, we have serious concerns that the Ukrainian government may have invested portions of the nearly $66 billion of U.S. economic assistance into FTX to keep Democrats in power—and keep the money coming in,” the lawmakers explained in a letter (pdf) exclusively obtained by FOX Business.

  “We sincerely hope the primary driver behind the billions in congressional assistance to Ukraine was not Democrats attempting to keep themselves in power, and that none of the missing funds were used as a passthrough to avoid campaign finance laws or end up in Democrat pockets.”

  A State Department spokesperson told the business news network that there is “no reason to believe that these reports are anything but pure falsehoods and misinformation.”

  The House Financial Services Committee, led by Reps. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) and Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), announced a bipartisan hearing into the FTX debacle and what it could mean for the digital asset economy. The committee plans to hear from Bankman-Fried and individuals involved in Alameda Research, Binance, and FTX.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 18:20

• Iran Launches More Large-Scale Missile Attacks On Northern Iraq
  Iran Launches More Large-Scale Missile Attacks On Northern Iraq

  Iran has launched another round of attacks on Kurdish groups in northern Iraq in connection with ongoing anti-government protests inside the Islamic Republic. This as Iran’s own neighboring Kurdistan region has continued to be a hotbed of the now two-month long “anti-hijab” protests sparked by the death in police custody of a 22-year old Iranian Kurdish woman from Saqqez. 

  Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced early Monday that it struck three areas of the northern Iraqi Kurdish region with drones and missiles the day prior, causing “heavy damage” on the camps. Tehran has said that “terrorist groups”.

  

  Iranian statement media said that 26 members Komala and the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan were killed as a result. 

  Iran had first carried out a similar cross-border attack in September, which was said to have killed an American citizen who was a dual national. There were more reported Iranian strikes last week.

  The IRGC claims that the groups being targeted are behind weapons smuggling operations, as well as sabotage actions inside Iran, which aim to destabilize the country. 

  Like with the last major cross-border attack, the US Central Command condemned the fresh Iranian military aggression, saying the strikes violate Iraq’s sovereignty and “jeopardize the hard-fought security and stability of Iraq and the Middle East.”

  ⚡️Consequences of Iranian strike in Northeastern Iraq pic.twitter.com/CLYTNoK3K5

  — War Monitor (@WarMonitors) November 20, 2022

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

  Tehran has meanwhile been demanding that Baghdad take concrete action to disarm the outlawed Kurdish militia groups while holding open the possibility of more cross-border strikes.

  A Monday Iranian foreign ministry statement said its military had no choice to act to “protect its borders and security of its citizens based on its legal rights.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 18:00

• The Lords Of War: The Perils Facing Trump, Garland, & Smith In Washington's Legal Arms Race
  The Lords Of War: The Perils Facing Trump, Garland, & Smith In Washington’s Legal Arms Race

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in The Hill on the appointment of a special counsel to investigate former President Donald Trump. All of the three main players – Trump, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Special Counsel Jack Smith – will face immediate challenges in the legal arm’s race unfolding in Washington.

  

  Here is the column:

  There seemed to be enough torpedoes in the water in Washington this week that you could walk across the Potomac without getting your feet wet. On Capitol Hill, the new House Republican majority announced a series of subpoena-ready investigations of President Biden and administration officials. At the Justice Department, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to investigate former President Trump for possible crimes ranging from the 2020 election to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot to the Mar-a-Lago documents controversy.

  It was all reminiscent of the movie “The Lord of War,” in which a fictional arms dealer warns that “the problem with gunrunners going to war is that there is no shortage of ammunition.” The same appears true of rival government officials having no shortage of subpoenas.

  In this atmosphere of politically and mutually assured destruction, there are some immediate threats for the three main combatants:

  Attorney General Garland

  When he announced the appointment of Jack Smith to investigate Trump, Garland explained that “based on recent developments, including the former president’s announcement that he is a candidate for president in the next election, and the sitting president’s stated intention to be a candidate as well, I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint a special counsel.”

  In making that case for a Trump special counsel, however, Garland may have made a case against himself for refusing to appoint a Biden special counsel in the Hunter Biden scandal. Garland’s department is investigating potential wrongdoing that could involve the other referenced candidate, President Biden, in the Hunter Biden matter. That investigation should be looking at numerous alleged references to the president using code names such as “the Big Guy” in the context of receiving percentages on foreign deals and other perks. Yet Garland has refused to appoint a special counsel in an investigation that not only could prove highly embarrassing to the president but, in the view of some of us, could implicate him as well.

  Congressional Democrats repeatedly voted to block an investigation of this alleged multimillion-dollar influence peddling by the Biden family. House Republicans are now poised to look into these foreign deals — and how the Justice Department may have stymied or slowed any investigation before the 2020 election.

  While the special counsel appointment helps insulate Garland from claims about the use of his department for political purposes on any Trump charges, he may soon face new challenges, including possible contempt referrals if Biden officials or Democrats refuse to supply information or testimony to Republican House investigators. Garland has sharply departed from prior cases in which the Justice Department largely refused to prosecute such contempt referrals; he has been very active in pursuing Trump officials who failed to cooperate with Congress. He now may be asked to show the same willingness to pursue those who obstruct or defy House Republican investigations.

  Former President Trump

  The greatest threat clearly faces Trump himself. His announced intention to run for the presidency in 2024 may have expedited the appointment of a special counsel. With the expectation of a possible indictment, Trump may have wanted to frame the optics as a vendetta against a declared Biden opponent before his administration took any major step toward prosecution. Instead, it likely sealed the need for a special counsel.

  Trump already has declared the move to be political and says he will not “partake in” an investigation.

  A special counsel could make fast work of controversies such as Mar-a-Lago, which have been investigated for months and already have secured grand jury testimony. For Trump, having a special counsel in control, rather than an attorney general, may prove even more precarious. Some of the potential charges for unlawful transfer or possession of classified material historically have resulted in relatively minor charges. If this investigation produces the basis for an obstruction charge or misdemeanors, Garland might have been inclined to use his discretion to forgo prosecution and avoid political disruption or questions of bias. In contrast, after the expense and effort to create his office, a special counsel may feel less inclined to overlook a chargeable offense. The majority of people charged by former special counsel Robert Mueller faced relatively minor charges and served short terms in jail.

  Trump also will face practical barriers. Prosecutors usually start with the low-hanging fruit in an organization, to coerce people to cooperate by threatening criminal charges. On issues such as obstruction, Trump did not allegedly act alone; there were staff and lawyers who made what the FBI claims were knowingly false or misleading representations. Those individuals must now be viewed by Trump’s counsel as having potential conflicts of interest, including his former counsel. The only way to avoid conflicts or vulnerabilities is to assemble a largely new staff that was not involved in either the Jan. 6 or Mar-a-Lago episodes.

  That is the difference between “partaking” in a personal excursion and a criminal investigation: The latter does not depend on your participation.

  Special Counsel Smith

  Smith faces the unenviable task of investigating a presidential candidate less than two years before the election. Given the advanced stage of prior investigations, he could bring charges before Sept. 5, 2024 (or roughly 60 days before the election under Justice Department guidelines for election year filings). It is unlikely, however, that a charge against Trump could be tried in that time.

  However, Smith’s first test will be to avoid the initial mistakes of a predecessor, Mueller.

  Like Smith, Mueller was considered a natural choice as special counsel, given his extensive experience as a career prosecutor. However, Mueller’s investigation was undermined by his selection of a team — starting with his top aide, Andrew Weissmann, a controversial prosecutor who was accused of political bias. The investigation was further undermined by FBI personnel, including Special Agent Peter Strzok, who was later removed from the team and fired by the Justice Department; Strzok has since filed a wrongful termination lawsuit.

  Smith can avoid tripping a similar explosive wire by selecting a team that is defined by its prior professional expertise, not its prior political views or associations.

  He also needs to be wary of creative avenues to indict Trump. Smith was part of the prosecution team that convicted former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell (R) on federal corruption charges in 2014. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned that conviction as having stretched the law beyond its breaking point. If Smith is going to be the first prosecutor to indict a former president, he needs to do so with unimpeachable evidence of an unchallengeable crime.

  Only one thing is certain in any of this: It will not end well.

  With both sides loading up staff and subpoenas, the start of the 2024 campaign season has all of the makings of an utter bloodletting. There will be ample support for both sides to fulfill their respective narratives — and no shortage of legal weapons — in this political war of attrition.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 11/21/2022 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• They Will Lock You Down Again
  They Will Lock You Down Again

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  The lords of lockdown barely escaped their worst possible fate, namely that the topic would become the national and international source of scandal that it should be. And let’s add the vaccine mandates here too: even if such had been morally justified, which they were not, there is absolutely no practical reason for them at all. 

  

  To have imposed both of these within the course of one year – with zero evidence that they achieved anything for public health and vast amounts of unfolding evidence that they ruined life quality for countless millions – qualifies as a scandal for the ages. It was in the US but also in nearly every country in the world but a few. 

  Might that have huge political implications? One would suppose so. And yet today it appears that truth and justice are further off than ever. The most passionate of the anti-lockdown governors – those who never locked down or opened earlier than the rest of the country – won on their record. Most of the rest joined the entire political establishment in pretending that all of this is a non-issue. Tragically, this tactic seems to have worked better than it should have. 

  Meanwhile, a few points to consider:

  The US government, through the Transportation Safety Administration, has signed yet another order extending the ban on unvaccinated international visitors until January 8, 2023. This means that no person who has managed to refuse the shot is allowed to come to the US for any reason. This is 30% of the world’s population, banned even to enter the US on their own dime. Something like this would have been inconceivably illiberal three years ago, and been a source of enormous controversy and outrage. Today, the extension hardly made the news. 

  The Biden administration has once again extended the Covid emergency declaration another 90 days, which continues to grant government vast powers without Congressional approval. Under a state of emergency, the Constitutional structure of the US is effectively suspended and the country remains on a wartime footing. This announcement was not controversial, and, like the above, it barely made the news. 

  Many colleges and universities, and also other schools and public agencies, continue to enforce the vaccine mandate even without any solid science behind the approval of the bivalent shots or any real rationale behind the push, given that most people have long ago been exposed and acquired natural immunity, and, moreover, it is very well established that the shots do not protect anyone from infection nor stop transmission. They just keep doing this anyway. 

  Masking is not in disrepute because we never really obtained anything like an honest admission of their failure to control the spread. Even today, there is a percentage of people out there permanently traumatized. On travels, I’m seeing perhaps 10-20% but in some Northeastern cities, regular wearing of masks is also very common. Once they became a symbol of political compliance and virtue, that sealed the deal and the culture was changed. Now we face the threat of mask mandates whenever government deems it necessary because the Transportation Safety Authority has been given the go-ahead by the courts. 

  The end of vaccine mandates in most areas of life, and hence also the drive for a passport to distinguish between clean and unclean people, is a good sign. But the infrastructure is still in place and becoming more sophisticated. It is hardly a final victory. It might only be a temporary respite, while all the ambitions are still extant. 

  More than that, the Biden administration (and all that it represents, including the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, and everything else called the establishment) has its own pandemic plans in place. The idea is not to dial back the mandates or cool it on them. It’s the reverse: centralize all pandemic planning to make a South Dakota, Georgia, and Florida experience impossible the next time. Also, spend tens of billions in more money. 

  The principle seems to have emerged among the agencies, intellectuals, and politicians who did this. Whatever you do, never admit to having made any major mistakes. And never connect the economic, cultural, health, and educational disasters all around us to anything the govenrment did in 2020 or 2021! That would be nothing but a conspiracy theory. 

  The pandemic racket is so huge at this point that it is even embroiled in the FTX meltdown over the weekend. Sam Bankman-Fried’s brother Gabe actually founded a nonprofit solely for the purpose of providing “support” for the $30 billion that the Biden administration has allocated to pandemic planning. The institution “Guarding Against Pandemics” is very obviously a honeypot for such funding, complete with on-the-record endorsements from many Democrat Party candidates who won election. 

  Meanwhile, yes, there have been many successful court challenges to many features of the pandemic response. But not enough. The main machinery that took away liberty and property in the name of virus control is still in place in all its essentials. The CDC to this day brags of its awesome quarantine powers that it can deploy any time government deems it necessary. Nothing about that has changed. 

  In the big picture and rendered in a philosophical sense, humanity seems to have lost its ability to learn from its own errors. Put in more gritty terms, too many people among ruling-class interests gained financially and in terms of the lust for power during the pandemic to prompt any serious rethinking and reform. 

  In any case, that rethinking and reform is now put off for another day. Anyone seriously concerned about the future of humanity and the civilizations it built must throw themselves into the long-term battle for truth and reason. That will require that we use every bit of what remains of free speech and what remains of the longing for integrity and accountability in public life. The group we have come to call “they” want a demoralized population and a silent public square. 

  We cannot allow that to happen.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 23:30

• Texas Prepares Military Tanks For Southern Border After Governor Abbot Declares Invasion
  Texas Prepares Military Tanks For Southern Border After Governor Abbot Declares Invasion

  Three days after Texas Governor Greg Abbott invoked the state’s “Invasion Clauses” to tackle the record-setting influx of migrants illegally crossing the southern border, a new planning document obtained by Army Times and The Texas Tribune reveals Texas Military Department officials are planning to deploy a fleet of fully tracked armored personnel carriers and National Guard troops. 

  Texas Military Department officials issued the order Thursday to the headquarters leading Operation Lone Star reveals. It detailed the deployment of ten M113 armored personnel carrier vehicles to the border. 

  By Friday, the Texas Military Department released a statement that “aircraft flights and security efforts” will also be ramped up. 

  “These actions are part of a larger strategy to use every available tool to fight back against the record-breaking level of illegal immigration.

   “The Texas National Guard is taking unprecedented measures to safeguard our border and to repel and turn-back immigrants trying to cross the border illegally,” the department said.

  

  Governor Abbott launched Operation Lone Star in March 2021, deploying soldiers and Texas Department of Public Safety troopers to counter the influx of illegals crossing the border while the Biden administration turned a blind eye to the migrant crisis they sparked. 

  Fox News reporter Bill Melugin tweeted a shocking video from Eagle Pass, Texas, via drone outfitted with a thermal imaging system. He said the drone “shows a large group of migrants crossing illegally into private property early this morning [Thursday morning].”

  Melugin said, as reported by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “there have been over 1,400 illegal crossings in the Del Rio sector in the last 24 hours & 69,000 since 10/1.”

  NEW: Thermal drone video from our team in Eagle Pass, TX shows a large group of migrants crossing illegally into private property early this morning.
  Per CBP source, there have been over 1,400 illegal crossings in the Del Rio sector in the last 24 hours & 69,000 since 10/1. pic.twitter.com/N1FjKVVuDa

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) November 17, 2022

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

  Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz quoted Melugin’s tweet, stating that “5,000,000 illegal aliens have crossed the border since Joe Biden was elected,” adding “over 230 illegal aliens crossed last month alone.”

  5,000,000 illegal aliens have crossed the border since Joe Biden was elected.

  Over 230,000 illegal aliens crossed last month alone.

  And STILL Joe Biden doesn’t secure the border. https://t.co/BBSJadktHB

  — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) November 17, 2022

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

  Melugin has shown that migrant inflows were relatively low during the Trump years but have since erupted under Biden. 

  BREAKING: CBP reports there were 230,678 migrant encounters at the border in October, the first month of fiscal year 2023. It is an enormous increase over recent Octobers.

  OCT FY’23 : 230,678
  OCT FY’22 : 164,837
  OCT FY’21 : 71,929
  OCT FY’20: 45,139
  OCT FY’19: 60,781 @FoxNews

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) November 15, 2022

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

  The near-term deployment of the M113s comes as no surprise. These tanks are designed to carry infantry troops and or haul equipment. Each tank can be outfitted with a variety of weapons, heavy machine guns, grenade launchers, and antitank missiles. What weapons will be on Texas Guard’s M113s at the border is unclear. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 23:00

• No Evidence Freedom Convoy Donations Were From Criminal Origins: GoFundMe Exec
  No Evidence Freedom Convoy Donations Were From Criminal Origins: GoFundMe Exec

  Authored by Peter Wilson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  An executive from the online crowdfunding platform GoFundMe said in testimony before a parliamentary committee that there is no evidence suggesting that any of the funds raised for the Freedom Convoy protest through the platform were illegal or acquired through criminal means.

  

  Conservative MP Larry Brock asked GoFundMe general counsel Kim Wilford if she agreed that there was “no evidence that any of the funds originating to your platform were proceeds of crime.”

  “That is correct,” Wilford told the parliamentary joint committee on the declaration of emergency on Nov. 18.

  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in the House of Commons on Feb. 9 that there was a “flow of funds through criminal activities” being sent to the convoy.

  Just over a week later, the prime minister also told the House that the convoy was “being heavily supported by individuals in the United States and from elsewhere around the world.”

  “We see that roughly half of the funding that is flowing to the barricaders here is coming from the United States,” he said on Feb. 17.

  Wilford said Thursday that 88 percent of the funds donated to the convoy through GoFundMe originated in Canada and 86 of the donors were from Canada.  The convoy’s fundraising page raised over $10 million before GoFundMe removed it on Feb. 4 on the grounds that it violated their service terms.

  Wilford confirmed that of the total 133,000 donors who gave to the fundraiser, only 18,000 originated from outside of Canada, with 14,000 of that total coming from the United States.

  ‘Perhaps A Handful’

  A CBC broadcasting host said on Jan. 28 that there was “concern that Russian actors could be continuing to fuel things as this protest grows or perhaps even instigating it from the outside.”

  The national media outlet’s ombudsman later called the comment “too bold” and said it should’ve been backed by more evidence.

  Wilford told the House finance committee on March 17 that the largest single donation made to the convoy through GoFundMe totalled $30,000 and that it was from Canada.

  GoFundMe’s president Juan Benitez told the committee on the same day that “there was virtually no, perhaps a handful at most, of donations from Russia.”

  “In our opinion, and from the evidence that we see, there was no coordinated effort there to have any kind of contribution or impact,” he said.

  On Nov. 18, Liberal MP Rachel Bendayan asked Wilford to provide the joint committee on with GoFundMe’s numbers outlining where convoy donors originated.

  “Can you confirm to the committee that no donations were received from China?” Bendayan asked.

  “I do not believe that any donations were received from China,” Wilford said, adding that she didn’t have the exact information at hand and couldn’t “confirm with 100 percent certainty.”

  “Can you similarly confirm with respect to any donations coming from Russia?” Bendayan asked.

  “Correct, yes,” said Wilford.

  David Wagner contributed to this report. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 22:30

• Worst Chinese Bond Drop Since 2016 Is Coming To An End
  Worst Chinese Bond Drop Since 2016 Is Coming To An End

  By Ye Xie and George Lei, Bloomberg Markets Live commentators and reporters

  Three things we learned last week:

  1. Good policy news is bad news for Chinese bonds. Bonds tumbled the most in six years earlier in the week amid growth optimism following the government’s loosening of Covid restrictions and support for the housing market. The selloff prompted retail investors to pull money from wealth-management bond products, which fueled a spiral of price declines and accelerating withdrawals. While redemption remains a wild card, it’s unlikely that rates will keep shooting up. The interbank borrowing costs have already converged with the central bank’s benchmark after persistently staying below. That limits the scope for further tightening unless the PBOC shifts its policy stance. On Friday, the PBOC added liquidity to the banking system for a second day, suggesting that it doesn’t want to see borrowing costs rise much further.

  

  After the selloff, five-year swap rates are about 80 bps above the PBOC’s policy rate, surpassing levels seen in the second half of 2020. The market looks as if it is pricing in a V-shaped recovery  similar to the one two years ago. Those expectations may be misplaced. “We believe the valuation is getting stretched,” Bank of America’s strategists, including Janice Xue, told their clients.

  

  2. That’s because Covid reopening takes time. A little over a week since Beijing issued 20 new guidelines for easing Covid controls, fear and confusion lingers. With daily cases near record highs, China’s largest cities saw dramatic declines in subway traffic due to movement curbs, infection and quarantine worries. That said, there have been only 61 severe cases across the country out of hundreds of thousands of infections in recent weeks. Both authorities and the public may feel more confident in resuming a normal life if severe cases stay low.

  

  3. Tech companies still trade with lower valuations than utilities. The three large Chinese tech firms reported mixed earnings last week. Alibaba posted a surprise loss, while Tencent saw revenue shrink for the second straight quarter. JD.com fared better, reporting higher sales.  Even after the recent rally, Alibaba and Tencent are trading at valuations below utility companies in China and the US, underscoring investors’ skepticism toward big tech’s future  under Beijing’s “common prosperity” drive.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 21:30

• The No Normal
  The No Normal

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  The No Normal:

  “Restoring price stability will take some time and requires using our tools forcefully to bring demand and supply into better balance,” reminded Powell this past summer, on Aug 26. The equity market had just jumped 15% from the lows on hopes of a gentler Fed. The Fed doesn’t tighten into weaker equity markets and a contracting economy. Ever. It’s a rule. Powell changed the rule, an opportunity to win back inflation credibility. And the market listened. The swap market anticipates inflation will collapse to an average of 2.28% next year from 7.02% this year.

  Hard landing. Soft landing. No landing. Investors are dusting off playbooks from the past. There is a little bit for everyone.

  • Hard landing? Housing demand has fallen off a cliff. Prospective homebuyer traffic is down 49 points since the start of the year, the largest decline ever.

  • Soft landing? Credit markets are showing almost no sign of strain, even in areas where activity is weak.

  • No landing? There are too many job openings to talk about landings. Real wages have a lot of room to rise, and this could allow the global economy to fumble along.

  The Fed keeps hiking until policy rates are above inflation. It’s a bear market until credit cracks. The Fed pivots when something breaks, and nothing has broken yet. Equity valuations are bloated, and earnings-per-share are too high. EPS always declines sharply in recession. S&P 500 EPS is tracking growth of 6% in 2022 and consensus expected to rise another 4% next year. When the Fed is easing into recession, equity markets are usually in decline. Bear-market rallies are noise, not signal. This is the hard-landing playbook.

  The soft-landing playbook sees 2022 markets anticipating a recession that never comes. Inflation was driven by temporary supply constraints. The US has withstood three quarters of housing contraction. Credit markets are fine because nominal GDP is running 7.3% annualized for the year, whereas real GDP is flat. The rapid rise in the US dollar is typically tied to foreign credit events. None have occurred. The fall in inflation will give a big boost to real incomes. Policy returns predictable path. All is forgiven – global risk climbs the wall of worry.

  These are normal debates in a world that is far from normal. There is no tidy fundamental equilibrium. Balance sheets add complexity, the blind spot of most investors and policymakers. Balance sheets mostly don’t matter. Those who care about them are often in the shadows of institutions, fretting over left tails being underwritten when buying credit. The Fed’s balance sheet is merely a window into deeper challenges. Reserve balances with Fed district banks are $3.13trln. It is the symbol of decades of policy preventing financial failure.

  

  Capital was drawn to duration assets of all varieties in that world. This came at the expense of real investment. Emerging market countries were charged with filling that gap – an epic geopolitical miscalculation. And now, whatever the type of landing that lies ahead, decades of financial imbalances need to be reconciled. Markets need to incentivize a shift to tangible investment. People will hold on to their iPhones longer, keep that ThinkPad an extra year or two. You see, the landing isn’t the problem – it’s that we need to rebuild the runway.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 21:00

• Freight Demand Has Not Found The Floor
  Freight Demand Has Not Found The Floor

  By Zach Strickland of FreightWaves,

  Container imports, rail intermodal shipments and truckload demand have fallen from their lofty peaks during the pandemic era and may be a better indicator of how inflation will be tamed in the coming months than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) itself.  

  

  Container import bookings measured by FreightWaves’ Inbound Ocean TEUs Index (IOTI) are now only roughly 6% higher than they were in November 2019 after averaging 80% above pre-pandemic levels through most of 2021.

  Loaded intermodal container volumes on the rails (ORAILL) are down 7% versus mid-November 2019 levels. 

  The Outbound Tender Volume Index (OTVI), a measure of shipper requests for truckload capacity, is now only 9% higher than it was the week before Thanksgiving in 2019 after averaging nearly 50% above pre-pandemic norms from July 2020 to March 2022. 

  

  Demand destruction has occurred at a much more significant level than suggested by the dollar figures that drive a lot of the macroeconomic data. Dollar values are noisy and measure emotion as well as supply and demand imbalances. The scarcity effect is a prime example of this and has been one of the main drivers of inflation over the past two years.  

  The CPI that is representative of inflation, the Fed’s No. 1 enemy, is still moving higher from an annual basis thanks to rising supply costs and companies still passing along upstream cost increases that occurred over the past two years.

  

  Looking at the Producer Price Index (PPI), which is focused more on upstream production costs, that direction has already changed and has been slowing since June. Transportation costs are a portion of this figure. 

  The point is that scarcity is diminishing. Supply chain congestion is easing. Consumer conditions have diminished from a purchasing power perspective. It takes time for this all to fully work its way into macroeconomic figures and behavior to change fully. 

  The transportation sector has been on the front end of both the economic boom and its recent decline. The reason for this is that transportation is the backbone of the goods economy. All goods, unfinished and finished, need to be moved at some point.

  Raw materials move ahead of production and represent the furthest upstream view of aggregate demand. Finished goods moving to brick-and-mortar stores and fulfillment centers are also represented in transportation data. 

  While truckload and import demand may not have fully eroded back to pre-pandemic levels, the direction and time of the year suggest that it won’t be long until we are there. Seasonally speaking, retail volumes tend to spike just prior to and around the holidays, but there is little evidence of that at this point.

  

  December and January are the slowest months of the year for domestic freight movements, meaning that it will probably get worse for transportation providers this winter without some sort of black swan event. 

  It is hard to tell how long this downward trend will last, as a lot of it will hinge on fiscal policy and investment sentiment. There is some surprising strength in labor numbers, which the Fed cites as a reason for continued rate increases, but this is a lagging figure that may still be reflecting past conditions.

  About the Chart of the Week

  The FreightWaves Chart of the Week is a chart selection from SONAR that provides an interesting data point to describe the state of the freight markets. A chart is chosen from thousands of potential charts on SONAR to help participants visualize the freight market in real time. Each week a Market Expert will post a chart, along with commentary, live on the front page. After that, the Chart of the Week will be archived on FreightWaves.com for future reference.

  SONAR aggregates data from hundreds of sources, presenting the data in charts and maps and providing commentary on what freight market experts want to know about the industry in real time.

  The FreightWaves data science and product teams are releasing new datasets each week and enhancing the client experience.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 20:30

• Trump-Era Treasury Secretary Calls G7 Russian Oil Price Cap "Ridiculous"
  Trump-Era Treasury Secretary Calls G7 Russian Oil Price Cap “Ridiculous”

  Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times,

  Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has called the Group of Seven’s plan to place a price cap on Russian oil “ridiculous.”

  

  The veteran cabinet member from the Trump administration was speaking with CNBC’s Hadley Gamble on a panel at the Milken Institute’s Middle East and Africa Summit.

  In addition to being a former Goldman Sachs partner, Mnuchin now works in private equity investing.

  Mnuchin panned the proposal to cap prices as “not only not feasible, I think it’s the most ridiculous idea I’ve ever heard.”

  He explained that that imposing sanctions on Russia and its officials now would have far less of an impact than if they were implemented before the war started.

  “Sanctions would have had a big impact back then. I think the problem now is that there’s limited options … there’s parts of the world that are now buying Russian oil outside of U.S. sanctions,” Mnuchin said.

  “But look, a price cap, the market is going to set the price. So if you put sanctions on at higher prices, in a way, you’re just making the situation worse, in my opinion.”

  The G7, which includes the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom, are trying to set a fixed price cap on Russian oil from Dec. 5. Australia will also participate.

  Meanwhile, American and European officials are still trying to decide upon the exact cap level, which has delayed the implementation of the plan.

  The price caps, which were first proposed in July, would restrict shipping-related services that involve oil, including maritime transport, insurance, and financing to buyers of Russian oil supplies, unless it was sold at or below the limit.

  The scheme is intended to hurt Russia financially, while protecting Western businesses and households from the effect of skyrocketing energy prices.

  G7 Continue Stepping Up Sanctions on Kremlin

  The United States and its allies have repeated that they are fully committed to rolling out more sanctions on Russia due to the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine.

  Additional sanctions by the European Union will also take effect in early December and will terminate Russian crude oil deliveries to the bloc by sea, in time for a ban on all refined energy imports from Moscow next year.

  The EU is imposing the energy sanctions in solidarity with President Volodymyr Zelensky’s government in Kyiv, despite the hardship it will cause on already suffering European residents and businesses.

  The Kremlin has been pressed to look for new customers in Asia, and has since boosted its oil exports to countries like India and China, as it loses its main export base in Europe.

  However, analysts have said that the price cap plan will not work without cooperation from the Asian nations, which both have strong ties with Moscow.

  If the Indians and Chinese agreed to follow the price caps, American policymakers anticipate a relaxation in global oil prices, while hitting Russian oil export revenues where it hurts.

  The United States said that it has no problem with India still buying oil from Russia, as long as it agrees to abide by the G7 price caps, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said, while visiting her counterparts in New Delhi last week.

  Indian energy companies “can also purchase oil at any price they want as long as they don’t use these Western services and they find other services. And either way is fine,” Yellen told Reuters.

  The Russians have threatened retaliatory measures against any country that imposes price caps on its energy exports and will terminate oil shipments to them.

  Peace Negotiations Long Overdue

  It currently looks uncertain that the two Asian giants would even go along with the proposed price caps, due to major political and economic factors.

  Mnuchin stated that negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv were “long overdue,” and that the best case scenario to avoid an escalating crisis for now would be a truce between both combatants.

  Ukraine has repeatedly expressed it will only enter negotiations following the “restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity,” financial reparations, and the handing over of Russian soldiers and officials for alleged war crimes.

  The Russians have outright rejected those offers.

  A spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s government said on Nov. 18, that “one thing is for sure: the Ukrainians do not want any negotiations,” CNBC reported.

  Biden Administration Should Push For Energy Self-Sufficiency

  Mnuchin also criticized President Joe Biden for having an “extreme focus on the issue of global warming.”

  He said that while he was “not minimizing” climate change, he stated that the White House should not “discourage investment in the carbon economy.”

  “With approvals, and again this stuff doesn’t need legislation, there are things the current administration could do, you know, there’s a need for pipeline, there’s a need for infrastructure, there’s a need for more drilling,” Mnuchin said.

  He then stated that cheap and secure domestic energy supplies still remain critical to U.S. national security interests.

  Mnuchin called for a return to the years of energy self-sufficiency under his former boss, President Donald Trump, and blasted Biden for hypocritically complaining about insufficient oil supplies from exporting nations.

  “We can’t turn around and say to OPEC+, ‘Why are you not producing more oil?’ when we’re not doing it ourselves,” the former treasury secretary said.

  “There’s plenty of shale oil and at these numbers, it’s very economic to produce,” he said, while noting that the U.S. energy sector was being “starved of capital.”

  Mnuchin said that when he was still Treasury Secretary, he wanted to acquire more funding to fill up the National Petroleum Reserve, when prices were still low in the first months of the pandemic.

  That oil reserve since has been severely depleted by a decision of the Biden administration to tap it in order to lower U.S. gas prices.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 20:00

• "You Can't Put It Back Together" – Jim Rickards Warns Of 'Unstoppable Crisis Worse Than 2008'
  “You Can’t Put It Back Together” – Jim Rickards Warns Of ‘Unstoppable Crisis Worse Than 2008’

  Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

  Six-time, best-selling financial author James Rickards says the upcoming book “Sold Out” lays out the case why a huge crash is already a certainty sometime in 2023. 

  

  In a nutshell, broken supply chains have already caused big inflation, and the Fed is raising rates to tamp it back down.  On top of the perfect storm of inflation and prolonged supply problems, we have the recent meltdown of the FTX crypto currency exchange.  Rickards says,

  “It is definitely going to cause sequential collapses in the crypto world, but will it jump the fence into the broader financial world?  My expectation is it will, but it can take six months or more to play out…

  We probably have an acute global financial crisis coming anyway.  If FTX never existed, I would say we are staring at a worse financial crisis than 2008.  Throw FTX on top of that, and it’s like throwing gasoline on a fire.  It will accelerate the fire.  So, we’re probably going to have problems anyway, but the FTX implosion just makes it worse.”

  As far as the dwindling supply chains, Rickards says, “The old supply chain has collapsed.  A new supply chain will emerge, and I talk about that in my book and what it will look like…”

  ”  Right now, we are in a very messy middle period where things don’t work well.  It’s like a vase.  You knock over a vase, and it breaks into 5,000 pieces.  You can’t put it back together.  You’ve got to go get a new vase.  We broke the vase, and we are shopping for a new one.  We are not there yet.  We are just cleaning up the mess. . . . Russia invades Ukraine.  The Ukrainian plastic conduit factory shuts down, and all of a sudden, the BMW production lines are shut down because they cannot get a part.  Again, this is another example of how this is all falling apart, and it’s not going to be put back together quickly.  There will be a new supply chain, and I call it supply chain 2.0, but we are in that in between time, and it’s going to be just a mess.”

  Rickards says the Fed is going to keep raising rates because that is what they keep telling the public.  Rickards says, “They are telling us what they are going to do, and you should believe them.”

  Rickards says we do have inflation, and it’s going to be with us for awhile, but we are also going to get deflation too.  Rickards points out,

  “Why does Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway have $130 billion in cash?  Buffett is one of the greatest investors of all time.  Why isn’t he out there buying stocks?  Again, why does he have $130 billion in cash?  It’s because Buffett sees what I see.  Yes, this thing is going to completely crash. 

  It’s a really good idea to have cash because you can go shopping in the wreckage and pick up some bargains.  My point is, we don’t have to guess.  Look at the Treasury yield curve.  Look at the euro/dollar futures yield curve.  Look at other metrics, and guess what it looks like?  It looks like 2007.  Everything I am describing, but not quite as extreme by the way, was true in 2007…

  These euro/dollar futures were behaving then exactly as they are now.  Except now, the inversion is even worse, which means we are in for a worse crisis than 2008.  It’s coming.  Everything I said has nothing to do with FTX.  Throw FTX on top, and as I said, you are throwing gasoline on a fire.”

  After the inflation, Rickards says count on big deflation.  He will explain exactly how that happens in the 58-minute interview.

  Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with six-time, best-selling author James Rickards.  Rickards’ new book “Sold Out” will be coming out in early December.

  *  *  *

  To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here

  If you want to pre-order a copy of “Sold Out,” click here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 19:30

• What's Behind The Explosion In 0DTE Option Trading
  What’s Behind The Explosion In 0DTE Option Trading

  In recent weeks there has been much discussion of the unprecedented explosion in 0DTE (0-days to expiry), or options with less than 24 hours to maturity, which have become an extremely levered way to bet on even the smallest market gyrations (of course, the past month has seen some very major market gyrations, so imagine those magnified by 100x or more when it comes to P&L impact).

  Just last week we quoted Goldman’s derivative strategist Rocky Fishman explaining that “the strongest area of volume growth has been ultra-short-dated” options, and that “measured in notional volume terms, S&P options with less than 24 hours to maturity now represent 44% of the index’s trading volume, and have been averaging $470BN notional per day over the past month.”

  

  Roughly around the same time, JPMorgan quant Peng Cheng also picked up on this fascinating topic, writing that the increase in the volume of 0 day to expiry (0DTE) options on the S&P 500 (SPX) has attracted a lot of questions.

  To analyze the topic, he published two reports (both available to pro subs), the first of which focused on 0DTE SPX index options and found that 1) the flow is not retail driven; 2) the order flow is biased towards seller initiated; and 3) proposed a framework is proposed for measuring the market impacts of 0D options. The second report looked at the tradability of 0D options.

  Let’s start at the top with Peng’s response to several client questions:

  Q1: Are retail traders driving up the volume?

  Based on JPM’s retail classification algorithm, around 5.6% of all market volume on 0DTE options is attributable to retail market orders. This may be higher than the average for all SPX options (3.3%), but far from dominating the flow.

  According to Peng, it is tempting to overestimate the retail activity in 0DTE options, given one observes a large number of small trades in 0DTE options. However, due to the proliferation of algo trading, trade size is no longer a good classifier for retail vs. institutional. Moreover, the average 0DTE trade size is not smaller than regular options, for the most part. To illustrate, the average trade size of 0DTE options is 3.6 contracts vs 5.7, for all SPX options. However, as Figure 2 shows, the distributions of 0DTE and regular option trade sizes are largely indistinguishable besides the very right tail (largest trades).

  

  Q2: Are these options bought or sold, and are they held to maturity?

  After estimating the directions of all +trades on 0DTE options, Peng does not observe an overwhelming bias toward either buying or selling. Despite the large volume traded, only a small percentage of the trades result in imbalances, and most of them are in fact net sold. Moreover, JPM estimates that only around 6% of the options are kept open until maturity.

  

  Q3: Do 0DTE option trades move markets?

  Since 0DTE options are traded at such a high frequency, their delta hedging behavior becomes much less predictable. Therefore, the gamma on 0DTE options is less meaningful than gamma on longer dated options. Instead, the JPM strategist looks at the market impact of delta: he partitioned market trading hours (9:30AM – 4:00PM) into 5-minute intervals. All 0DTE option trades are assigned an estimated trade direction, and their deltas at trade initiation are aggregated into the 5-minute bars. These aggregated deltas are then merged with the S&P 500 returns over the same interval. A regression between these two quantities tells us the market impacts emanating from 0DTE option delta imbalance. The relationship can be seen in Figure 5, whose positive slope suggests that there is indeed some market impact on the SPX from 0DTE delta. To wit, JPM estimates that market impact in any 5 minutes is between [-0.6%, +1.1%] over the last month.

  

  With that background in mind, Cheng next looks at a transaction cost analysis and profitability of trading 0DTEs.

  Transaction cost analysis

  Q4. Is it more expensive to trade 0D options than longer-dated options, and if so, by how much?

  Using tick level data during regular trading sessions from the month of October, JPM measured the cost of trading at-the-money 0D options. Specifically, it filtered for options with |delta| between [0.45, 0.55] at trade inception and eliminated those that are traded exactly at the mid. For comparison, we run the same analysis on 1 day to expiry options. The chart below shows the average effective spread, defined as the difference between traded level and mid, by trade size. For trades that are 10 contracts or fewer, the transaction costs are relatively invariant with respect to size. However, the transaction cost for 0D options is 3 times as much as 1D options on these trades.

  

  Specifically, for 0D options, the volume-weighted effective spread is approximately 0.35 vega for trades 10 contracts or fewer (95% of all trades). For the 5% largest trades, the effective spread is 0.65 vega. In comparison, for 1D options, the average effective spread of is only about 0.11 vega for the lower 95% of all trades (11 contracts or less), and 0.66 vega for the 5% largest trades.

  In terms of the intraday profile, there is significant volatility in the 0D option effective spread throughout the day. Notable volatility is observed at the market open, and again after 15:00 as time to expiry approaches 0. The profile of 1D options is much better behaved and exhibits little intraday seasonality.

  

  Profitability

  As pointed out in Q2 above, most of the 0D options are net sold by end users. This begs the question, who are the end users, and how are they using these options? In our view, these options are likely to be used by high-frequency directional traders, rather than volatility arbitrage traders. This is based on our analysis below, for which we find outright option returns to be profitable, but volatility premium strategies to be unprofitable.

  First, consider the outright performance of the end users of 0D options, who are assumed to pay the bid-ask spread to enter into these trades. Let’s limit the analysis to ATM options (|delta| between 0.45 and 0.55 at the time of trade). Figure 4 shows the performance of estimated P&L shortly after trade initiation, based on the best bid or offer of the traded option 1 and 10 minutes later. These trade level P&Ls are then aggregated into a daily volume weighted average. It’s notable that not only is the performance strong, but also that 2/3 of the 10-minute P&L is earned in the first minute. Moreover, profitability disappears if these trades are held to expiry. It further supports the hypothesis that 0D options are unlikely to be held to expiry.

  On the flip side, assume the market makers supply liquidity to the order flow and hedge out delta, their estimated P&L is 1 and 10 minutes after trade initiation is shown in Figure 5. They also show a strong performance, implying that volatility premium is captured by taking on the opposite positions of the order flow. The difference between delta hedged and unhedged performance suggests that end users of 0D options are unlikely to be volatility arbitrage traders.

  

  In summary, JPM finds that trading 0DTE options cost up to three times as much as trading 1D options. However, it appears that the end users of 0D options profit from directional, high-frequency trading strategies even after incorporating the wider bid-ask spread. In other words, in a time when conventional HFT frontrunning of orderflow is far less profitable than it was a decade ago, HFTs are forced to resort to such market reflexivity schemes as 0DTE to boost their returns. At the same time, market makers are willing to supply liquidity thanks to the wider bid-ask and are able to systematically profit from delta hedged positions.

  More in the full 0DTE notes available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 19:00

• Entire Gender Industry Is Based On A Failed Study That Disproved Scientist’s Theory: Psychiatrist
  Entire Gender Industry Is Based On A Failed Study That Disproved Scientist’s Theory: Psychiatrist

  Authored by Jan Jekielek and Masooma Haq via The Epoch Times,

  With schools teaching sex and gender ideology beginning in kindergarten, the Biden administration encouraging early medical treatments for gender dysphoria, and social media influencers discussing the topic, a record number of adolescent girls believe they are transgender and are transitioning to live as males.

  

  Concerned adults are sounding the alarm on the lack of scientific studies to support transgender medical treatments that permanently alter a young person’s physiology and leave their mental health issues unresolved.

  Child and adolescent psychiatrist Miriam Grossman, who has been a mental health professional for 40 years, said the gender industry is built on the lies of one troubled psychologist.

  “The person who came up with the theory was Dr. John Money, and he came up with this idea that a person’s biology—their body, their chromosomes—is completely separate from their feeling of whether they are male or female,” Grossman said during a Sept. 23 interview for EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.

  Grossman said the industry surrounding gender ideology—from gender clinics and hospitals to transgender pride flags and the emergence of a transgender civil rights movement—is based on a concept that was never proven to be true.

  “In fact, the opposite was proven,” she said. “This whole concept of having an identity as male or female being completely separate from your biology has actually been proven incorrect by John Money’s experiment.”

  Money was instrumental in establishing the first clinic to perform gender reassignment surgeries on children and adults at the Johns Hopkins Gender Identity Clinic.

  In the 1960s, Money set out to prove his theory of gender identity to the world, and the perfect case study showed up in his office, Grossman said. But instead, his theory was disproven, and it was later revealed that his gender theory came from a study that was seriously corrupted.

  The Canadian Twins

  Grossman told the story of Janet and Ron Reimer, a Canadian couple with twin boys who consulted Money in the mid-1960s after one of the twins, Bruce, suffered a botched circumcision as an 8-month-old that permanently disfigured his genitals.

  After seeing Money speak on a TV program about his research, the parents thought their grievously injured son could—like Money was promoting—change the sex he was born with and live a happy life as a girl.

  Money’s hypothesis was that humans are born with a blank slate in terms of gender.

  “He told the parents that they must immediately change Bruce’s name to a girl’s name, put him in girl’s clothing, tell everybody that he’s a girl, and never, ever tell him the truth about his birth and what happened to him,” Grossman explained.

  Money advised the parents to have Bruce castrated and for doctors to construct an elementary female genitalia for the boy, Grossman said. Bruce was renamed Brenda and raised as a girl.

  However, after many years of being treated by Money, at about the age of 10 the twins refused to see him again. It was later revealed that Money sexually abused the twins during their appointments. Bruce was reportedly never happy as a girl and had masculine inclinations that disturbed him throughout his life.

  When the parents finally revealed the truth to the twins as they were entering puberty, Bruce (who was living as Brenda at that time) chose to revert to living as a male and took the name David.

  “We have to acknowledge the unbelievable arrogance of a professional high-standing academic—widely respected, accomplished—the arrogance that he had to exploit this family in order to hold them up as proof of his theory,” said Grossman.

  Money received a slew of awards during his treatment of the twins, including 25 years of continuous funding from the National Institutes of Health, Grossman said.

  “His ideas about gender were institutionalized, were immediately adopted within an entire field of medicine—within mental health, psychiatry—and outside of medicine as well,” she said.

  Indoctrination

  Children have been indoctrinated with Money’s gender ideology, and now most young people do not believe there is a fundamental connection between biology and gender, which Grossman said is troubling.

  She cited a poll published in September by The New York Times which found that over 60 percent of respondents aged 30 and older said they believe gender is determined by a person’s biological sex at birth, but 61 percent of respondents aged 18 to 29 said they believed that gender identity is distinct from biological sex.

  The different between the younger and older group is directly due to the spread of gender ideology, Grossman said. This is because children as young as 5 years old have been indoctrinated with Money’s gender ideology in schools.

  

  Kids are repeatedly being told that gender identity is separate from biology and that one can choose one’s gender identity, and it’s being presented as fact in the same way children are taught that the capital of California is Sacramento, she said.

  Children are being told that a person can choose their own gender and that “gender-affirming care” is available for them if they want to become a different sex.

  The “care” starts with puberty blockers and later progresses to opposite sex hormones and finally sex reassignment surgeries, at which point there is no room for the children to change their minds, Grossman said.

  Researchers at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, published a study in JAMA Pediatrics (from the Journal of the American Medical Association) and reported that the number of gender-affirming chest surgeries performed in the United States on adolescents aged 13 to 17 years—the majority of which were elective mastectomies on girls—increased from 100 surgeries in 2016 to 489 surgeries in 2019, a difference of 389 percent.

  Adolescents are constantly changing and trying to discover who they are, so allowing them to make a drastic change to their bodies during or before puberty is having a devastating impact on many young people and families, said Grossman.

  

  Dutch Protocol Run Amok

  Prior to the 1990s, the majority of those seeking medical treatment for gender dysphoria were men in their 30s and 40s, Grossman said. Doctors were finding that opposite-sex hormones and surgeries were less effective after puberty, so they thought if they started these treatments before puberty, the patient might have better outcomes in the sex change.

  Researchers in Holland came up with a study that’s now referred to as the Dutch protocol. Children were only chosen to participate in the study if they had discomfort with their biological sex from an early age and their discomfort became worse when they reached puberty. They also could not have any other mental health issues.

  “They took those kids and they put them on puberty blockers at age 12. And those puberty blockers had never been used before for that purpose, and to this day, puberty blockers are not licensed or FDA approved in any country to be used with gender dysphoria,” said Grossman. They are only approved for disorders or medical conditions like precocious puberty, she said.

  The researchers then gave opposite-sex hormones to the 55 children in the study, and later the children could have surgeries if they wanted them. There were problems with this study, including the fact that there was no control group alongside the transitioning kids, said Grossman.

  Grossman said there is a lot of evidence to suggest that if the kids who were uncomfortable with their sex at adolescence had been left alone, the majority of the cases of gender dysphoria would have resolved on their own after puberty.

  “This Dutch protocol was immediately adopted in other countries, including in the U.S., as ‘this is the solution for these kids,’” said Grossman.

  

  ‘Gender Affirming Care’

  The phrase “gender-affirming care” is a euphemism for radical medical experiments that are leaving patients with long-term physical health problems, and they don’t address the more important mental health issues these young people have, Grossman said.

  “You’ll have to note, again, the manipulation of language and the Orwellian use of language, when the term ‘gender affirming’ is used. They’re experimenting on the body, and people are paying a massively high price for these medical experimentations,” she said.

  “Gender-affirming care means that whatever the child comes up with in terms of their identity, no matter how old they are or what other conditions they may suffer from, that is their identity and we accept it. We affirm it. And we give them the treatment that they would like to get,” said Grossman.

  President Joe Biden and Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary Dr. Rachel Levine are promoting these treatments, and the majority of U.S. professional organizations are backing it, leaving parents to fight an uphill battle should they oppose their child’s wishes to change their gender, said Grossman.

  Further, there are not enough long-term studies regarding the impact of “gender-affirming care” on children, but there is evidence about the dangerous outcomes, including being left sterile and developing blood clots, heart attacks, cancers, kidney failure, and early menopause, said Grossman.

  Even with all the adverse effects of “gender-affirming care,” the Biden administration is trying to mandate that all medical professionals participate and support children to get these types of treatments, Grossman said.

  

  Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria

  The Tavistock gender clinic in London has seen an exponential increase in kids seeking sex changes, most with rapid onset gender dysphoria.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 18:30

• Heavy Shelling At Ukraine's Largest Nuclear Plant: "You Are Playing With Fire!"
  Heavy Shelling At Ukraine’s Largest Nuclear Plant: “You Are Playing With Fire!”

  Concerns are mounting over the potential for radioactive fallout and disaster at the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine following large explosions heard at the site over the weekend. 

  Like with prior incidents of shelling and fighting coming near the sensitive facility, each warring side is blaming the other for these latest attacks. “Explosions shook the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine over the weekend in what appeared to be renewed shelling of the facility and the surrounding area, according to the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),” The Hill reports Sunday. 

  The BBC cites local sources who say over a dozen powerful explosions were heard Saturday night at or in the vicinity of Zaporizhzhia plant, which remains Europe’s largest nuclear facility.

  

  IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi called the reports “extremely disturbing” and “completely unacceptable”. He urged for fighting to halt there immediately. “Whoever is behind this, it must stop immediately. As I have said many times before, you’re playing with fire!”

  The IAEA said that in prior weeks there had been a “period of relative calm” in the area, which has now ended. “I’m not giving up until this zone has become a reality. As the ongoing apparent shelling demonstrates, it is needed more than ever,” Grossi stated.

  The UN atomic watchdog still has a team of experts on location at the plant, but there’s been no definitive word on which side was behind the renewed shelling which risks destabilizing the plant. 

  Most Western media reports have blamed Russia for the powerful explosions which reportedly continued into Sunday, despite Russian troops still being the ones to occupy and oversee the actual site. Ukrainian state energy company Energoatom charged that Russia is “once again… putting the whole world at risk.”

  “This morning on Nov. 20, 2022, as a result of numerous Russian shelling, at least 12 hits were recorded on the territory of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant,” Energoatom said.

  “You are playing with fire!”

  Director General of the international Atomic Energy Agency reacted to reports that the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant is being shelled and said: “whoever is behind this, it must stop immediately.”

  Latest: https://t.co/X3flQUBL0r

  📺 Sky 501 pic.twitter.com/L9897zapHB

  — Sky News (@SkyNews) November 20, 2022

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

  Russia fired back, with its own nuclear agency Rosatom saying the following: 

  Kyiv “does not stop its provocations aiming at creating the threat of a man-made catastrophe at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant,” the Russian army said in a statement on Sunday. 

  Despite the shelling, radiation levels “remain normal,” the army added.

  It said missiles exploded around a power line that feeds the plant, the fourth and fifth power units and “special building number 2.”

  Renat Karchaa, an adviser to the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, told state-run agency TASS that the “special building” contained nuclear fuel.

  As for assessed damage as a result of the weekend explosions, the IAEA said at this point the damage to the buildings is not “critical.”

  However, there fears this means escalation in fighting around the plant, with the IAEA statement underscoring the shelling is “abruptly ending a period of relative calm at the facility and further underlining the urgent need for measures to help prevent a nuclear accident there.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 18:00

• Hedge Fund CIO: This Isn't The 1920s Or The 1970s… Today's Starting Points Are Like None We Have Ever Seen
  Hedge Fund CIO: This Isn’t The 1920s Or The 1970s… Today’s Starting Points Are Like None We Have Ever Seen

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River ASset Management

  “Buyer traffic is becoming increasingly scarce,” explained the Chairman of the National Homebuilder Association. “Even as home prices moderate, building costs have yet to follow.”

  

  When prospective homebuying is this weak, the Fed is typically cutting rates. Yet markets are prepared for another 100bps of rate hikes through next Spring.

  US existing home prices were down each of the past four months across all four regions. Price discounts aren’t enough – inventory ratios are higher as nobody wants to move unless they must.

  Bond markets are convinced that inflation is going to fall hard – higher real rates, a weaker economy, a stronger US dollar, and a massive deflationary impulse from global trade make it a safe bet.

  But there are oddities in the background. Labor is gaining strength. This doesn’t usually happen with a weaker economy and falling inflation. But it is happening.

  “Overtime and minimum wage violations are common violations found in food service industry investigations,” said the Department of Labor. Krispy Kreme quickly settled damages filed by 516 workers on Nov 7th. Starbucks workers staged their largest labor action on Red Cup Day, one of their busiest of the year.

  “If the company won’t bargain in good faith, why should we come to work,” the mood captured by a shift manager.  US rail strikes are scheduled to start on Dec 5 – key chemicals shipments will stop days before. “Congress must quickly intervene to ensure a disruption does not occur,” the National Retail Federation warned. And it isn’t just the US – labor tensions are rising in the UK, Canada, Finland. Central bank balance sheets make unusual the new normal.

  The QT theme continues; the “T” for tightening bit has paused. Fed excess reserves rose again last week, having bottomed seven weeks ago. It’s a complication that policy has never experienced. Demand for US dollars has declined as investors fish for an equity bottom, pushing excess liquidity back onto the Fed’s balance sheet.

  

  Warren Buffet is one of those investors on the hunt for value. Berkshire’s 13F focused on cyclical infrastructure – semiconductors, energy companies, transportation over banks and technology stocks.

  What to make of this mix of marbles?

  There is a thirst to place current circumstances into a package that resembles the past, to give some comfort that the future isn’t as unknown as it seems. But it isn’t the 1920s or the 1970s, pre-war or post-war. There is no analog. Today’s starting points are like none we have seen.

  The biggest risk is extrapolating to the future from a past that feels comfortable, confirmed by recent data. Disequilibrium is the new equilibrium.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 17:30

• Top Contender To Replace Kuroda As BOJ Head Urges Removal Of Emergency Central Bank Support
  Top Contender To Replace Kuroda As BOJ Head Urges Removal Of Emergency Central Bank Support

  Central banks must remove emergency support measures once financial crises are over to avoid causing moral hazard in the market, former Bank of Japan deputy governor Hiroshi Nakaso said on Thursday. Which is ironic coming from the one central bank that not only institutionalized moral hazard and MMT, keeping rates at or below zero for the past 30 years, but also ushered in QE and now owns more than half of the entire JGB market, and even the merest hint of a pull back in BOJ support would spark financial armageddon for Japan where the country’s pensions would be wiped out in a millisecond should a central bank backstop ever be removed.

  According to Reuters, Nakaso, who is considered one of the top candidates to become next BOJ governor, also said that once an economy was running below potential capacity, a central bank could more easily normalize ultra-loose monetary policy. Which is easy for him to say now that he is in the running for next BOJ head: we just somehow doubt he will demonstrate the same conviction if and when he becomes the next BOJ head.

  

  Echoing what we have said for the past 13 years, Nakaso said that investors had come to (correctly) assume that central banks would always come to the rescue when financial markets destabilized because of the massive monetary support deployed during the COVID-19 crisis, Nakaso said.

  “This moral hazard must be removed once the crisis is over, though this is easier said than done because it’s a contradictory issue,” Nakaso said in a seminar hosted by the University of Tokyo and International Monetary Fund. And yet he said it, because the wave against relentless central bank intervention – which sparked record inflation across the world in the aftermath of the Covid crisis – is turning. Then again, it will promptly make another U-turn the moment tens of millions are left without a job as the financial tightening spawned by central banks in the past year finally hits the economy instead of just markets.

  “Crisis management is like creating … artificial moral hazard,” he said. “It shouldn’t stay forever.” Yes it shouldn’t, which is precisely what we said in 2009, and yet no official or politician will ever have the guts to pull the plug knowing very well that the alternative is overnight collapse of the financial system.

  None of this fazed Nakaso who continued citing what monetary policy should look like, not what it looks like now: to avoid moral hazard, central banks could design their lending facilities so they were less costly to tap for investors in crisis situations but became more costly when the market normalised. Oh you mean like ending QE 2, 3, Twist and so on, instead of holding on to them for years and for dear life. Yes, well, we tried suggesting that pretty much every single year since 2009 and it didn’t work. It won’t work now either, and it’s why – as Elliott correct predicted – we are facing tens of trillions more in monetary stimulus as the alternative is total collapse.

  “Maybe this is something we can revisit and study” in preparing tools to combat the potential next financial crisis, Nakaso said. Maybe. Or maybe not, because once it is up to Nakaso to pull the plug on Japan’s unprecedented easing and collapse what’s left of Japan’s economy and market – as it is now far too late to try and “normalize” – he will never dare to do it.

  Nakaso’s remarks come amid growing debate about how and when the next BOJ governor will reduce its massive stimulus, considered by some to be distorting market pricing.

  “Inflation pressure that proved persistent … can be attributed at least … to generous monetary and fiscal support by the authorities,” Nakaso said, debunking relentless lies by central bankers in Europe and the US who have feigned ignorance and claimed none of the galloping inflation observed today is the result of their actions.

  Nakaso and incumbent BOJ deputy governor Masayoshi Amamiya are considered among top candidates to succeed BOJ Governor Haruhiko Kuroda, whose current term will end in April.

  Nakaso was speaking at the online symposium from Bangkok, where he was joining a meeting of national economic leaders along with Kishida. Their being there together may stoke speculation about Nakaso’s closeness to the premier.

  Of course, all of this is just posturing and jawboning: as analysts quoted by Reuters note, neither would rush into tightening monetary policy, given the fragility of Japan’s economy and the need to keep low the cost of funding its huge public debt. And if they don’t tighten now, they never will.

  Still, compared with Amamiya, Nakaso is seen more in favor of dialing back Kuroda’s radical stimulus. In a book published this year, he laid out in detail how the BOJ could end ultra-loose policy. What he left out is how JGBs go bidless, how trillions in Japanese pensions evaporate overnight, and how a global financial shockwave crushes the western financial system which is inextricably linked to the continued stability of the Japanese bond market.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 17:00

• Don't Make Taylor Swift Fans Angry
  Don’t Make Taylor Swift Fans Angry

  By Matt Stoller, author of the BIG Substack

  “It’s truly amazing that 2.4 million people got tickets, but it really pisses me off that a lot of them feel like they went through several bear attacks to get them.” – Taylor Swift

  

  Over the past week, there has been fiasco in the sale of Taylor Swift tickets, with millions of angry fans despondent at not being able to see their favorite singer, and frustrated at the incredibly poor service, inexplicable pricing, and high fees of the Ticketmaster software system used to sell them.

  Swift is the most popular artist in America, and hadn’t done live shows for four years. When she announced a tour, Ticketmaster was the ticketing agent. Due to under-investment in its platform, the corporation’s site and app crashed, unable to handle the demand for tickets. Somehow, though, scalpers managed to get plenty of tickets and put them on sale for much more than the original list price.

  

  Why was Ticketmaster’s system so poorly structured? To answer that it helps to look at the firm’s stock price. In the face of such a high-profile embarrassment, a firm without market power would suffer in the marketplace. Investors would assume that customers would switch to a competitor’s services, much as, say, Ford’s stock drops when it has to do a recall of a line of cars. But Live Nation’s stock didn’t move at all. No investors were afraid that artists or venues would use a competitor’s software system. Because they can’t. There aren’t any meaningful rivals.

  The problem, as this new generation of fans is learning, isn’t just that Ticketmaster is a bad system. The problem is Ticketmaster is the only system. It’s a monopoly.

  And so Swifties, as they are known, demanded answers. These kinds of bitter cries tend to go into the void, just one more piece of evidence we have too many greedy people at the top and a government that cannot act. But this time, something different happened. Yesterday, David McCabe reported that the Department of Justice Antitrust Division has been investigating Live Nation, the parent company of Ticketmaster, for antitrust violations. And THAT revelation caused the stock to drop.

  Members of the antitrust division’s staff at the Justice Department have in recent months contacted music venues and players in the ticket market, asking about Live Nation’s practices and the wider dynamics of the industry, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is sensitive. The inquiry appears to be broad, looking at whether the company maintains a monopoly over the industry, one of the people said.

  The Ticketmaster monopoly story goes back to the 1990s. It started with a merger. In 1991, Ticketmaster acquired its main rival in computerized ticketing, Ticketron, which put 90% of the ticketing business in the hands of one firm. This was a milestone. Indeed, Ticketmaster brags about this unlawful merger on its own website.

  

  Three years later, the fees for ticketing had gotten out of hand. So Pearl Jam, then the biggest band in the world, got mad. The band was angry at the high prices and hidden fees the firm charged their fans, and they wanted a straightforward ticket price – $1.80 service fees clearly spelled out on $18 tickets, which was lower than what Ticketmaster sought. But Ticketmaster refused. So the band boycotted what was the then-new Ticketmaster monopoly. They ran a pressure campaign, testifying to Congress, embarking on a lobbying campaign, and pointing to the firm’s acquisitions of rivals and other underhanded tactics in its attempt to control the industry.

  Ticketmaster struck back, bribing music venues to only accept Ticketmaster as a booking system, which meant that Pearl Jam couldn’t play at most normal locations. Pearl Jam’s 1995 tour was thus a catastrophe, because they had to play in places like sporting fields which couldn’t hold concerts, so most of their shows were canceled. The cost to Pearl Jam was in the millions, and it devastated the band. This was a remarkable potential moment for antitrust enforcement, with the biggest music act in the world brought to its knees by a ticketing monopoly.

  And yet, enforcers did nothing. Under Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump, Ticketmaster grew, buying up rivals, becoming more and more powerful. Then, enter the other major powerhouse of the industry, Live Nation, a firm that rolled-up live events until it ultimately became the world’s largest concert promotion company. Live Nation was sick of paying Ticketmaster’s fees, and the two firms had been battling at the bargaining table. Finally Live Nation simply built its own ticketing software and threatened to compete directly with Ticketmaster. Competition would have hit profits for both firms. So instead the two worked out a deal to merge, so the combined entity could have all the fees – and more – to itself.

  This new giant of the industry would open the door to an array of opportunities to grab cash. The merger combined the biggest owner of venues, the monopolist of ticketing software, and Front Line Management, a roll-up of artist management firms that came to control most of the biggest names in the business, making Live Nation the most powerful live entertainment firm America had ever seen.

  

  The deal was so outrageously arrogant that the combined firm was to be chaired by Irving Azoff, who – in a New York Times profile – confessed himself a serial liar and talked about how he put pictures of himself giving the middle finger on his own stationary. Initially, people thought Obama, who had talked tough on antitrust on the trail, would block the merger. Not doing so would look weak. If you weren’t going to go after Ticketmaster, the scourge of the 1990s, then would you go after anyone?

  But the Obama administration approved the merger, with Antitrust Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney leading negotiations over what concessions Live Nation would have to offer. Immediately after the merger, Live Nation began violating its consent decree with the Antitrust Division, charging outrageous fees, and not stopping the sale of tickets to bots. It suppressed competitors who had developed ways of blocking scalpers, like Songkick. Live Nation acted in such bad faith that the Trump Antitrust Division eventually had to rework the consent decree.

   

  Today, the choice by the Obama administration looks inexplicable. “The people who came in to oversee this transaction were very interested in doing everything imaginable to create more competition in ticketing in the marketplace,” said former Antitrust Division chief counsel Gene Kimmelman, who worked on the deal. “We were frustrated that the options were unbelievably limited.”

  The concerns of Obama-era enforcers weren’t outlandish. From the 1980s onwards, it had become increasingly hard to prevail in antitrust claims. This ideological turn is one reason Clinton didn’t act despite Pearl Jam’s advocacy, and why the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations allowed it to fester and worsen.

  The post-1982 model used in antitrust cases, known as the consumer welfare standard, made it hard to show harm, because large firms could claim they were large not because they engaged in predatory behavior, but because they were efficient. And plenty of bought-off people in the industry would validate Live Nation, and very few opponents – after seeing what had happened to Eddie Vedder – would be willing to speak out publicly for fear of retribution. By the Obama administration, antitrust enforcers had come to see themselves as deal-makers, working with merging firms to help them make deals, rather than law enforcers trying to constrain corporate power.

  But then something changed. Starting in the early 2010s, but then picking up steam over the decade, a new anti-monopoly movement began challenging the standard by which dominant firms such as Google and Amazon acquired their power. A range of writers, lawyers, businesspeople, workers, and ordinary citizens began learning, reading, researching, and talking. While a lot of people assumed that big tech was the only focus, the target was much broader. In 2021, my organization released a report called Courage to Learn, in which we highlighted a litany of Obama antitrust failures, including allowing the Ticketmaster/Live Nation merger. We recommended that the incoming Biden administration appoint new enforcers and engage in a far more aggressive strategy, including “unwinding” that merger.

  Joe Biden listened. He appointed Jonathan Kanter to the Antitrust Division, and Lina Khan to the Federal Trade Commission. And they embarked on a series of new choices within the agencies, sparking controversy and in some cases bitterness within the white collar antitrust bar. A month ago, we published a research report on Live Nation, and were part of a coalition of fans and artists called Break Up Ticketmaster. 40,000 people have since asked for action.

  And then came the Taylor Swift fiasco. It’s deeply embarrassing for the antitrust enforcers who facilitated the Live Nation merger, because the premise of their merger was that bigness begat efficiency. And yet the firm couldn’t handle an easily predicted demand spike that it induced by sending out marketing codes to Swift fans.

  Politicians began speaking out, such as the state attorneys general of Tennessee and North Carolina, who pledged investigations. Members of Congress wrote letters to the Department of Justice, and Senators Amy Klobuchar and Mike Lee said they would hold hearings. And yet, the firm itself acted as a monopolist would, treating the fiasco as something of a joke. The first words out of a Live Nation executive at the Liberty Investor meeting two days ago was “Everyone has a Taylor swift ticket underneath their seat.” The harm Live Nation caused was irrelevant to its owners, who profited mightily regardless. Then, when the Chair of Live Nation, Greg Maffei, was asked on CNBC about the ticketing fiasco, he blamed… Taylor Swift.

  Finally, Swift herself spoke out. On Instagram, she expressed anger at the exploitation of her fans. “It’s really difficult for me to trust an outside entity with these relationships and loyalties,” she said, “and excruciating for me to just watch mistakes happen with no recourse.” The statement was mostly heartfelt and personal, but the ‘no recourse’ phrase suggests something else. ‘Recourse’ is not the word choice of a songwriter, but of a lawyer trying to make a point about market power. Swift – or perhaps Swift’s lawyer – is saying that Ticketmaster is, as it was when Pearl Jam was the biggest act in the world, a monopoly. “We asked them,” she said, “multiple times, if they could handle this kind of demand and we were assured they could.” Even Swift, as the most powerful artist in music, could not prevent her fans from being cheated by Ticketmaster.

  And now we know the Antitrust Division is on the case. It’s going to take time for this suit to move forward. They’ve been doing interviews for months, but there’s more work needed to put together a complaint. To some extent the lawyers can short-circuit the process since there’s a consent decree, but a judge will still drag it out. There are many more wrinkles to the Live Nation antitrust case. But that’s the gist of it.

  It’ll be interesting to see if Live Nation decides to throttle back a bit on its fees, alleged coercive practices, and rumored retaliatory behavior. Firms in the crosshairs often do, and that’s probably why the stock went down, an expectation from investors that Live Nation might have to eat some margin loss for PR purposes. Somehow, though, I suspect they won’t. Live Nation is still guided by its original chairman’s love of putting up a middle finger to the world.

  That’s what at least two generations of music fans have experienced.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 16:30

• FTX Hacker Starts Dumping Massive Haul Of Ether Tokens
  FTX Hacker Starts Dumping Massive Haul Of Ether Tokens

  Last weekend, we reported on the mysterious $662 million outflow of tokens that suddenly hit FTX.

  At the time, Nansen’s Alex Svanevik said, “It’s unclear exactly who’s making the transactions, but you wouldn’t expect to see these on-chain trades at this time.”

  He said FTX’s main wallet was entirely drained of FTT.

  Additionally, Reuters reported that SBF had a “backdoor” in FTX’s book-keeping system, which allowed him to move customer money around without triggering internal compliance or accounting red flags.

  During the week, more details came out that suggested at least some of this outflow was in fact an apparently sanctioned transfer from FTX to Bahamian regulators – who rejected the exchange’s US bankruptcy filing and took possession of some of the assets.

  “[There is] credible evidence that the Bahamian government is responsible for directing unauthorized access to the Debtors’ systems for the purpose of obtaining digital assets of the Debtors—that took place after the commencement of these cases,” read the filing, signed by new FTX CEO John Ray, famous for handling the liquidation of Enron.

  The company went on to say that its co-founders Sam Bankman-Fried and Gary Wang were recorded saying that Bahamanian regulators instructed the pair to make “certain post-petition transfers” and that such assets were “custodied on FireBlocks under control of [the] Bahamian government.”

  Securities Commission Addresses FTX Statement on Bahamian Withdrawals pic.twitter.com/OZKWwicSuN

  — Securities Commission of The Bahamas (@SCBgov_bs) November 12, 2022

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

  However, although initial reports suggested that all of the funds in question might be in the custody of securities regulators in the Bahamas, Chainalysis poured cold water on this theory however, stating:

  “Reports that the funds stolen from FTX were actually sent to the Securities Commission of The Bahamas are incorrect. Some funds were stolen, and other funds were sent to the regulators.”

  And as Bloomberg reported earlier in the week, the hackers who stole the funds have become one of the world’s largest holders of the Ether token.

  According to security specialists PeckShield, a wallet linked with the exploit swapped about another $49 million of stablecoins – mainly Dai – for Ether on Tuesday. That lifted the attacker’s Ether haul to 228,523 or about $288 million – the 35th largest stash of the coin, according to data from analytics platform Etherscan.

  #PeckShieldAlert FTX Accounts Drainer has swapped 48.27M $DAI (~$48.36M) to 37.57k $ETH (~$47.69M) on Ethereum
  Arbitrary loss: -$671,424.25
  FTX Accounts Drainer currently holds 228,523.83 $ETH (~$288M) and makes the address become the 35th largest holder of ETH pic.twitter.com/8oukNomdDf

  — PeckShieldAlert (@PeckShieldAlert) November 15, 2022

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

  The hacker reportedly transferred some funds using the crypto exchange operated by Kraken, which said it had been in touch with law enforcement about the matter.

  But now, as Coinpedia.org reports, the FTX hacker has begun to liquidate those holdings creating significant downward pressure on Ethereum’s price.

  

  As PeckShield further detailed earlier today, the FTX hacker is swapping ETH for BTC via renBTC bridge protocol…

  #PeckShieldAlert FTX Accounts Drainer 1 currently holds 200,735.1 $ETH (~$235.5M) & drops to the 37th largest holder of $ETH (from 27th)
  FTX Accounts Drainer 1 has transffered 50k $ETH (~$58.5M) to 0x866E, then 0x866E swapped these $ETH for ~3,517 $renBTC and bridged out pic.twitter.com/Qokr8bQrvg

  — PeckShieldAlert (@PeckShieldAlert) November 20, 2022

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

  You can monitor the FTX Hacker’s moves here…

  You can keep an eye on the ren bridge here: https://t.co/8Lqjtt1W34

  I assume that each time Hacker Wallet 1 transfers fresh ETH to Wallet 2, we should expect continued dumping shortly thereafter

  Hacker Wallet 1: https://t.co/q2bl56LoKQ

  Hacker Wallet 2: https://t.co/189Yk9lwXY

  — kamikaz ΞTH 🦇🔊 (@kamikaz_ETH) November 20, 2022

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

  Notably, renBTC liquidity is not deep enough for the FTX Hacker to dump all his ETH. If renBTC minting is disabled, the liquidity can’t be refilled, so the hacker may speed up.

  Which is perhaps why, as @kamikaz_ETH notes, the FTX Hacker is now steadily dumping ETH on-chain – which is why we are seeing the sudden purges in Ethereum’s price.

  It’s hard to know how sophisticated the FTX Hacker is, but Ren protocol announced earlier (completely by coincidence with no connection to the ongoing ETH dump) that they will be disabling renBTC mints soon

  That gives the hacker an incentive to dump the ETH asap https://t.co/YKBSD1KWyY

  — kamikaz ΞTH 🦇🔊 (@kamikaz_ETH) November 20, 2022

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

  This could be a problem for ETH as if 50k ETH drove the drop from $1220 to $1160, the remaining 200k ETH could do some more serious damage to price.

  FTX itself has tweeted to urge exchanges to block these transfers from the FTX Hacker…

  (2/2) Exchanges should take all measures to secure these funds to be returned to the bankruptcy estate.

  — FTX (@FTX_Official) November 20, 2022

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

  Finally, one source suggested that perhaps the FTX Hacker realized that The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) can sanction the address where they are holding the hacked ETH and thereby make the ETH worthless…

  As 76% of validators (and rising) enforce OFAC sanctions – accordingly they wouldn’t include ETH transactions from sanctioned addresses…

  The FTX exploiter, who has been dumping all other drained assets for ETH, is now one of the largest holders in the world, with 228,523 ETH ($284.82m) currently in their wallet.

  Everyone should keep an extremely close eye on what happens next… pic.twitter.com/SAP3UkyVaa

  — Dylan LeClair 🟠 (@DylanLeClair_) November 15, 2022

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

  Hence the sudden urgency to discard the ETH for bitcoin via RenBTC bridge …

  Probably they had a tip off that OFAC is planning to do this tomorrow…

  Now who would have the political connections with the administration to know that info in advance?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 16:00

• What We Know About Jack Smith, Special Counsel Appointed In Trump Probes
  What We Know About Jack Smith, Special Counsel Appointed In Trump Probes

  Authored by Cathy He via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Jack Smith, who on Nov. 18 was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to be special counsel in two probes involving former president Donald Trump, is a veteran prosecutor with the Department of Justice (DOJ).

  

  Most recently, Smith was the chief prosecutor for the special court in The Hague responsible for investigating and adjudicating war crimes in Kosovo. Prior to the Hague, he was the vice president of litigation at HCA Healthcare, one of the largest health providers in the United States.

  In a statement following Garland’s announcement, Smith said he intends to conduct the investigations and any prosecutions that may arise from them “independently and in the best traditions of the Department of Justice.”

  “The pace of the investigations will not pause or flag under my watch. I will exercise independent judgement and will move the investigations forward expeditiously and thoroughly to whatever outcome the facts and the law dictate,” Smith said.

  Smith graduated from Harvard law school in 1994, and from there started his prosecutorial career as an assistant district attorney at the New York County District Attorney’s Office. From 1999, he served as assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of New York for nine years, a position which included leading the criminal litigation unit prosecuting cases involving public corruption, violent crime and gangs, and white collar and complex financial fraud, according to the DOJ.

  From 2008 to 2010, he worked at the Office of the Prosecutor with the International Criminal Court, where he conducted investigations of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.

  In 2010, he returned to the DOJ to serve for five years as the chief of the Public Integrity Section in Washington overseeing prosecutions of public corrections cases across the United States, according to the department. During this time his unit secured bribery and extortion convictions of former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell and Arizona U.S. Representative Rick Renzi.

  Smith in 2015 was appointed first assistant U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee before becoming the acting U.S. attorney in 2017.

  In a speech announcing the special counsel appointment, Garland described Smith as the “right choice to complete these matters in an even-handed and urgent manner.”

  “Throughout his career, Jack Smith has built a reputation as an impartial and determined prosecutor, who leads teams with energy and focus to follow the facts wherever they lead,” Garland said.

  Garland said that Smith will begin his work as special counsel immediately and return from The Hague to the United States.

  As special counsel, Smith is charged with overseeing the ongoing investigation into Trump’s handling of classified and presidential records at Mar-a-Lago, as well as the Washington-based probe into whether there was unlawful interference with the transfer of power after the 2020 election or the certification of the electoral college vote on Jan. 6, 2021.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 15:30

• Just Kidding! CBS News Resumes Twitter Posts After 40-Hour Tantrum
  Just Kidding! CBS News Resumes Twitter Posts After 40-Hour Tantrum

  It only took 40 hours for CBS News to realize what absolute morons they’d been to stop posting on Twitter over “security concerns” with the platform.

  

  “After pausing for much of the weekend to assess the security concerns, CBS News and Stations is resuming its activity on Twitter as we continue to monitor the situation,” the news organization’s communications team tweeted Sunday morning.

  After pausing for much of the weekend to assess the security concerns, CBS News and Stations is resuming its activity on Twitter as we continue to monitor the situation.

  — CBS News PR (@CBSNewsPress) November 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsThe outlet announced on Friday that they would be pausing its activity on the social media platform “out of an abundance of caution,” which was apparently no longer an issue by Sunday morning. The massive virtue signal marked perhaps the most significant organization to protest the threat of free speech at the Musk-owned social media giant – after multiple advertisers announced that they would be pausing ad spending amid the chaos of locked-out employees and fired executives.

  Musk took Twitter private on Oct. 27 – firing the senior management team and appointing himself as CEO, before then firing 50% of the company. On Nov. 17, hundreds of Twitter employees resigned after Musk set a deadline for workers to agree to “extremely hardcore” working conditions.

  According to Variety, CBS News was particularly concerned about the security of information on Twitter, as key personnel related to that area had departed.

  The news outlet has been closely watching the situation to see if any of Twitter’s critical functions break down and whether Twitter is susceptible to hacking attacks.

  The mass employee exodus from Twitter — now with a headcount estimated to be less than 2,500, down from 7,500 prior to Musk’s $44 billion acquisition — has escalated fears that the platform may start to break down operationally. -Variety

  The decision by CBS News comes after Musk reinstated former President Donald Trump’s account following a 24-hour poll.

  The responses, as expected, have been hilarious.

  https://t.co/hyNeBg9hbg pic.twitter.com/FJCS3VUCQ1

  — Dr. DW (@ZombyWoof2022) November 20, 2022

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

  Your heroism will not go unrewarded.

  — 🫃🏼🇺🇦💉Hollaria Briden, Esq. (@HollyBriden) November 20, 2022

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

  During that pause, everyone on this app was safe from misinformation.

  — Chef Andrew Gruel (@ChefGruel) November 20, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 15:00

• Judge Orders Unsealing Of Names Of 8 Anonymous Individuals Relating To Jeffrey Epstein
  Judge Orders Unsealing Of Names Of 8 Anonymous Individuals Relating To Jeffrey Epstein

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A federal judge on Friday ordered the unsealing of documents featuring the real names of some of the “John Does” relating to deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, according to multiple media outlets.

  

  Judge Loretta Preska ruled on Friday to disclose the identities of a number of previously anonymous individuals in documents filed by Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre against the convicted pedophile’s associate Ghislaine Maxwell in a defamation case, according to Insider.

  Epstein died in jail awaiting trial while Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking and sentenced to 20 years behind bars.

  Giuffre’s civil lawsuit against Maxwell has generated a trove of documents relating to Epstein, which contain a number of redacted names, some of which Preska ordered unsealed on the premise that public interest outweighs the right to privacy, according to Daily Mail.

  

  Already Disclosed to the Public

  Eight “Non-Party Does” referred to in documents as Does 12, 28, 97, 107, 144, 147, 171, and 183, sought to remain anonymous amid concerns that their disclosure would harm their reputations, Fox News reported.

  Preska disagreed in some cases, saying that much of the “purportedly sensitive information” had already been disclosed to the public during Maxwell’s trial, per Daily Mail.

  While a timeline for the release of the documents and names has not been set, Preska identified some of the Epstein-linked individuals during the hearing.

  The judge identified Doe 147 as Epstein victim Sarah Ransome, who testified publicly at Maxwell’s sentencing and published a book about her experience, and granted numerous interviews, according to Insider.

  

  Another individual Preska identified was Emmy Tayler, a former personal assistant to Maxwell who was accused of playing a role in the sexual abuse of some of the victims, according to Daily Mail.

  Tayler, who has denied any wrongdoing, was named in a batch of publicly available documents from another lawsuit, Preska said and ordered its release, according to Daily Mail, though it’s unclear which of the Does is used in reference to Tayler.

  ‘Intense Media Coverage’

  Preska also ordered documents relating to Doe 183 unsealed as the individual has been the “subject of intense media coverage” and their name was disclosed during Maxwell’s trial. But in order to allow Doe 183 an opportunity to appeal her decision, Preska put a stay on the release until Nov. 28.

  She also ordered the name of Tom Pritzker, billionaire executive chairman of the Hyatt Hotels, to be unsealed, according to Insider. Preska said Pritzker had only a marginal connection to Epstein as his name came up in a deposition in which a witness said they didn’t recognize him.

  Pritzker argued against the disclosure on the premise that it could harm his reputation but Preska overruled his objection.

  The judge did concede to some of the individuals who raised objections, however.

  Doe 12 will remain anonymous as they were a “classic outsider,” the judge said, describing them as “neither victim nor associated with Epstein or Maxwell,” according to Daily Mail.

  The name of Doe 28 will also remain sealed as they’re a sexual assault victim who the judge said “continues to experience trauma,” per Daily Mail.

  Meanwhile, Maxwell recently alleged that a fellow inmate plotted to kill her in her sleep.

  She also said that she found Epstein’s death, which was ruled a suicide, to be “profoundly suspicious” and that she doubts he really killed himself.

  When he died, Epstein was awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges. He was convicted in 2008 on similar charges but received a light sentence.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 14:45

• Morgan Stanley: These Were Our Key 2023 Outlook Debates
  Morgan Stanley: These Were Our Key 2023 Outlook Debates

  By Vishwanath Tirupattur of Morgan Stanley

  Our 2023 Outlook – What We Debated

  This has been our outlook week. We published our year-ahead global economics and strategy outlooks last Sunday, and the more detailed asset class and country-specific outlooks have been streaming out during the week, with more to follow. At Morgan Stanley Research, the outlooks are the culmination of a process involving much deliberation and spirited debate among economists and strategists across all the regions and asset classes we cover. In a highly interconnected world with myriad uncertainties, we are convinced that this collaborative exercise in which we challenge each other’s views is critically important. In last week’s Sunday Start, my colleague Andrew Sheets summarized the outcome of the process – our outlook for 2023 across markets and economies. This week, I will focus on some of the key debates we engaged in during the process.

  Unsurprisingly, we spent a lot of time on inflation. Given the many upside surprises to inflation through much of the year, there was understandable skepticism around our forecast that US inflation will show a steady decline. Our economists acknowledged the uncertainty but took some comfort in base effects, normalizing supply chains, and weaker labor markets. They also saw deflation (not just disinflation) in certain core goods such as autos and a reset in medical services prices exerting a steady drag on core inflation. To be clear, our US inflation forecast takes into account that while shelter inflation will slow, it will remain a persistent driver of above-target inflation for a few more quarters.

  

  Our FX strategists changed their bullish stance on USD to neutral, a notably out-of-consensus call. With our outlook debates taking place against the background of a hawkish-sounding post-FOMC press conference at which the Fed chair signaled the policy rate peaking higher than previously thought, this change was vigorously debated. Our strategists argued that a decline in inflation as our economists forecast would limit upside potential for US rates. Furthermore, monetary policy in the US is now in restrictive territory, implying that we will see more downside surprises in individual data points. Also, the outlook for China, while still challenging, appears to be shifting, with a decent chance that the authorities take steps toward ending the Covid-zero policy. This would help to bring greater balance to the global economy, with less upward pressure on the dollar.

  

  Our economists’ base case expectation that the Fed will stop hiking in January led to a discussion of how markets would behave following the end of a hiking cycle. In some cases, the end of a hiking cycle was good for markets over the following 12 months (February 1995) but not in others (May 2000). We noted that the key to the outcome for markets seems to be whether a recession follows the end of a hiking cycle.

  

  While our forecast for the US is a ‘soft landing’ (no recession), our economists pointed out that the landing won’t feel all that soft and the margin for error is small. This makes the risk/reward for US stocks challenging. It is worth highlighting that in both 1995 and 2000 the 10-year US Treasury yield rallied, consistent with what our rates strategists expect by the end of 2023.

  There was debate around why we only see high yield default rates rising to ‘long-term average’ levels (4-4.5%), given slower growth and higher borrowing costs. Our credit strategists contended that the modest maturity walls over the next two years, cash on balance sheets, and healthy coverage and leverage ratios will mitigate near-term default pressures. However, they did note the potential for a longer default cycle, as maturities start to matter more in 2024.

  Another topic of discussion was our housing strategists’ view that US housing will experience a significant decline in activity (sales, starts, and permits) comparable to the steep declines seen in the aftermath of the GFC, yet only a modest drop in home prices, unlike what we saw post-GFC. The divergence in activity and prices is rooted in the prospect of much lower forced sales through foreclosures due to tight mortgage lending standards post-GFC, the substantial equity in many existing homes, and the lock-in effect of existing mortgages.

  

  The future of the Fed’s quantitative tightening (QT) was also much debated, particularly when it might end and its sequencing with a rate cut. History is really no guide here since we only have one data point to go by. As our chief global economist Seth Carpenter noted, the Fed sees the two policy tools as independent, and stopping QT depends on money market conditions and bank demand for reserves. Thus, QT could end before or after December 2023, when we anticipate gradual rate normalization to start. That said, QT could stop abruptly for two reasons:

  1. A recession that forces the Fed to contemplate rate cuts of 100bp or more; or
  2. Dysfunctional markets along the lines of March 2020 or the recent episode in the gilt market.

  More in the full note available to pro subscribers.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 11/20/2022 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Conrad Black: A Step Toward National Suicide?
  Conrad Black: A Step Toward National Suicide?

  Authored by Conrad Black via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Nov. 8 midterm elections were a watershed in modern American history. The implications of choosing a president whom the public strongly disapproves of and is generally a failure, over a controversial but undoubtedly capable and successful ex-president, are very serious.

  

  That the Democrats and their lock-step allies in the national media succeeded in putting across the colossal smear that former President Donald Trump is a supporter of violence and a threat to the constitutional system could be interpreted as a long step toward the national suicide that Abraham Lincoln foresaw is the only way in which the American project could perish.

  Former CIA Director John Brennan called Trump a traitor; former National Intelligence Director James Clapper declared as a matter of settled fact that Trump was a Russian intelligence asset. The corruption of the FBI and the intelligence agencies in the dissemination of the infamous Steele dossier funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign as authentic intelligence revealing Trump as completely unsuited to public office and the profound dishonesty of former FBI Director James Comey in white-washing Clinton’s alleged destruction of subpoenaed evidence and his recourse to surveillance granted in response to false affidavits while attempting to destroy the Trump presidency have escaped legal retribution by the somnambulant Durham investigation, and there will be no retribution for any of it.

  Yet, Trump is the tainted protagonist. The Russian collusion hoax was the most monstrous defamation ever inflicted on a U.S. president. The spurious impeachment of him, for an innocuous telephone call to the president of Ukraine about the commercial activities of the Biden family in his country—now notorious but probably a matter of political suppression of the normal working of American justice—was in the same category of misuse of the political system for the lowest and most destructive partisan ends.

  It’s obvious that the potentially millions of harvested ballots that couldn’t be verified in the 2020 presidential election could easily have provided the 50,000 vote switchover needed in Pennsylvania and two other states to flip that election to Trump in the Electoral College. The dishonesty of the universal media stone wall that 2020 was a pristine presidential election is compounded by the judiciary’s abdication of its coequal role in government and reassertion of its refusal to consider overturning the apparent presidential election result.

  Democratic strategists deserve a near-perfect score for tactical judgment: They rounded up a big majority among young voters by hammering the abortion issue, emphasizing the reduction in marijuana penalties, and championing student loan forgiveness. This and the malicious and unctuous pressing of the safety of democracy as a euphemism for the defamatory nonsense that Trump was a menace to the Constitution turned the minds of an adequate number of voters to produce a dangerously perverse result. They have pretty well given up the former slanders that Trump is a racist, homophobe, and misogynist.

  Tabulating all of the votes cast for all offices contested last week, the Republicans outpolled the Democrats all over. The Democrats only took what they needed. Politics is a notoriously unjust occupation; Trump is objectively perhaps among the 10 most successful holders of that office. But he did great harm to himself by his lack of public relations judgment, and this fact in the hands of the political and social media monopoly of his enemies working with the strategists and saboteurs in the Democratic leadership have unfortunately won the match.

  But even the voters who rendered such an ambiguous result on Nov. 8 have betrayed a concern that the incompetence of the Biden administration, with the duplicity of the Democratic congressional leaders, can’t go on indefinitely. But they’ve demonstrated that Trump isn’t the man to stop them and to tear the government apart and repopulate it with people with clean hands.

  There’s still an important place for Trump to complete the task that he commenced of transporting the Republican Party from the country clubs to the championship of the disadvantaged and working and middle class of America, and to cleaning out the bipartisan infestation of placemen and decayed servitors of the federal political and administrative state. But the former president is far from blameless in his own misfortunes. He warned of the dangers of ballot harvesting in 2020 but was completely inadequate in taking preventive measures or even following up efficiently to challenge the vulnerable points. Instead, we had the well-intended but completely ineffectual efforts of Rudolph Giuliani and Sidney Powell. In order to make his case plausibly, he absolutely had to avoid precisely the sort of outrage that occurred on Jan. 6, 2021. But the fact that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser paid no attention to Trump’s warnings that matters could get out of hand and his offer of 20,000 National Guardsmen indicates the Democrats’ role was a good deal less innocent than they pretend.

  But Trump knew what desperate and sleazy people he was dealing with, and he doesn’t have a credible excuse for being so reckless. This condemned him to having to continue to emphasize the 2020 election irregularities in order to justify his calling forth such a huge and discontented crowd at the Washington Elipse on Jan. 6, 2021. Of course, he no more sought an insurrection than Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) did.

  The only way to complete Trump’s work and root out and politically exterminate those who have corrupted the intelligence and justice arms of the federal government and have dragooned the contemptible but still insidiously influential national political media in full metal jacket Trump-hate, is for Trump to identify and support the successor whom he favors as Republican presidential candidate.

  He shouldn’t go back to his 2016 playbook and insult all the other prominent Republicans. He has exchanged enough fire with his Republican enemies, contemptible though many of them are, and did well to win the first round and come so close in the second. The third round last week was an acute disappointment, and the Republican Party doesn’t need, and the American public doesn’t wish for, an internecine war on the scale that would rage if Trump sought another presidential nomination. But another candidate plausibly pledged to the enactment of the Trump program and supported by Trump but not stigmatized by him, could lead the desperately needed national political purgation.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 23:30

• The Most And Least Reliable Cars In America
  The Most And Least Reliable Cars In America

  Toyota, Lexus and BMW are the most reliable manufacturers of new cars according to the annual survey of U.S. nonprofit Consumer Reports. Compiled by assessing issues with over 300,000 vehicles in 17 trouble spots over the past 12 months according to participant feedback, the index saw major movement compared to 2020.

  As Statista’s Florian Zandt shows in the chart below, two legacy brands, in particular, have moved up and down the ladder significantly…

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  While Toyota and Lexus traded places year-over-year, German manufacturer BMW climbed 10 spots and won the bronze medal in terms of reliability. Dropping 10 ranks, on the other hand, is Chevrolet, which only scored 40 out of 100 possible index points across all its models.

  Notably, seven of the 10 highest-rated brands are Japanese.

  The most valuable car company in the world, Tesla, which came in second-to-last in 2020, managed to climb four ranks. According to Reuters coverage of the report, the EV manufacturer still faces problems concerning “body hardware, steering/suspension, paint and trim, and climate system on its models.”

  Jeep and Volkswagen dropped even further compared to 2020.

  Coming in last is Mercedes-Benz, earning a reliability score of 26 out of 100.

  

  Consumer Reports’ annual study analyzes consumer feedback for car manufacturers with more than two models and includes only the brands with enough data. By aggregating statistically significant weak points of popular car brands in the new car market, the report offers valuable insight into the market in the United States. It is considered vital information for every branch of the domestic automobile industry.

  In case you were wondering, Consumer Reports notes that this year we have insufficient data to rank Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Infiniti, Jaguar, Land Rover, Maserati, Mini, Mitsubishi, Polestar, Porsche, and Rivian.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 23:00

• Escobar: Goodbye G20, Hello BRICS+
  Escobar: Goodbye G20, Hello BRICS+

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

  The increasingly irrelevant G20 Summit concluded with sure signs that BRICS+ will be the way forward for Global South cooperation…

  

  The redeeming quality of a tense G20 held in Bali – otherwise managed by laudable Indonesian graciousness – was to sharply define which way the geopolitical winds are blowing.

  That was encapsulated in the Summit’s two highlights: the much anticipated China-US presidential meeting – representing the most important bilateral relationship of the 21st century – and the final G20 statement.

  The 3-hour, 30-minute-long face-to-face meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and his US counterpart Joe Biden – requested by the White House – took place at the Chinese delegation’s residence in Bali, and not at the G20 venue at the luxury Apurva Kempinski in Nusa Dua.

  The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs concisely outlined what really mattered. Specifically, Xi told Biden that Taiwan independence is simply out of the question. Xi also expressed hope that NATO, the EU, and the US will engage in “comprehensive dialogue” with Russia. Instead of confrontation, the Chinese president chose to highlight the layers of common interest and cooperation.

  Biden, according to the Chinese, made several points. The US does not seek a New Cold War; does not support “Taiwan independence;” does not support “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan”; does not seek “decoupling” from China; and does not want to contain Beijing.

  However, the recent record shows Xi has few reasons to take Biden at face value.

  The final G20 statement was an even fuzzier matter: the result of arduous compromise.

  As much as the G20 is self-described as “the premier forum for global economic cooperation,” engaged to “address the world’s major economic challenges,” the G7 inside the G20 in Bali had the summit de facto hijacked by war. “War” gets almost double the number of mentions in the statement compared to “food” after all.

  The collective west, including the Japanese vassal state, was bent on including the war in Ukraine and its “economic impacts” – especially the food and energy crisis – in the statement. Yet without offering even a shade of context, related to NATO expansion. What mattered was to blame Russia – for everything.

  The Global South effect

  It was up to this year’s G20 host Indonesia – and the next host, India – to exercise trademark Asian politeness and consensus building. Jakarta and New Delhi worked extremely hard to find wording that would be acceptable to both Moscow and Beijing. Call it the Global South effect.

  Still, China wanted changes in the wording. This was opposed by western states, while Russia did not review the last-minute wording because Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had already departed.

  On point 3 out of 52, the statement “expresses its deepest regret over the aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and demands the complete and unconditional withdrawal of armed forces from the territory of Ukraine.”

  “Russian aggression” is the standard NATO mantra – not shared by virtually the whole Global South.

  The statement draws a direct correlation between the war and a non-contextualized “aggravation of pressing problems in the global economy – slowing economic growth, rising inflation, disruption of supply chains, worsening energy, and food security, increased risks to financial stability.”

  As for this passage, it could not be more self-evident: “The use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible. The peaceful resolution of conflicts, efforts to address crises, as well as diplomacy and dialogue, are vital. Today’s era must not be of war.”

  This is ironic given that NATO and its public relations department, the EU, “represented” by the unelected eurocrats of the European Commission, don’t do “diplomacy and dialogue.”

  Fixated with war

  Instead the US, which controls NATO, has been weaponizing Ukraine, since March, by a whopping $91.3 billion, including the latest presidential request, this month, of $37.7 billion. That happens to be 33 percent more than Russia’s total (italics mine) military spending for 2022.

  Extra evidence of the Bali Summit being hijacked by “war” was provided by the emergency meeting, called by the US, to debate what ended up being a Ukrainian S-300 missile falling on a Polish farm, and not the start of WWIII like some tabloids hysterically suggested.

  Tellingly, there was absolutely no one from the Global South in the meeting – the sole Asian nation being the Japanese vassal, part of the G7.

  Compounding the picture, we had the sinister Davos master Klaus Schwab once again impersonating a Bond villain at the B20 business forum, selling his Great Reset agenda of “rebuilding the world” through pandemics, famines, climate change, cyber attacks, and – of course – wars.

  As if this was not ominous enough, Davos and its World Economic Forum are now ordering Africa – completely excluded from the G20 – to pay $2.8 trillion to “meet its obligations” under the Paris Agreement to minimize greenhouse gas emissions.

  The demise of the G20 as we know it

  The serious fracture between Global North and Global South, so evident in Bali, had already been suggested in Phnom Penh, as Cambodia hosted the East Asia Summit this past weekend.

  The 10 members of ASEAN had made it very clear they remain unwilling to follow the US and the G7 in their collective demonization of Russia and in many aspects China.

  The Southeast Asians are also not exactly excited by the US-concocted IPEF (Indo-Pacific Economic Framework), which will be irrelevant in terms of slowing down China’s extensive trade and connectivity across Southeast Asia.

  And it gets worse. The self-described “leader of the free world” is shunning the extremely important APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit in Bangkok at the end of this week.

  For very sensitive and sophisticated Asian cultures, this is seen as an affront. APEC, established way back in 1990s to promote trade across the Pacific Rim, is about serious Asia-Pacific business, not Americanized “Indo-Pacific” militarization.

  The snub follows Biden’s latest blunder when he erroneously addressed Cambodia’s Hun Sen as “prime minister of Colombia” at the summit in Phnom Penh.

  Lining up to join BRICS

  It is safe to say that the G20 may have plunged into an irretrievable path toward irrelevancy. Even before the current Southeast Asian summit wave – in Phnom Penh, Bali and Bangkok – Lavrov had already signaled what comes next when he noted that “over a dozen countries” have applied to join BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa).

  Iran, Argentina, and Algeria have formally applied: Iran, alongside Russia, India, and China, is already part of the Eurasian Quad that really matters.

  Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Afghanistan are extremely interested in becoming members. Indonesia just applied, in Bali. And then there’s the next wave: Kazakhstan, UAE, Thailand (possibly applying this weekend in Bangkok), Nigeria, Senegal, and Nicaragua.

  It’s crucial to note that all of the above sent their Finance Ministers to a BRICS Expansion dialogue in May. A short but serious appraisal of the candidates reveals an astonishing unity in diversity.

  Lavrov himself noted that it will take time for the current five BRICS to analyze the immense geopolitical and geoeconomic implications of expanding to the point of virtually reaching the size of the G20 – and without the collective west.

  What unites the candidates above all is the possession of massive natural resources: oil and gas, precious metals, rare earths, rare minerals, coal, solar power, timber, agricultural land, fisheries, and fresh water. That’s the imperative when it comes to designing a new resource-based reserve currency to bypass the US dollar.

  Let’s assume that it may take up to 2025 to have this new BRICS+ configuration up and running. That would represent roughly 45 percent of confirmed global oil reserves and over 60 percent of confirmed global gas reserves (and that will balloon if gas republic Turkmenistan later joins the group).

  The combined GDP – in today’s figures – would be roughly $29.35 trillion; much larger than the US ($23 trillion) and at least double the EU ($14.5 trillion, and falling).

  As it stands, BRICS account for 40 percent of the global population and 25 percent of GDP. BRICS+ would congregate 4.257 billion people: over 50 percent of the total global population as it stands.

  BRI embraces BRICS+

  BRICS+ will be striving towards interconnection with a maze of institutions: the most important are the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), itself featuring a list of players itching to become full members; strategic OPEC+, de facto led by Russia and Saudi Arabia; and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China’s overarching trade and foreign policy framework for the 21st century. It is worth pointing out that early all crucial Asian players have joined the BRI.

  Then there are the close links of BRICS with a plethora of regional trade blocs: ASEAN, Mercosur, GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), Arab Trade Zone, African Continental Free Trade Area, ALBA, SAARC, and last but not least the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the largest trade deal on the planet, which includes a majority of BRI partners.

  BRICS+ and BRI is a match everywhere you look at it – from West Asia and Central Asia to the Southeast Asians (especially Indonesia and Thailand). The multiplier effect will be key – as BRI members will be inevitably attracting more candidates for BRICS+.

  This will inevitably lead to a second wave of BRICS+ hopefuls including, most certainly, Azerbaijan, Mongolia, three more Central Asians (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and gas republic Turkmenistan), Pakistan, Vietnam, and Sri Lanka, and in Latin America, a hefty contingent featuring Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Peru, Uruguay, Bolivia, and Venezuela.

  Meanwhile, the role of the BRICS’s New Development Bank (NDB) as well as the China-led Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) will be enhanced – coordinating infrastructure loans across the spectrum, as BRICS+ will be increasingly shunning dictates imposed by the US-dominated IMF and the World Bank.

  All of the above barely sketches the width and depth of the geopolitical and geoeconomic realignments further on down the road – affecting every nook and cranny of global trade and supply chain networks. The G7’s obsession in isolating and/or containing the top Eurasian players is turning on itself in the framework of the G20. In the end, it’s the G7 that may be isolated by the BRICS+ irresistible force.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 22:30

• Democrat Rep. Claims Slavery Reparations Could Have Saved Black Americans From COVID
  Democrat Rep. Claims Slavery Reparations Could Have Saved Black Americans From COVID

  Leftists are now scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to arguments in favor of reparations for slavery.  This week, Democrat House Representative Sheila Jackson Lee from the 18th Congressional District surrounding Houston, Texas (one of the only blue districts in the entire state), “demanded” that reparations be made. 

  Her argument?  Lee presents the usual debunked social justice narratives claiming that the generations of today are somehow responsible for and benefit from the trespasses of a minority of slave owners who lived centuries ago (Only 1.4% of the population of the US were slave owners in 1860 right before the Civil War according to stats derived from the Census Bureau – This is a number the media continually claims is “not a proper metric,” and yet it is a mathematical fact.  Even if one includes the entire extended family of each slave owner in the metric as beneficiaries, the number is still only 7.4% of the population).   

  Lee, who has a noted habit of making some of the dumbest comments of any congressional representative, also insists that black Americans would have had a lesser transmission rate and death rate from covid if they had been paid reparations in advance:

  Lee does not cite the specific Harvard study she mentions in her speech that supposedly supports her assertion, but with social justice politics invading scientific inquiry the past few years, it is highly likely that said study is biased and holds no basis in fact.  One could say that ANY person might get better medical treatment if they had more money, but that is the extent of the argument and it has nothing to do with race or reparations or covid for that matter. 

  As with most things, equity is a fantasy because nature does not operate on fairness.  Covid is not fair, just as life is not fair.  The reparations game has grown tiresome, most of all because every race, every culture and every religion has faced tyranny and slavery in the past.  There are no exceptions.  Trying to maintain a running tally of who wronged who over thousands of years is impossible and pointless. 

  The political left prides itself on being “progressive” to the point that they seek to tear down the past and not let history or heritage determine the future.  Yet, they continue to cling like parasites to their own incomplete version of the history of slavery as a means to get free handouts for many years to come.  This is not progressive, this is regressive and holds our society back from true racial equality in which everyone’s future is decided by their effort and their merit, not the color of their skin.     

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 22:00

• FTX Post Mortem Part 1 Of 3: WTF Really Happened?
  FTX Post Mortem Part 1 Of 3: WTF Really Happened?

  Authored by Scott Hill via BombThrower.com,

  The dust hasn’t settled, but the smoke is beginning to clear, somewhat… Here’s WTF just happened, and what happens next…

  

  On November 2nd Coindesk published a leaked balance sheet from FTX affiliated market maker Alameda Research.

  Ten days later the third largest Crypto exchange in the world was bankrupt and its founder was under international investigation for fraud.

  In this article I’ll go through how Crypto giant FTX fell apart. There is a lot of backstory to this situation which I’ll cover in a following article, discussing the beginnings of Alameda research and the story of how a sketchy hedge fund turned into a major exchange.

  As you’ve no doubt heard repeatedly this week, self custody of your Crypto is the safest approach until we know who is insolvent and the extent of the contagion. If you’re not confident with self custody, Coinbase and Kraken seem to be the safest Crypto exchanges, but that is still a counterparty risk that I’m not willing to take personally in these market conditions.

  The Balance Sheet Leak

  The exclusive scoop from Coindesk looked bad for Alameda Research. The firm, which performed market making on FTX as well as taking directional bets and venture capital investments, seemed insolvent on a realized value basis.

  Their balance showed $14.6 billion in assets held against $8 billion in liabilities. On paper solvent on a mark-to-market basis, but digging in there was no way that mark was reasonable.

  The most egregious example was $5.82 billion worth of FTT tokens on the asset side, around a third locked and the rest unlocked and available to trade. FTT is a token created by FTX, a sort of pseudo-equity token which represented some share of the exchange revenues. Kind of.

  FTX had been doing periodic buybacks of the token which were supposed to represent a distribution of exchange revenues to holders. Holding the token also entitled traders to a discount on trading fees. The token was at the time worth around $26. At its peak it was worth around $80.

  The main thing that FTT was used for though, was pledging as collateral by FTX and Alameda. 

  You read that right, a token which the exchange invented a little over 3 years ago was used as collateral for loans. We know for sure that it was acceptable collateral in various Solana DeFi protocols, which FTX had a significant amount of influence over; but reports are also surfacing that it may have been used to purchase real estate in the Bahamas and quite possibly with various institutional Crypto lending like Genesis which is now facing major problems.

  The problem with FTT

  There’s nothing inherently wrong with using Crypto tokens as collateral if there is a robust and deep market pricing them. If the loan goes bad, lenders can seize the collateral and sell it off, covering some of their loss.

  FTT didn’t have a deep and robust market.

  

  The “flywheel” scheme – via Dirty Bubble Media

  There was barely any volume. There was barely any liquidity. If a lender had to sell a large volume in a hurry there weren’t any buyers ready to step in.

  While Alameda was claiming to have $5.82 billion of its balance sheet held in FTT tokens, the entire available market cap was less than $4 billion.

  Read that again, Alameda’s balance sheet held more than the entire market cap of FTT. 

  So this wasn’t a situation where a lender might make a loss on selling the collateral, this was a situation where there were potentially billions in loans floating around in the Crypto ecosystem with essentially no collateral that could be liquidated without detonating the market.

  Just to top it off, some of this FTT was likely pledged to multiple lenders.

  Industry Reaction

  The initial reaction was general indifference. Alameda looked like it was playing with fire and had gone all in on the exchange token for its sister company FTX alongside various other FTX supported coins like Solana and Serum. It was an open secret in the industry that Alameda and FTX were more intertwined than they claimed, but if push came to shove it was assumed that Alameda would be allowed to fail and FTX would continue being the highly profitable exchange that everyone assumed it was.

  FTX was highly profitable, right?

  There were a few that were calling the bluff, but the main gripes were conflict of interest within FTX related companies and unsavory business practices by FTX, trading against customer positions and liquidating accounts improperly. The usual bucket shop tricks. No one seemed to be expecting a total insolvency across the FTX group of companies.

  But still something didn’t feel right. Caroline Ellison, the newly appointed CEO of Alameda Research tried to calm fears on Twitter, claiming that the leaked balance sheet was only a partial balance sheet, there were another $10 billion in assets elsewhere within the corporate structure, and they’ve paid down most of their loans.

  It was a strange and deeply unsettling response, shrugging the issue off as if the industry should just take her at her word.

  Enter the CZ Dragon

  Even CZ, the CEO of rival exchange Binance, didn’t seem to be suggesting that FTX was in trouble. Late on Sunday November 6 CZ announced that he would be liquidating the FTT held by Binance.

  All $500 million of it.

  Binance had been the sole investor in the seed round for FTX.  In 2021 they were bought out for $2.1 billion in cash and FTT tokens. This alone wasn’t enough to push markets into panic. CZ said he would do this over a number of months, carefully and slowly in an attempt to “minimize the market impact”. In a follow up tweet, CZ said that he was doing “post-exit risk management, learning from Luna”

  Everyone in Crypto knew what he meant by “learning from Luna”

  In May Luna detonated, dropping to zero. The protocol is now seen as a deeply flawed project in the best possible light and a blatant ponzi scheme in the more realistic assessment.

  Did CZ, the most powerful man in Crypto just call FTX a ponzi scheme?

  Panic

  Crypto industry figures were in disbelief. Surely FTX, the darling of the industry, was a highly profitable, solvent and legitimate business. But the reaction was off and deeply troubling. The CEO of Alameda Research quickly asked CZ if she could buy all of the FTT tokens off-market at a price of $22.

  The market smelled blood.

  Over the course of the next few hours FTT was aggressively shorted, Caroline had put a floor under it at $22 and traders were going to bleed Alameda dry defending that mark. Why did $22 matter? It’s only conjecture, but it seems likely that below $22 Alameda would be liquidated by its lenders and a cascade of FTT tokens would need to be sold into a market unwilling to buy them, flattening the firm.

  But traders only thought they were going after Alameda, the predatory market maker.

   In hindsight it’s obvious, you shouldn’t short an exchange token to death on the exchange that issued it, but FTX was the main venue for the fight for $22. A huge amount of volume flowed through the order books and everyone was looking forward to getting paid as the token dropped, first to $18 and later to $6.

  While the traders were battling it out, regular users were getting out.

  FTX experienced massive outflows and on-chain analysis showed some deeply troubling signs. Alameda was pulling liquidity from everywhere. Every dollar that was deployed in DeFi got pulled. Weird tokens got dumped. But the liquidity wasn’t going into Alameda’s wallet, it was going into FTX wallets to pay customers.

  Surely FTX wasn’t funding customer withdrawals from Alameda’s DeFi degen positions?

  FTX was supposed to be a full reserve exchange. As an even higher bar, the terms of depositing with FTX were that customers retained title to their assets. Assets were held on trust, they weren’t supposed to be lent out or touched except as directed by the customer.

  SBF concedes

  On Sunday afternoon, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the CEO of FTX said that the problems with the Alameda balance sheet were just “unfounded rumors”. He explained that FTX had processed billions of dollars in withdrawals and that they would continue to do so. He claimed that they were hitting node capacity, something that I’ve never heard of, and needed to slow down withdrawals.

  By Sunday night, withdrawals of some assets had stopped entirely, but there was no announcement from FTX. Radio silence from the team.

  We now know that during this period SBF was frantically going to investors to do an emergency fundraise of between $6-10 billion dollars. The terms which later leaked were insane. It was obvious that no lawyer had reviewed these documents.

  They seemed to be written by a child, imitating a businessman, who was in way over his head.

  Industry insiders at the time thought that FTX had likely lost some amount of user funds, would need to take a loan to cover them and could move on with rebuilding trust. We were shocked to wake up on Tuesday to the news that Binance had made an offer to buy out FTX entirely, subject to due diligence. This isn’t what a rescue package for a competently run business looks like.

  This was a fire sale of a dumpster fire.

  

  The previous day SBF had claimed his exchange was fully solvent, just having minor liquidity issues. The next day he was handing the keys to their main rival. Now that balance sheets have been leaked for FTX we know what Binance would have seen as soon as they started their diligence, a balance sheet crammed with dodgy tokens and full of holes, unaudited and put together in excel with no real supporting evidence.

  The rumored sale price was one dollar.

  CZ quickly walked away from the deal, citing misuse of customer funds and regulatory concerns; leaving SBF to fix his own mess. With the exchange still operational, but withdrawals closed, SBF posted yet another long thread trying to talk his way out of the problem, claiming to be trying to set everything straight and get emergency funding. While he had not yet admitted that it was all over, he did make a bizarre reference to CZ “well played; you won”

  As we came to learn later, for this sociopath that’s all it was, just a game to be won or lost.

  The Insanity Begins

  The rejection of the deal from Binance was the first mention of misuse of customer funds. Until then there was speculation that there was a minor balance sheet hole, remember, no one knew at that time that SBF had been seeking $6-10 billion in emergency funding. The next day the news started pouring in.

  Reuters reported that there was a secret back door in the accounting at FTX which allowed customer funds to be moved around without alerting anyone. It also claimed that $10 billion dollars worth of customer funds had been secretly moved to Alameda.

  SBF remained silent, but elsewhere there was chaos. Alameda funds were moving around frantically on chain, placing gigantic bets and actively trading.

  Was SBF trying to trade out of it?

  Tether put a stop to this later in the day, freezing Alameda’s funds on the request of law enforcement.

  On the exchange the chaos was even worse. Justin Sun the founder of Tron had shown up to offer to redeem Tron tokens trapped on FTX. Prices spiked as customers flocked to get cents on the dollar via this exit ramp. There was talk of taking complicated cross-platform trades to make a synthetic exit ramp.

  The Bahamas Loophole

  As the insanity deepened, FTX posted on Twitter that they were processing a small amount of withdrawals to customers in the Bahamas as requested by local authorities. A week later we found out this was a lie, there was no request, but even at the time it seemed likely to be a way for insiders to exit their funds before the inevitable bankruptcy.

  Suddenly, traders with stuck funds were desperately trying to obtain a fraudulent Bahamian passport and complete identity checks in the Bahamas. Some even managed to do it apparently and successfully withdrew funds. Black market prices on passports spiked and a secondary market for trapped funds emerged, with accounts trading for 15 cents on the dollar.

  NFTs were being traded for entire balances in order to move the funds to an account which could still withdraw.

  On the actual exchange things were just as chaotic. Traders with trapped funds were treating their accounts like paper money, trading nonsense on high leverage and dislocating markets. FTX was removed from pricing feeds to restore order elsewhere.

  This was the first time in the whole saga that it became clear, it was all over for FTX.

  FTX US halts withdrawals

  This entire time the story had been that FTX US was a separate entity. Their funds were firewalled off from FTX international. The exchange remained open for withdrawals and appeared to be functioning properly.

  This relative calm on the US side of the company instilled some faith. Surely, despite the havoc going on in the Bahamas, the US exchange was well regulated. Surely, the books were audited and no client funds could go missing in the US.

  On Thursday afternoon, FTX US halted withdrawals.

  Bankruptcy and the Hack

  On Friday morning SBF resurfaced and announced that FTX would be put into bankruptcy. The motion was filed in the US and included FTX US. It would later be revealed that SBF had stepped down as CEO and John J Ray III, a lawyer famous for taking over Enron post-collapse, would be similarly guiding FTX through bankruptcy. Everyone breathed a sigh of relief, it was finally done.

  But the fun and games weren’t over

  Shortly after the bankruptcy was announced funds started moving on-chain. A lot of funds. Over $600 million left FTX affiliated wallets, moving to fresh wallets. The speculation was that there was a hack, perhaps by an insider looking to get the last of what they could out of FTX.

  It quickly became clear that there were two teams working. One appeared to have simply moved worthless tokens into storage, a plausible move by a “white hat” or good guy team seeking to preserve user funds from a compromised system.

  The other team, the “black hat” team, took the vast majority of the $600 million and moved it all into Ethereum DeFi, trading other coins into Ethereum tokens and consolidating them all together. This consolidation took place across multiple blockchains and traded with reckless abandoning, losing gigantic sums on slippage along the way.

  Once the dust had settled, the hacker was one of the largest individual holders of Ethereum.

  We don’t quite have the full story on what happened here yet. The Bahamian authorities claim that they seized the assets, with many assuming that they are referring to the hacked funds. It seems far more likely that they are referring to the “white hat” funds only, as the “black hat” funds demonstrated much more sophistication in blockchain use that could be expected of a regulator.

  The funds have stopped moving for now. Sitting idle with more that 241,000 ETH, a little less than $300 million worth. No one really knows what will happen with these funds.

  Where are we now?

  After a week of complete mayhem as the exchange fell apart and another week for the adults to take over and begin the clean up we have two competing bankruptcy procedures. One taking place in the US, overseen by the lawyer who cleaned up after Enron collapsed. The other taking place in the Bahamas, overseen by two accountants from PriceWaterhouseCoopers and a senior local lawyer who has a decades long history of high level appearances in the Supreme Court of the island nation.

  It’s not entirely clear which action will take precedence, but they are opposed to each other. The US bankruptcy is seeking that all the companies be wound up together and users are compensated with whatever assets are left across the entire conglomerate.

  It turns out, FTX was made up of over 100 individual companies.

  The organization chart looks like the web a drunk spider would spin. It’s not the sort of corporate structure that would be constructed for anything other than hiding funds and playing shell games.

  The Bahamian action appears to be seeking to have the main FTX company dealt with separately, screwing US customers out of funds and leaving the bankruptcy in the hands of the Bahamian government which seems to have taken some pretty significant donations from FTX in the past.

  In filings made late this week FTX was referred to as a “disorganized mess”. There was a lack of proper accounting. The auditing was done by “the first accounting firm in the metaverse” that doesn’t appear to have a physical address. There appears to have been loans made to company executives in the hundreds of millions of dollars range. There was no corporate board. There was no human resources department. There was no accounting department. There was no real tracking of customer funds.

  The lawyer handling the FTX bankruptcy also conducted the Enron bankruptcy. He says this is far worse.

  Enough for now

  This is just the walkthrough of how everything fell apart in front of our eyes. The corruption, the lies and the scandal have all been uncovered in the wake of this collapse. In another article coming shortly I will cover the rise and fall of FTX and Alameda Research, delving into the backstory that allowed this fraud to grow under the cover of one of the most well regarded companies in the industry.

  *  *  *

  Today’s post is from contributing analyst Scott Hill. To receive further updates of this series and our overall investment thesis for digital assets (even in this climate), subscribe to the Bombthrower mailing list. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 21:30

• NASA Prepares Spacecraft For First "Powered Flyby Burn" Around Moon
  NASA Prepares Spacecraft For First “Powered Flyby Burn” Around Moon

  NASA’s Artemis 1 Orion capsule is three days into the lunar mission. The uncrewed spacecraft cruises at 1,000 mph and is 215,000 miles from Earth. It’s about 95,000 miles from the Moon and will make a very close powered flyby burn on Monday. 

  

  “Orion’s entry into the lunar sphere of influence will make the Moon, instead of Earth, the main gravitational force acting on the spacecraft,” the space agency wrote in a press release. 

  NASA continued: “Flight controllers will conduct an outbound powered flyby burn to harness the force from the Moon’s gravity, accelerate the spacecraft, and direct it toward a distant retrograde orbit beyond the Moon. During the outbound powered flyby, Orion will make its closest approach – approximately 80 miles – above to the lunar surface.” 

  

  Four days later, the second powered flyby burn will “insert Orion into distant retrograde orbit, where it will remain for about a week to test spacecraft systems,” NASA said. 

  Additional flyby details will be provided on Saturday following a meeting with NASA officials. 

  “Right now, we’re looking good, and we’re ready to go continue executing,” Artemis 1 Flight Director Jeff Radigan said during Friday’s briefing.

  NASA has laid out a detailed map of the Artemis 1 mission.

  

  Less than 12 hours into the flight after Orion took off from Launch Pad 39B at the space agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on Wednesday, the first view of Earth from the spacecraft was released to the public. 

  As @NASA_Orion begins the #Artemis I mission to the Moon, the spacecraft captured these stunning views of our home planet. pic.twitter.com/Pzk3PDt7sd

  — NASA Artemis (@NASAArtemis) November 16, 2022

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

  If Artemis 1 mission is successful, which would end with the Orion capsule splashing down in the Pacific Ocean on Dec. 11, then Artemis 2 and 3 flights will follow. Artemis 2 is scheduled sometime in 2024. That mission will propel four astronauts around the Moon. Then in 2025, Artemis 3 could include a return of humans back to the lunar surface. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 21:00

• Watch: FBI Director, DHS Secretary Grilled On Tech Censorship Collusion, Targeting Everyday Americans As Terrorists
  Watch: FBI Director, DHS Secretary Grilled On Tech Censorship Collusion, Targeting Everyday Americans As Terrorists

  Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News (emphasis ours),

  Republican Senators Joh Hawley and Rand Paul took the heads of the FBI and the Department Of Homeland Security to task Thursday, with Hawley at one point directly telling Christopher Wray that he should have been fired a long time ago.

  

  Hawley also targeted Wray for previously leaving a committee hearing early so he could go on a vacation.

  “You were at the Senate Judiciary Committee. You remember that I think so. We had to cut that hearing short. We’re supposed to do two rounds of questions. You said you had to be somewhere, so we cut it short. Republicans were not able to ask second round as we had been informed we would,” Hawley noted.

  The Senator continued, “The press reported shortly thereafter that the reason that the hearing had to be cut short is because you were flying on a Gulfstream jet for a personal vacation in the Adirondack. Please tell me that’s not accurate.”

  It was accurate.

  “You left an oversight hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee required by statute so you could vacation with your family,” Hawley declared, adding “I find that absolutely unbelievable and, frankly, indefensible.”

  Senator @HawleyMO roasts FBI Director Christopher Wray for leaving a statutorily-required committee hearing to go on vacation.

  Hawley: “So you were going on vacation?”

  Wray: “I was, yes” pic.twitter.com/RZLlvdoKwN

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) November 17, 2022

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

  The Senator then provided examples of how the FBI has been overtly politicised and told Wray that he doesn’t believe he is up to the job of FBI Director anymore.

  Hawley asserted “frankly, I think you should have been gone a long time ago. And given your behavior recently, I think it only makes it more clear.”

  Hawley then twisted the knife by asking “Are there any travel plans today that we should be aware of, that you have? We’re supposed to have a second round. Will you be here for that?”

  Sen. Josh Hawley leaves FBI Director Chris Wray in PANICKED silence after EXPOSING woke FBI for 2 straight minutes pic.twitter.com/8BJaOfzNCE

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 17, 2022

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

  Elsewhere during the hearing, Hawley grilled Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas regarding the Biden administration reportedly flagging social media posts it doesn’t like as “disinformation” and “pressuring Big Tech to treat American citizens as if they’re threats to Homeland.”

  “A federal judge in a federal lawsuit [has said] you are supervising the nerve center of federally directed censorship… Is that constitutional?” Hawley asked.

  Mayorkas repeatedly claimed that the allegation are false. 

  “You are leveraging private companies to carry out censorship on your behalf. It is dystopian, but worse than that, it is unconstitutional,” Hawley asserted.

  “It is also false,” Mayorkas sardonically replied.

  Senator @HawleyMO‘s Full Grilling Of DHS Secretary Mayorkas About The “Disinformation Governance Board” And The Biden Administration’s Coordination With Big Tech Companies To Censor Americans

  “You have turned your agency into a censorship machine.” pic.twitter.com/VpvFoHlv9c

  — The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) November 17, 2022

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

  Rand Paul also grilled Wray about reported collusion between the FBI and Facebook, noting “You may think it’s just jolly well to get all this stuff without a warrant that people volunteer to you, but many of us are alarmed that you’re getting this information that are private communications between people, because it is against the law.”

  “You work for the government, you should admit to us whether or not you have a program going after our speech,” Paul asserted.

  As we highlighted recently, Paul has vowed to introduce legislation that would make it illegal for government agencies and private big tech to secretly collude on such enterprises, noting that “it goes against everything that we all believe in as far as the foundation of our constitutional republic.”

  *  *  *

  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. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 20:30

• Trump To Be Reinstated On Twitter
  Trump To Be Reinstated On Twitter

  Update (2010ET): After 15 million people voted, Elon Musk announced on Saturday that former President Donald Trump will be reinstated on Twitter.

  The people have spoken.

  Trump will be reinstated.

  Vox Populi, Vox Dei. https://t.co/jmkhFuyfkv

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2022

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

  The vote came in at 52% for reinstatement, 48% against.

  

  And here it is:

  BOOOOOOOM https://t.co/pYjfwtVopR

  — NEWS MAKER (@NEWS_MAKER) November 20, 2022

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

  Trump, meanwhile, says he won’t be back. When asked about the poll, Trump said: “He’s a character. I tend to like characters. But I have something called Truth Social. It’s doing phenomenally well. Engagement is much better. I’ll be staying there. I don’t see it. I don’t see any reason for it.”

  Trump was asked today about Elon Musk’s poll to reinstate him: “He’s a character. I tend to like characters. But I have something called Truth Social. It’s doing phenomenally well. Engagement is much better. I’ll be staying there. I don’t see it. I don’t see any reason for it.” pic.twitter.com/TuZDi7aCB3

  — Ron Filipkowski 🇺🇦 (@RonFilipkowski) November 19, 2022

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

  *  *  *

  ‘Free speech absolutist’ Elon Musk has decided to ask the public whether Donald Trump – a former president and ostensibly Joe Biden’s 2024 GOP challenger – should be allowed to speak freely on Twitter, instead of, you know, just restoring Trump’s account on day one.

  

  The former president was banned from the platform because a group of fed-infiltrated Trump supporters were allowed into the Capitol and wreaked havoc on January 6, 2021, after Trump gave a speech in which he said “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

  Reinstate former President Trump

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 19, 2022

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

  Musk’s poll on whether he should reinstate former President Donald Trump to the platform has received more than 11 million votes in less than 24 hours.

  

  While Trump took a large early lead, the vote tightened over Saturday morning, and currently stands at 52.3% ‘yes’ to 47.7% ‘no.’

  Dems are going to need to stop the count so they can haul in some mail-in votes pic.twitter.com/MFP9vqid8w

  — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) November 19, 2022

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

  “Vox Populi, Vox Dei,” Musk tweeted in a follow-up, which means “the voice of the people is the voice of God.’

  Vox Populi, Vox Dei

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsThe poll is set to run for 24 hours.

  Musk’s departure from ‘free speech absolutism’ is undoubtedly due to the realities of the advertising market – with major companies having already suspended their campaigns on Twitter over Musk himself taking over the platform. According to Insider, advertising made up 89% of Twitter’s revenues in 2021.

  In response, Musk assured advertisers in late October that Twitter “will not become a free-for-all hellscape.”

  While Alex Jones won’t be allowed back on the platform, the Babylon Bee is back after their ban over a transgender joke, as is Jorrdan Peterson and Kathy Griffin.

  Maybe Elon should do an Alex Jones poll next? The frogs did, after all, turn out to be gay.

  

  Trump, meanwhile, isn’t going anywhere.

  I’m sure he’s not watching the poll, or noticing the over 14,000,000 votes to his 170 Truths. 😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/ybd3D4ORDK

  — Harrison Painter (@HarrisonPainter) November 19, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 20:08

• NBC: Body Cam Footage Shows Paul Pelosi Opened Door For Police Before Alleged Attack
  NBC: Body Cam Footage Shows Paul Pelosi Opened Door For Police Before Alleged Attack

  The official narrative on the Paul Pelosi attack purported by Democrats and the mainstream media makes zero sense.  You don’t have to be a “conspiracy theorist” to recognize there were multiple contradictory accounts from the Department of Justice vs. local police and even some reports from journalists.

  In fact, NBC suspended one of its own correspondents, Miguel Almaguer, after he reported that on the night of the supposed attack at the Pelosi home in San Francisco that Paul Pelosi actually opened the door when police knocked, seemingly in normal health, and then walked away from the officers to talk to the alleged assailant David Depape, when Depape attacked him.  This report led many to suggest that Pelosi and Depape somehow knew each other. 

  A media firestorm ensued along with denials from the DOJ, which detailed a completely different version of events in which the police officers opened the door themselves and found Pelosi struggling with Depape who had injured him with a hammer.  NBC dropped Almaguer after many called his report “bizarre.” 

  As it turns out, Miguel Almaguer was right.  NBC now reports that police body cam footage has been made available to some media outlets and the footage clearly shows Paul Pelosi opening the door for police in seemingly perfect health.  This contradicts the DOJ report on the attack and suggests a potential cover-up. 

  NBC is forced to retract their earlier assertions that the Paul Pelosi open door event was unfounded.  Why?  Because they have to.  Eventually the police body cam footage will make it out into the public sphere for everyone to see, and NBC is front-running their own false reports.  However, they do suggest that “it doesn’t really matter” who opened the door to the Pelosi home, and that Paul Pelosi’s actions don’t support the “conspiracy theories” surrounding the attack.

  If that is the case, then why would the DOJ lie?  Surely, they have seen the same body cam footage.  If there is no conspiracy, then why is there an attempted coverup?  

  NBC has never had a problem editorializing news stories in the past and presenting biased opinions as evidence, yet suddenly now they pretend as if they have journalistic integrity?  It is incumbent upon journalists to present what they think are the facts to the general public, but they are also required to investigate potential false accounts and false information in order to separate truth from lies.  In the case of the attack on Paul Pelosi, NBC and other outlets clearly do not want to dig deeper. 

  Now that the midterm elections are over it would appear that the “MAGA attacker” story no longer serves any purpose.  The Democrats conjured their own conspiracy theory first – The claim that right-wing “extremists” are a threat to “democracy” and that the Pelosi attack proves it.  There is no evidence to support this claim.  There is, though, evidence to support the theory that Pelosi was familiar with Depape and his behavior indicates familiarity. 

  No person under threat of being beaten with a hammer by a home intruder is going to move closer to the violent stranger instead of running towards the police.  This does not happen, it’s nonsense.

  What is likely to take place as this case develops?  A media blackout on the story, much like we have witnessed with multiple cases in the past few years that make the political left look bad (the Waukesha massacre by BLM suppporter Darrell Brooks comes to mind).  Details will probably emerge which further contradict the official narrative but they will be buried and ignored.  The leftists will continue to label any suspicions as “conspiracy” as they hope and pray the general public completely forgets and moves on to other distractions.   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 20:00

• Gun Sales Skyrocket After Oregon Passes Measure Restricting Gun Rights
  Gun Sales Skyrocket After Oregon Passes Measure Restricting Gun Rights

  Authored by Scottie Barnes via The Epoch Times,

  Gun sales have skyrocketed in Oregon since the narrow passage of a strict gun control measure in last week’s midterm election.

  

  As gun sellers scramble to fill orders before the rule change on Dec. 8, opponents are planning to file suit against what they call the most restrictive gun control measure in the country. Several sheriffs around the state have vowed not to enforce the new legislation.

  With just three weeks until Measure 114 takes effect, background checks to purchase a gun jumped from about 850 per day before the election to 4,000 per day after, according to Oregon State Police.

  The new law, in addition to limiting sales of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, will require buyers to obtain a permit to purchase any firearm. To obtain that permit, the measure requires buyers to complete firearms training in a class that does not yet exist in the state. It also requires law enforcement to create a publicly accessible database of those who apply for or obtain a permit.

  The measure passed with just 50.7 percent approval. The disparity of votes is consistent with Oregon’s extreme urban-rural divide.

  Voters in the seven, mostly urban, predominantly Democrat counties that voted for the measure did so by a nearly 2-1 margin. Voters in the 29, mostly rural counties, rejected the measure by nearly the same ratio.

  Multiple lawsuits will be filed after the law takes effect, Leonard Williamson, a licensed firearms dealer for 20 years who helps advise gun rights groups, told The Epoch Times.

  “Plaintiffs representing the interests of different constituencies—such as gun dealerships and hunters associations—will file,” he said.

  “Ultimately, the court will likely consolidate them under one judge.”

  Lawyers advising the Oregon Firearms Federation, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Oregon Hunters Association, and other gun rights advocates, will seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent the measure from taking effect until a judge can determine if it meets constitutional muster.

  The first draft of a complaint has reportedly been written.

  “We’re still adding plaintiffs to the suit, and we’ll be ready,” according to Alan M. Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, based in Bellevue, Washington.

  Meanwhile, a number of county sheriffs have publicly stated they will not enforce the measure.

  “This is a terrible law for gun owners, crime victims, and public safety,” wrote Linn County Sheriff Michelle Duncan in a Nov. 9 Facebook post. She said her office “is NOT going to be enforcing magazine capacity limits.”

  Duncan called the measure “poorly written” and said she hopes its passage will result in an immediate lawsuit.

  Her office has received calls from people who fear they’ll face criminal charges if they’re pulled over while driving and found with a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, she added.

  “I’m not out there to try to look for their magazines and arrest anybody.”

  Union County Sheriff Cody Bowen wrote on his office social media that the measure is an “infringement on our constitutional rights and will not be enforced.”

  “[It] will only harm law abiding gun owners” and waste time, he said, vowing to “fight to the death” to defend gun owners’ constitutional rights.

  Lincoln County Sheriff Curtis Landers issued a press release promising to enforce the measure only after “it is ruled constitutional by any court challenge.”

  Nathan Sickler and Chris Kaber, sheriffs of Jackson and Klamath counties, have both said Measure 114 is “an unconstitutional restriction on the right to possess firearms.”

  Their statements come despite the Oregon State Sheriffs’ Association statement to officials that it expected its members to uphold any law created by popular vote.

  Retailers are warning customers that gun sales will be cut off immediately unless a lawsuit results in an injunction.

  Sportsman’s Warehouse issued a statement outlining the impact to its Oregon customers.

  “A valid Oregon Firearm Purchase Permit will be required to purchase any firearm,” after Dec. 8, the retailer wrote in an email to customers. “At this time, there are no known law enforcement agencies issuing the Oregon Firearm Purchase Permit.”

  In addition, “state background check delays are possible and may impact your ability to take possession of a firearm before Dec. 8, 2022.”

  To meet demand in the meantime, it is “extending store hours and resupplying rapidly.”

  The National Rifle Association (NRA) issued a statement claiming that the legislation’s ambiguous language fails to safeguard gun owner information by creating a searchable gun owner database.

  Currently, California maintains a database for owners of concealed carry permits, but Measure 114 will place every gun owner on a database, according to the legislation. After the contents of the California database were leaked in June, gun rights advocates argued that such centralized gun databases led to an abuse of power.

  Oregon joins Washington, DC, and 14 states that have enacted similar permit-to-purchase gun laws. Nine states and Washington have adopted laws banning large-capacity ammunition magazines.

  There were more than 130 proposed constitutional amendments on midterm ballots across 37 states in the Nov. 8 elections, but relatively few related to gun rights and gun control.

  The only other measure related to firearms aside from Oregon’s Measure 114 was in Iowa, where 65 percent of voters approved Amendment One, which enshrines gun rights in the state constitution by stating residents’ rights “to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

  Iowa joins Alabama, Louisiana, and Missouri with that language incorporated into their state constitution, which requires that courts use “strict scrutiny,” which makes it more difficult to impose limits on gun possession, ownership, and use while preempting attempts to require more extensive background checks or to ban certain types of firearms.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 19:30

• CBS News Stops Posting On Twitter Out Of "Abundance Of Caution"
  CBS News Stops Posting On Twitter Out Of “Abundance Of Caution”

  Amid reports that Twitter’s mass-layoffs will ‘break’ the platform, allowing ‘free speech types’ to run amok, CBS News has stopped posting on the social media giant out of an “abundance of caution.”

  

  In a Friday announcement during the evening broadcast of “CBS Evening News with Norah O’Donnell,” the network’s national correspondent, Jonathan Gigliotti, said: “In light of the uncertainty around Twitter and out of an abundance of caution, CBS News is pausing its activity on the social media site as it continues to monitor the platform.”

  CBS News confirms it’s no longer posting updates on Twitter pic.twitter.com/HoKjOMsBtS

  — BNO News Live (@BNODesk) November 19, 2022

  As Fox News notes,

  Coverage began with the network reporting on the mass resignations of employees offended by Musk’s “ultimatum” from earlier this week. In his quest to streamline the company, the world’s richest man emailed all employees asking them to commit to an “extremely hardcore” workload or leave the company.

  The “ultimatum,” as many disgruntled folks called it, prompted backlash from onlookers who trashed the company under Musk, some calling it a “hellscape.”

  The ensuing chaos from Musk’s email, as well as the general vitriol generated by him taking over the reins of company, did not sit well with CBS News. 

  And as Adweek notes, the move will affect all CBS-owned properties, including local news outlets.

  In light of the uncertainty around Twitter and out of an abundance of caution, CBS News Bay Area is pausing its activity on the social media site as we continue to monitor the platform.

  — KPIX 5 (@KPIXtv) November 19, 2022

  On Thursday, Twitter was hit with mass layoffs after many employees refused to accept Musk’s new demand, which would have required them to work for long hours at “high intensity.”

  The departure of those employees resulted in speculation that the website would become more unstable and could potentially cease functioning.

  Fortunately, none of that has come to pass, but the uncertainty following Twitter has caused one news organization to take action. -Adweek

  Tens of fans are crestfallen, we’re sure.

  @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/lL14CaHHoF

  — Michael Rufo (@rufo4congress) November 19, 2022

  CBS (allegedly) has 8.8 million followers on Twitter, and almost no engagement on their tweets.

  The evidence suggestions CBS News paid for bots to make their account appear larger than it really is. This is common for all of the legacy media, low engagement. pic.twitter.com/4mfpTbHcm5

  — Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) November 19, 2022

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

  Meanwhile over at Twitter alternative Mastadon;

  WTH is this https://t.co/2QSNlysx25

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 19, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 19:00

• "Lost…In The Emotion Of The Night": Attorney Who Firebombed Police Vehicle Given Just 15 Month Sentence
  “Lost…In The Emotion Of The Night”: Attorney Who Firebombed Police Vehicle Given Just 15 Month Sentence

  Authored by Jonathan Turley via jonathanturley.org,

  We previously discussed the case of two New York attorneys (Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman) who joined in violent protests in New York, including firebombing a police vehicle. The Biden Justice Department later gave the two lawyers an astonishingly generous plea deal that avoided long prison sentences. Now Rahman has been sentenced to 15 months after asking for no jail time for throwing the Molotov cocktail.

  

  Mattis was a member of the Corporate Group at Pryor Cashman when he was arrested. Mattis graduated from New York University School of Law in 2016 and received his bachelor’s degree from Princeton University. He was also previously employed as an associate at Holland & Knight.

  Rahman had just been admitted to the New York bar in June 2019 after graduating from Fordham University School of Law.

  The police also had a picture of Rahman with the explosive. The FBI statement included the following description:

  “Officers pursued the minivan and arrested Rahman and Mattis, who was the vehicle’s driver.  The NYPD recovered several precursor items used to build Molotov Cocktails, including a lighter, a bottle filled with toilet paper and a liquid suspected to be gasoline in the vicinity of the passenger seat and a gasoline tank in the rear of the vehicle.”

  Mattis and Rahman were facing domestic terrorism charges and the possibility of 30 years in jail. The Biden Administration later agreed to a massive reduction of the charges in a plea agreement that would likely result only in a couple years of jail time. What is particularly bizarre is that the plea agreement reduced an earlier plea agreement for a more serious offense. They had agreed to the more serious offense but the Justice Department cut it down further.

  The now-disbarred attorney sought no jail time and told the court that “I completely lost my way in the emotion of the night.”

  U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan praised Rahman for her commitment to fighting social injustices: “You’re a remarkable person who did a terrible thing on one night.” Cogan, however, also criticized her “arrogance” displayed in such conduct. Firebombing seems a tad more than arrogance when you throw Molotov cocktails at police cars.

  Even with the greatly reduced charges, Cogan still elected not to give Rahman the maximum sentence of two years. While Rahman claimed to have been caught up in the moment, her texts and emails established a difficult story. In one message hours before the protest, she told Mattis “I hope they burn everything down. Need to burn all the police stations down… probably all the courts too.”

  Mattis is expected to be sentenced in December.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 18:30

• Sam Bankman-Fried's Law Firm Drops Him As A Client Amid Ongoing Bankruptcy Revelations
  Sam Bankman-Fried’s Law Firm Drops Him As A Client Amid Ongoing Bankruptcy Revelations

  With post-mortem after post-mortem after FTX port-mortem piling up, even as the questions surrounding the world’s biggest crypto fraud and bankruptcy pile up at an even faster pace amid a breathless demand for answers – like where did all that $8 billion really go – on Saturday we learned that as part of the firm’s shambolic bankruptcy process, FTX won’t even disclose its top creditors and has asked the bankruptcy judge to keep the company’s list of creditors (which previously was said to be larger than one million) under confidential seal.

  

  So amid the mounting confusion, on Saturday FTX Trading unveiled that it had started a “strategic review of their global assets to begin to maximize recoverable value for stakeholders“, as part of what promises to be a very lengthy bankruptcy process (which will quickly become a Chapter 7 unless someone reveals where that $8 billion stolen by SBF has been parked), and has hired Perella Weinberg Partners LP to help with the potential sale of any viable units.

  “Based on our review over the past week, we are pleased to learn that many regulated or licensed subsidiaries of FTX, within and outside of the US, have solvent balance sheets, responsible management and valuable franchises,” FTX Group’s new CEO, Enron liquidation veteran John J. Ray III said in a statement on Saturday.

  Among those with the largest identified financial positions are FTX EU Ltd., at $49.4 million in total cash available, and West Realm Shires Services — which encompasses the FTX.US crypto exchange as well as some acquisitions — at $48.1 million, a filing in Delaware on Saturday showed. FTX Ventures, which launched a $2 billion fund in January, had less than $800,000 in available cash, it said.

  In the filing, FTX said that the positions were calculated based on verifiable available books and records for the businesses. More than half of identified bank accounts have yet to have their balances verified and other accounts may exist, given the group’s “historical cash management failures and the deficiency of documentation controls.”

  Separately, the bankrupt FTX companies, known as FTX Debtors, have engaged Perella Weinberg as lead investment bank and started preparing some assets for sale or reorganization, according to the statement.

  Ray further commented, “I have instructed the team at the FTX Debtors to prioritize the preservation of franchise value as best we can in these difficult circumstances. I respectfully ask all of our employees, vendors, customers, regulators and government stakeholders to be patient with us as we put in place the arrangements that corporate governance failures at FTX prevented us from putting in place prior to filing our chapter 11 cases.”

  Also on Saturday, the FTX Debtors filed various motions with the Bankruptcy Court “seeking interim relief from the Court that, if granted, would allow the operation of a new global cash management system and the ordinary course payment critical vendors and vendors at foreign subsidiaries,” it said. The first official bankruptcy court hearing has been scheduled for Nov. 22, at 11:00 a.m. before Judge T. Dorsey at the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, 824 North Market Street, 5th Floor, Courtroom No. 5, Wilmington, Delaware

  Ray, who oversaw the liquidation of Enron Corp., said earlier this week in a sworn declaration that he’d never seen “such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy financial information.” He called the chaos around the collapse “unprecedented.”

  And speaking of unprecedented, just days after FTX’s lawyers accused Bankman-Fried of undermining the bankruptcy case in their First Day Affidavit…

  

  … Paul, Weiss, the law firm hired by SBF, effectively fired him as a client, citing a conflict of interest.

  “We informed Mr. Bankman-Fried several days ago, after the filing of the FTX bankruptcy, that conflicts have arisen that precluded us from representing him” Paul Weiss counsel Martin Flumenbaum said in a statement, although he declined to describe the conflicts.

  While unclear what the catalyst was, starting on Nov. 14, SBF published a series of self-incriminating tweets that sparked a frenzy across Crypto Twitter, which would have made his defense extremely difficult for any law firm. In a conversation with the ultra-liberal outlet Vox – which sold SBF out after writing fawning praise about the prominent Democrat donor for months – and which was published this week, Bankman-Fried blamed FTX’s collapse in part on “messy accounting,” expressed regret at his decision to file for bankruptcy and denigrated U.S. regulators in profane terms. He later said he did not intend for the conversation to be made public.

  The biggest con man since Madoff just admitted that woke is a virtue-signaling game “where we say all the right shibboleths and so everyone likes us.” How stupid does the NYT feel now? pic.twitter.com/L92CmG1hVJ

  — David Sacks (@DavidSacks) November 17, 2022

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

  Flumenbaum is a longtime litigator whose past clients include the junk-bond trader Michael Milken and AIG. He currently represents Christian Larsen, the chairman of the Ripple Labs crypto exchange. However SBF proved to be too much of a liability for someone defending such iconic criminals as Mike Milken. Then again, Paul Weiss quitting is not all that much of a shock amid growing speculation that the increasingly erratic SBF – who was convinced his millions in donations to the Democratic party would render him immune from legal challenges – would be indefensible in court.

  “There’s this old saying that a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client. The reverse is also true. An individual who is the subject of an investigation and tries to defend themselves in the court of public opinion has a fool for a lawyer,” said Justin Danilewitz, a white-collar defense lawyer at law firm Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr.

  According to media report, Bankman-Fried is now represented by Greg Joseph, former president of the American College of Trial Lawyers. Also on his legal team as an advisor is David W. Mills, who teaches criminal law at Stanford Law School, where Bankman-Fried’s parents are both professors.

  Of course, all this legal wrangling may be for nothing: after all, SBF still hasn’t been accused of a crime, and it may just be that with the bribes he paid to prominent Democrats, ultimately helping Biden get elected…

  

  … that the 30-year-old will be able to avoid seeing the inside of a courtroom entirely.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 18:00

• You're Living In A World Wrought By The Federal Reserve. Notice Anything Wrong?
  You’re Living In A World Wrought By The Federal Reserve. Notice Anything Wrong?

  Authored by Lynn Parramore via The Institute for New Economic Thinking,

  In her new book, veteran Wall Street watcher and economist Nomi Prins warns that central bank strategies deployed since the financial crisis are destroying the real economy, worsening inequality, and creating societal chaos.

  

  Ever wonder why it is that for most of the 21st century, no matter who is in the White House, no matter the state of the economy, and regardless of what ordinary people are suffering, money travels inexorably to the top?

  If you find this baffling, you’re not alone. For many, it seems that the further we travel into this acutely challenging century, the political, economic, and social rules we thought we understood increasingly fail to apply.

  Economist, journalist, and former Wall Street exec Nomi Prins is here to explain the inexplicable. Her latest book, Permanent Distortion: How the Financial Markets Abandoned the Real Economy Forever, is a highly readable and clear account of how the financial realm, with its central bank-fueled loose money and mega-wealthy financiers, has split off from the real economy, the place inhabited by regular working people who buy stuff and produce things.

  The upshot: the people’s needs are increasingly ignored in favor of market demands.

  Prins points to the 2008 financial crisis and the Federal Reserve’s response as the pivotal moment in which we jumped on a tiger that we can no longer seem to dismount. What was supposed to be an emergency response to a crisis ended up turning into an unstoppable addiction to cheap money which, Prins argues, initiated a vicious cycle of pumped-up financial markets, destabilizing inequality, a public left worse off, and a political system increasingly unable to make real progress on long-term priorities like climate change. She spoke to the Institute for New Economic Thinking about who is responsible, what the public needs to understand, and why this tiger will not take us anywhere we want to go.

  Lynn Parramore: You’ve written several books about the U.S. economy and Wall Street. Why this new book, focusing on central banks and their influence? Why is this so important to understand now?

  Nomi Prins: Since the financial crisis, one of the themes in my books is money and power. There’s a real thru-line from my 2009 book, It Takes a Pillage, which focuses on the financial crisis, to All the President’s Bankers (2014), where I go back into the history of American bankers and their political influence, on up through Collusion (2018), the global analysis of what happened from the financial crisis through the period before the pandemic.

  That thru-line concerns this external body – the central banks – which can effectively manufacture money, and how this money, just by sheer mass momentum and the players involved, goes disproportionately to financial markets relative to the real economy. This activity, in fact, is detrimental to the relationship between markets and the real economy, and also to the real economy itself.

  I wrote Permanent Distortion because to me, the distortion that money and power have created between markets and the real economy did in fact become permanent. It’s not just something we’re experiencing now, and then can we go back to a more glorious time when it wasn’t like this. It was around July 2020, when we were all locked down and not knowing what was going on with our lives, our personal economies, our health, and our families, when I realized that the Federal Reserve had doubled the size – or even more so — of its book of assets. It had created about $5 trillion worth of money in a very short period of time.

  During that time, the markets went from being very afraid and down to being very, very high. A lot of people said, well, we’re all at home using Zoom, so therefore the market just rebounded by so much. But that was just a small part of it. The bigger part was that money became available at such an immense level and therefore the distortion between where money goes in the financial markets and where it doesn’t go in the real economy became permanent. At that moment I saw that this can happen in any amount, at any time. There’s no restriction, no transparency, no responsibility.

  LP: You make a strong case that high finance has become unhinged from the economy, and you go so far as to say it has become disconnected from capitalism itself. What exactly does that mean?

  NP: When I’m talking about capitalism in that sense, I’m connecting it to the idea of financial markets supposedly being created to aggregate money in order to then funnel it into companies, and therefore into projects, and on into the real economy.

  So the idea, technically, from a capital market perspective, is that borrowing money in order to do something, or selling bonds in order to finance something, or selling shares in order to finance something, used to have a particular relationship to each other. If there was a transparent use for a company that had value to shareholders, they would be willing to effectively invest their money in order for that company to do what it does to grow whatever it’s growing. Part of that use could be profits, part could be wages, part could be cars. The point being that the relationship was more or less (though not always) transparent at a theoretical level.

  But now there is more money being thrown into the markets from an outside source. It’s not money from the actual profits of a company or its long-term strategy, or the productivity of workers, or the creation of long-term things. You end up getting an unmooring between what markets are theoretically there to do in a capitalist society and from a capital-raising standpoint. There’s this other source that comes in and kind of turbo-boosts and distorts all of those relationships.

  LP: You place the roots of this trouble in 2008, a year which, you point out, increased the power of central banks. Yet, Ben Bernanke, the very economist in charge of the Fed at that time, just won the Nobel Prize. As some have pointed out, we are living in the world he created, and many hail him as the guy who prevented the second Great Depression. How did he contribute to the alarming picture you paint of an economic system gone off the rails?

  NP: I thought the Nobel Prize for Bernanke was a bizarre choice, although it made sense if you believed the narrative that attributed to him the power to save the economy. And he also happened to have written a lot of things historically about depressions. But if you actually dig into both what he did and what he wrote to win that Nobel Prize, you find a concerning story. To understand it, you have to go back to before the crisis was apparent to everyone — both during the Great Depression and during the 2008 financial crisis.

  Back before it became apparent that a financial crisis was happening, there was an immense amount of leverage in the banking system over which Bernanke had a responsibility to regulate. There was also an immense amount of assets being created off the back of a very small amount of interest coming in from subprime loans. Those subprime loans themselves had issues, and Bernanke knew it because the banks knew about the interest payments, and their rising delinquencies, and defaults. A small amount of subprime loans were structured to feed into a large amount of other assets by said banks. As this was happening, either he didn’t want to pay attention or he thought looming problems would just go away as many banks did. But Bernanke had information from the banking system in his position at the top of the Fed and certainly through his connection to the New York Fed. He was deeply connected to those banks and their liquidity and rising delinquency and default problems and he just chose to say that everything was effectively fine.

  He did that even before the crisis became apparent. Then, in 2007, when things were absolutely crumbling and even the shares of real estate developers were plummeting, when there was so much information all over the place and reports from the FBI were going into the Fed telling them there were issues, what did Bernanke do? He did nothing.

  So when the crisis did occur, Bernanke ultimately used the tool of quantitative easing, which is basically creating electronic money in return for taking out that debt from the market and putting it on the Fed’s books for safekeeping. He put it there and most of it stayed there. Later it manifested a larger crisis, or a looming crisis, by injecting all that money into the market on the auspices of saving the real economy.

  What actually happened was the markets rose precipitously over all of the ensuing years. There’s one or two years where they wobbled a bit, but, in all the period of time during Bernanke’s chairmanship of the Fed, the real economy stumbled. To me, the narrative that he saved things from being worse is a false one. Yet that narrative was perpetuated and is still believed today by the majority of people who care to think about it, like the Nobel Committee, apparently.

  And what about Bernanke’s writing on the Great Depression that he had done back in the day – as supposedly the main reason he got this prize? Well, he’s had an aura of having such great knowledge of the Great Depression. He was the man who wasn’t going to let it happen again. Yet he forgot, or didn’t recognize, that one of the reasons the central bank did what it did from 1929 to 1931, a time when many banks collapsed, is that there was a housing bubble. There was also overleverage and a situation where Wall Street banks had been doing nefarious things with money. So one of the reasons that the crash happened and so many banks went under afterward was because of what happened before. The banks had become over-extended, over-leveraged and Fed wasn’t paying attention at the time.

  Bernanke didn’t write about this. He wrote about what happened when the Fed tightened too much too quickly and caused another leg of the Great Depression. That strategy was something he wasn’t going to have happen on his watch, but he forgot or didn’t pay attention to anything that had actually caused the crisis, to what led to Great Depression. He showed the same blind spot in his approach to the financial crisis. To me, that’s like two negatives, two false narratives. The consistency in those two false narratives is that they are both related to over-leverage in the housing market, to Wall Street taking advantage of it, and to the Fed not doing anything.

  LP: Let’s talk for a moment about economists and economic advisers that influence our political system. What can you tell us about their relationship to power? Does it cause them to have these blind spots?

  NP: The National Economic Council is generally made up of senior business leaders and bankers with current jobs, so a lot of them tend to lobby for certain policies that benefit them. In this last go-round, there’s been an oddly exorbitant amount of lobbying to the Fed directly. There are about 120 different lobby groups that lobby the Fed directly, even beyond lobbying respective politicians and on behalf of respective companies or sectors! So “the economy” is really convenient as a funnel for any policy that has to do with money going in and out of anywhere. If policies are being formulated or explained by self-interested people or people that work for self-interested companies or parties, then they’re going to be skewed toward those people or companies. You don’t have Joe the Plumber hanging out in the middle of the Economic Council saying well, here’s what’s going on with my building and my house, now what are you going to do about those? That’s not how it’s structured. It ensures a very top-heavy approach to economics.

  Take, for example, how the Fed views statistics, such as employment numbers, when it’s thinking about inflation or raising rates so quickly, which is really constraining to people on an actual budget facing other inflationary pressures, and, by the way, not actually doing anything about inflation. They’ve got the Executive Survey and the Household Survey. The Executive Survey counts every single job somebody has as a job in the economy, even if it’s the same person, whereas the Household Survey only counts one job per human. So those numbers are disparate. There’s a lot that can be interpreted in different ways and the framework has been formulated, generally, by economists who accept certain narratives, who tend to confirm or to say what needs to be confirmed or said to keep the status quo. They’re the ones that remain in those advisory positions. You do get people who might try to push the envelope a bit in terms of definitions and policies, but they don’t tend to stay around.

  LP: You note in your book that our whole society has become alarmingly top-heavy due to these top-heavy approaches. I was struck by the statistic that in a single year of the pandemic, 2020, there were 500 new billionaires created, just as regular people were losing their jobs, losing their health, and many were losing their lives.

  NP: Yes, that statistic gets people’s attention. My other favorite is from the 2022 Oxfam report, which says that the top 10 billionaires were making $15,000 per second. When I do talks on the book, I make everybody imagine that, to think about the speed of what’s going on here. It’s because those billionaires are invested in markets that their wealth is propelling up so much. All the speculation, though, is driven by this excess amount of available money, by what the Fed has done.

  LP: You refer to this as wealth accumulation without accountability. In what sense?

  NP: If you’re participating in a market that’s going up, obviously the more you’re participating, whether as the head of a company that has options for stocks, or as an investor, or as the retail person who is placing just the little bit they have on it, then you’re going to benefit from that proportion of upside because you’re in it. If you’re not in it, you’re not going to benefit from the upside. That’s just the math.

  What we’ve seen is actually more money created than what was sensibly needed to save the economy, and it’s obviously not going into the real economy. I’ve gone through the stats of the Fed’s books related to the $600 stimulus payments, the extra unemployment insurance, and even the PPP loans. The remaining money was leveraged into the financial system. What was on offer to the markets from the Fed dwarfs what actually went into the pockets of real people in the real economy.

  As a result, the money just tsunamied upward in a very short period of time. That money unmoored from the real economy and did nothing for it. There were a lot of narratives flying around and guesswork on why the markets ballooned so quickly. What you didn’t have to guess was that trillions of dollars were created, not just by the US central bank, but by central banks around the world. And this was accumulated into the financial system and financial markets.

  LP: How does this distortion impact our ability to confront long-term challenges, such as climate change?

  NP: This goes back to the question of accountability. If money is being drawn into one place or one set of financial assets, the financial markets, it doesn’t go into preserving the social contracts or the Main Street economy or the fractures in Main Street economics. I think that as a result, government leaders of both parties get lazy about pushing through longer-term strategies. Because there is this external force of money, it distorts all of the decisions. Parties argue back and forth about where money should go where and so forth, but it distorts all that just that much further because of the ease with which money can be created and multiply and go elsewhere. The idea of long-term strategies, like fighting climate change, suffer.

  Yes, we recently had a bipartisan infrastructure act passed, and that was positive (though it’s taking quite some time to actually agree on where that money’s going to go). But going back to what capitalism could be, what if that money that went to financial markets had gone to directly build solar or wind energy? Or the electrification of manufacturing plants? Or water purification?

  If it could have gone to these areas more quickly, then you would see more of a shift. The pace of getting what’s needed to fight climate change would be faster if it weren’t way easier for money to flit about, especially when created in abundance, into areas where it can just multiply itself more easily rather than in awaiting to build a whole new production center and or new energy strategy. The fact that money can multiply so quickly in the markets makes it harder for it to stick around in one of those lasting areas —to build necessary, physical things, like new or upgraded power mechanisms.

  LP: You write about developments in cryptocurrencies and the metaverse as responses to this distorted situation. How do you see them evolving in relation to it?

  NP: When I wrote about crypto, I also wrote about decentralized finance. They’re not necessarily the same thing, though they do share commonalities in that Bitcoin, for example, was created off of blockchain technology, which has been around for decades. But let’s just focus on the fact that crypto grew exponentially in the wake of the financial crisis. That’s when the famous Bitcoin white paper came out. That’s when the idea of fighting against the bailing out of banks spurred this vision of having some way of financing, borrowing, lending, and keeping money outside of the auspices of the more centralized financial system, which had shown itself to be a) reliant on the Fed and the government and b) not particularly stable.

  Even though we’ve got, obviously, centuries of the establishment of different currencies, including the dollar (with the dollar becoming stronger and the reserve currency in the last century), the idea that something else can compete on a currency basis, or at least be another avenue if it were to be regulated and safer, was a direct result of what happened and how it was handled by central banks in the wake of the financial crisis. It’s also why that idea grew exponentially again in the wake of the pandemic, when the same things happened. Instead of saving the economy by saving Wall Street, the idea was that the Fed was saving the economy by — we don’t even know what — but ultimately money gushed into the markets again. That was one thing. But the decentralized aspect of it is also an interesting area of transformation and will be for some time — the idea of using technology to do financial transactions of all kinds away from the auspices of your Chase account or your Bank of America account.

  In terms of the metaverse, I’m not talking about gaming and that type of thing, but of using technology to share, more directly, things like medical treatments or surgery secrets or what have you, across countries without everybody physically being in the same place, or engineering techniques that can allow easier fabrication of potential problems in new bridges that could be ironed out before the bridge is actually built or engineered so that you have more efficiency in the use of material. This is about pushing technology into something helpful for the building of real things and the creation of better and healthier lives for people through the auspices of virtual reality techniques.

  LP: Some of that sounds hopeful, yet you use the word “permanent” in the title of your book. It sounds like we have no way of correcting this distortion between the financial markets and the real economy.

  NP: I chose the term “permanent” specifically. It’s a big word. Given what happened in the wake of the pandemic and the fact that central banks could create so much money so quickly facing a crisis showed me that this can happen again and again. Not necessarily that big of an amount for that big of a crisis, but that we would have this unhinged, uncapped, untransparent process that can occur repeatedly.

  Since I wrote the book, we have this high inflationary environment. The Fed is raising rates quickly, as are other central banks around the world. I think that’s creating a looming debt crisis for consumers, in particular, in the process, with the cost of money becoming so high for them so quickly. We’re starting to see delinquencies, defaults, and other problems arising as a result.

  But be that as it may, in the U.K, the Bank of England, when faced with a pension crisis recently, was “forced” — as described by articles associated with it — but actually chose to create 60 billion pounds worth of money in order to buy gilts [the equivalent of U.S. Treasury securities] and to give a bid to the gilt market to raise the level of gilts. They chose to do that because gilts were declining precipitously and over-leveraged by a contingent of the pension fund community. The idea was that, as with any pension fund, you invest and the return that you get on that investment is part of what the pensioners needing to draw on their pensions get. But when there’s too much borrowing or there’s too much of a depreciation in the assets, then there’s a problem. You can’t pay what is owed to the pensioners.

  That’s what happened in the U.K. As a result, the central bank is still raising rates – tightening policy — and on the other hand, they’re creating more money — loosening policy — in order to buy those gilts. I think we’re going to continue to see these types of situations. That’s what I mean by permanent. There’s always going to be this possibility of money coming into some part of the market when it needs it because (particularly in developed countries) central banks can do that.

  How do we get out of it? We can’t. First of all, it’s important to note that this is happening and not to accept false narratives, like the story that a host of $600 stimulus checks paid out two years ago is causing inflation today. That’s just really annoying and stupid. We need to understand that the Fed didn’t inflate money in order to pay people those $600 checks or help fund the PPP loans and whatever else was going on at the time. That’s not what’s causing our inflation. There’s a bigger picture. One of the things I think we can do is literally ask ourselves the question, do you think that this monetary body in Washington has the ability to do anything that can actually make my electricity bills go down by virtue of raising the cost of my credit card debt or my personal loans or my mortgage? The answer should be no. We need to understand and think about these relationships so that at least we don’t accept what’s false and we don’t become blind, to what’s going on. The public needs to know this. Congress should know this. That’s what I hope my book can do: educate people. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 17:30

• Ukraine Rejects Alleged Offer Of "Short Truce" By Russia
  Ukraine Rejects Alleged Offer Of “Short Truce” By Russia

  It was revealed Friday by the Ukrainian side that the Kremlin has offered Kiev the possibility of reaching an agreement to implement a “short truce”. It comes as there are more and more signals from Washington that it’s ready to see both sides come to the table for some kind of ceasefire agreement. 

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Friday that Russian officials had attempted the overture, but he rejected the possibility, at a moment the Ukrainian counteroffensive has made recent gains, especially the retaking of Kherson city and many surrounding villages.

  “Russia is now looking for a short truce, a respite to regain strength. Someone may call this the war’s end, but such a respite will only worsen the situation,” the Ukrainian leader said in a virtual address before the Halifax International Security Forum.

  

  Zelensky then reiterated his hardened resolve to not consider the possibility of talks until Russian forces are defeated. “A truly real, long-lasting and honest peace can only be the result of the complete demolition of Russian aggression,” Zelensky said.

  There was no confirmation from the Kremlin side that such a specific offer was actually made. However, Russia has lately reiterated that it has always remained open to the possibility of dialogue. During his virtual G20 address last week, Zelensky issued a 10-point plan for ceasefire, which included the hardline position that no territorial concessions would be made. 

  Despite widespread reports that Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs, has been pushing the White House to get Zelensky to negotiate, other influential voices such as Secretary Antony Blinken and national security advisor Jake Sullivan have said it’s “too early”.

  Gen. Milley’s position is based on the assessment that forcing Russian troops completely out of the country anytime soon remains unrealistic. 

  The Biden administration on Friday reaffirmed that only the Zelensky government can make the determination of when it is ready to negotiate, if at all. In the meantime the potential for direct confrontation between NATO and Russia remains as unpredictable as ever, especially after the deadly Polish border missile incident of last Tuesday. 

  The Poland incident, which resulted in widespread accusations that Zelensky had sought to lie NATO into war with Russia, illustrates that the longer both sides grind on in the conflict while rejecting the idea of negotiated settlement, the greater the chances are for a ‘mishap’ leading to a WWIII scenario among nuclear-armed superpowers. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 17:00

• House Committee Advances Bill To Have Trackable Mail-In Ballots
  House Committee Advances Bill To Have Trackable Mail-In Ballots

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The House Oversight and Reform Committee on Thursday advanced a bill that would enable mail-in ballots for federal elections to be tracked.

  “This bill would require that any ballot mailed in a federal election include a postal service barcode on the envelop that is unique to the individual ballot,” Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, the chairwoman of the committee, who had introduced the bill, said Thursday.

  “We can now track packages around the world, they have a barcode you can track it as a consumer. This would allow an individual to track their own ballot. This commonsense requirement would enable boards of elections to confirm when a ballot was sent and give voters confidence that their votes have been casted and counted.”

  

  She said that the bill would also require envelopes containing ballots to include a specific identifier which “will help ensure timely sorting and delivery” of the ballots.

  “Ensuring election officials and voters have the resources to track the status of their ballots would create even more peace of mind and confidence and further protect the sanctity of our elections,” Maloney said. The bill passed the committee by a vote of 34-5.

  

  Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the ranking member of the committee, told The Hill that he supports the measure because it will “help protect the postal service from being blamed for election irregularities.”

  ‘False Sense of Security’

  Other lawmakers said the legislation is not enough to prevent potential fraud.

  “This is good, but until you have some kind of voter identification attached to your mail-in ballot that’s stronger than amateur hand-writing experts assessing somebody’s signature on the outside of an envelope, I think we’re going to have a problem,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) reported The Hill.

  Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) said the legislation would give a “false sense of security,” because there is “no way of verifying the legitimacy” of the contents of the envelope, reported the outlet.

  

  On social media, people expressed concerns over the usefulness of the ability to track a mail ballot in the absence of voter I.D. Others expressed that the ability to track mail ballots would not prevent people from casting multiple votes.

  Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States saw a shift in voting methods in 2020, in part prompted by the actions of the states. While many states did not amend their policies, some states expanded early voting, and other states issued all registered voters ballots that they could return by mail.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 16:30

• Judge Orders Unsealing Of Names Of 8 Anonymous Individuals Relating To Jeffrey Epstein
  Judge Orders Unsealing Of Names Of 8 Anonymous Individuals Relating To Jeffrey Epstein

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A federal judge on Friday ordered the unsealing of documents featuring the real names of some of the “John Does” relating to deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, according to multiple media outlets.

  

  Judge Loretta Preska ruled on Friday to disclose the identities of a number of previously anonymous individuals in documents filed by Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre against the convicted pedophile’s associate Ghislaine Maxwell in a defamation case, according to Insider.

  Epstein died in jail awaiting trial while Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking and sentenced to 20 years behind bars.

  Giuffre’s civil lawsuit against Maxwell has generated a trove of documents relating to Epstein, which contain a number of redacted names, some of which Preska ordered unsealed on the premise that public interest outweighs the right to privacy, according to Daily Mail.

  

  Already Disclosed to the Public

  Eight “Non-Party Does” referred to in documents as Does 12, 28, 97, 107, 144, 147, 171, and 183, sought to remain anonymous amid concerns that their disclosure would harm their reputations, Fox News reported.

  Preska disagreed in some cases, saying that much of the “purportedly sensitive information” had already been disclosed to the public during Maxwell’s trial, per Daily Mail.

  While a timeline for the release of the documents and names has not been set, Preska identified some of the Epstein-linked individuals during the hearing.

  The judge identified Doe 147 as Epstein victim Sarah Ransome, who testified publicly at Maxwell’s sentencing and published a book about her experience, and granted numerous interviews, according to Insider.

  

  Another individual Preska identified was Emmy Tayler, a former personal assistant to Maxwell who was accused of playing a role in the sexual abuse of some of the victims, according to Daily Mail.

  Tayler, who has denied any wrongdoing, was named in a batch of publicly available documents from another lawsuit, Preska said and ordered its release, according to Daily Mail, though it’s unclear which of the Does is used in reference to Tayler.

  ‘Intense Media Coverage’

  Preska also ordered documents relating to Doe 183 unsealed as the individual has been the “subject of intense media coverage” and their name was disclosed during Maxwell’s trial. But in order to allow Doe 183 an opportunity to appeal her decision, Preska put a stay on the release until Nov. 28.

  She also ordered the name of Tom Pritzker, billionaire executive chairman of the Hyatt Hotels, to be unsealed, according to Insider. Preska said Pritzker had only a marginal connection to Epstein as his name came up in a deposition in which a witness said they didn’t recognize him.

  Pritzker argued against the disclosure on the premise that it could harm his reputation but Preska overruled his objection.

  The judge did concede to some of the individuals who raised objections, however.

  Doe 12 will remain anonymous as they were a “classic outsider,” the judge said, describing them as “neither victim nor associated with Epstein or Maxwell,” according to Daily Mail.

  The name of Doe 28 will also remain sealed as they’re a sexual assault victim who the judge said “continues to experience trauma,” per Daily Mail.

  Meanwhile, Maxwell recently alleged that a fellow inmate plotted to kill her in her sleep.

  She also said that she found Epstein’s death, which was ruled a suicide, to be “profoundly suspicious” and that she doubts he really killed himself.

  When he died, Epstein was awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges. He was convicted in 2008 on similar charges but received a light sentence.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 15:30

• US Redeploys B-1B Lancer Bomber Over Korea After North Fires Powerful ICBM
  US Redeploys B-1B Lancer Bomber Over Korea After North Fires Powerful ICBM

  Tensions are again reaching boiling point over the Korean peninsula as the US has redeployed a US B-1B Lancer long-range strategic bomber there, ostensibly for more joint aerial drills with the south’s military, even after North Korea’s vehement denunciation of similar exercises earlier this month, which resulted in Kim Jong-un ordering a record number of ballistic missile tests.

  “South Korea and the US conducted a joint air drill today with the US Air Force’s B-1B strategic bomber redeployed on the Korean Peninsula,” the South’s Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) confirmed in a Saturday statement.

  

  The statement further indicated a number of fighter jets accompanied the 1B Lancer’s flight. “Some of the most advanced jets in the US and South Korean air forces, including the F-35 stealth fighter, also joined the drill,” it said. “Through this drill, we have once again demonstrated the joint military capacity of the South Korea-US alliance and Washington’s commitment to protecting the Korean Peninsula and providing extended deterrence,” the JCS added.

  Crucially the new bomber redeployment comes the morning following another threatening North Korean ICBM launch amid warnings from the Kim regime of “fiercer military responses” to Washington to come.

  North Korean state media identified that it was a Hwasong-17 ICBM – said to be capable of flying 9,320 miles, thus making it a significant threat and warning to the United States. 

  Pyongyang accompanied the provocative ICBM launch with a severe warning, invoking the prospect of “all-out” nuclear war: 

  “Kim Jong Un solemnly declared that if the enemies continue to pose threats … our party and government will resolutely react to nukes with nuclear weapons and to total confrontation with all-out confrontation,” Pyongyang’s official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on Saturday.

  Referencing the Hwasong-17, state media described it as “the most powerful and absolute nuclear deterrence” – further calling the missile “the strongest strategic weapon in the world.”

  Kim Jong-un showed his daughter in public for the first time in relation to Friday’s ICBM launch…

  So, Kim Jong-un just decided to reveal his daughter for the first time publicly at an ICBM launch??? pic.twitter.com/tiE8gWixAJ

  — Joseph Dempsey (@JosephHDempsey) November 18, 2022

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

  The Biden administration has apparently felt the need to flex American military might over the peninsula in tit-for-tat measure of late whenever these ramped up missile tests by the north occur, creating a continuing dangerous and unpredictable situation, also as Japan feels increasingly under threat, given in the recent past missiles have flown directly over the main island.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 15:00

• Grayscale Bitcoin Trust Says It Won't Confirm Its On-Chain Wallet Information Publicly
  Grayscale Bitcoin Trust Says It Won’t Confirm Its On-Chain Wallet Information Publicly

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  Amidst the heightened scrutiny on basically all structured crypto products following the blowup of FTX, many players in the crypto space are rushing to reassure their clients and the investing public that their assets are real, unencumbered and safe.

  The grandfather of all bitcoin structured products, the hugely popular Grayscale Bitcoin Trust, has seen its discount to NAV plunge to almost -50% from about 0% in the beginning of 2021 as bitcoin has fallen in price.

  In other words, if you want to buy bitcoin, and you trust that Grayscale’s assets are safe and sound, buying their trust here would essentially allow you to buy bitcoin for an additional 50% off its spot price.

  

  It sounds too good to be true, right? That’s what many skeptics continue to point out. Why would the trust trade at such a massive discount? Could it be due to a reasonable explanation? Perhaps its just a technical glitch as many people are selling at any price do to the volatility in the space right now? Perhaps it is due to forced liquidations of people who held GBTC, opening the door for opportunities to those who have cash on the sidelines?

  The truth is we just don’t really know. But…the simplest way for Grayscale to close the price/NAV gap would be to reassure investors that its trust’s holdings are exactly as they seem, making the case easy for arbitrageurs to pounce on what could be a significant discount not just if the price of bitcoin rises, but even if it falls less than the current discount but Grayscale is somehow able to shore up the difference.

  As of yesterday, the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust was trading at a massive 43% discount to its NAV, Peter Schiff, who has traded barbs with Grayscale CEO Barry Silbert on Twitter often, noted:

  Today the #Grayscale Bitcoin Trust traded at a 43% discount to its NAV. With #Bitcoin trading at $16,700, shareholders of $GBTC were willing to sell their Bitcoin for the equivalent of $9,500. What does that tell you about retail and institutional investor confidence in Bitcoin?

  And so on Friday after the market closed, Grayscale took to its Twitter account to try and make a statement to shore up investor confidence. I’m not sure the company got the reaction it was looking for.

  ---

  The company’s entire Tweet thread can be viewed here. Grayscale said they were providing “additional information about the safety and security of the assets held by our digital asset products”.

  They told readers that “each of Grayscale’s digital asset products is set up as a separate legal entity” and that the company’s “laws, regulations, and documents that define Grayscale’s digital asset products prohibit the digital assets underlying the products from being lent, borrowed, or otherwise encumbered.”

  That’s a good start.

  They also noted that all of their digital assets are being held by Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC. They provided a letter from Coinbase, dated November 18, 2022, that appeared to attest to the amount of digital assets Coinbase held for them – as of the end of September.

  Also a good step in the right direction.

  

  But that’s where the verification stopped. The company didn’t turn over any of its on-chain wallet information, instead noting that “Coinbase frequently performs on-chain validation”. It’s also unclear to me whether or not the Coinbase document attests to current holdings by the trust, as it appears to have everything dated as of September 30, 2022 – the last date of the quarter.

  Of course, FTX’s blowup took place just weeks ago, and this is the pressure point of volatility that the industry is concerned about. Should any changes in the trusts have taken place due to FTX’s turmoil and the “run on the bank”, it would have likely been after September 30, 2022.

  Grayscale continued: “Due to security concerns, we do not make such on-chain wallet information and confirmation information publicly available through a cryptographic Proof-of-Reserve, or other advanced cryptographic accounting procedure.”

  They continued: “We know the preceding point in particular will be a disappointment to some, but panic sparked by others is not a good enough reason to circumvent complex security arrangements that have kept our investors’ assets safe for years.”

  Then, they linked to the following document, with more information about their products.

  “Due to recent events, investors are understandably inquiring deeper into their crypto investments. Custody of the digital assets underlying Grayscale’s digital asset products is unaffected, and our products’ digital assets remain safe and secure,” it reads.

  It then appears to make a more recent, concrete attestation:

  For example, this means that Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (OTCQX: GBTC) holds bitcoin — and only bitcoin — and each share is backed by a proportional amount of the trust’s holdings, approximately 0.00091502 BTC per share of GBTC, as of November 18, 2022. To be perfectly clear: these digital assets are owned by GBTC and GBTC alone. 

  ---

  Get 50% off: If you enjoy this article, would like to support my work, I would love to have you as a subscriber and can offer you 50% off for life: Get 50% off forever

  ---

  I’m not one to try and weigh Grayscale’s statements versus the clarity of on-chain validation, but isn’t that what the point of the blockchain actually is? Wasn’t it sold to so many people under the guise that anybody could have access and validate anyone else’s assets?

  If Grayscale has the assets it claims, and I’m not saying that they don’t, it still seems to be outside the spirit of the entire “decentralized” and “blockchain” cult that touts its transparency and openness as one of its biggest strengths.

  Why provide confirmation from the custodian but not verification on the blockchain?

  I was also alarmed by the number of people who responded to Grayscale’s Twitter thread, thrashing the company for not providing more information.

  “No one cares until you show exact on chain proof of reserves and state of your debt vs. reserves along with how much you are sucking out exactly to every executive and employee you have,” one person responded.

  Other responses looked like these:

  

  Another Twitter user wrote: “Making a public statement trying to quell fears while refusing to perform a proof of reserve is far worse than not making the statement. This will exacerbate the concerns and I expect the GBTC discount will reflect this sentiment.”

  I spoke with the owner of the @Bitfinexed Twitter account, who has long been a skeptic of the industry and has predicted that blowups like FTX would be coming. When I asked them if the security angle was real, they replied:

  “No, it’s not. Showing a public bitcoin address is zero risk.”

  As an example, they provided me with Binance’s wallet address.

  “Binance can sign a message to prove that address is under their control,” they told me. “Nobody can steal it and Binance can prove it is theirs.”

  A second crypto expert, @MagooPhD on Twitter, told me that they did think there was some validity to the security argument. They told me “realistically if you expose where the coin is kept you let potential bad parties know where to start looking.”

  They continued: “Like being able to see when coin movement is done. You can start to sync that to real world events and locations. It’s like disclosing where a safe is in a house – or even that there is a safe in a house.”

  Despite this, they called Grayscale’s statement “kind of weird”, adding that no one had claimed their bitcoin didn’t exist to begin with.

  Whether or not this attempt at shoring up confidence in the trust worked or not, we’ll likely know Monday morning. The important thing to watch won’t be the price of bitcoin, it’ll be the price/NAV of the trust. If the discount gets larger, the market likely isn’t buying what Grayscale has to say. If the discount closes, it means Grayscale has added little burst of confidence to the market.

  But the old saying goes…trust, but verify. Personally, even if Grayscale’s assets are fine, as they say they are and may very well be, the company may have done itself a disservice in how they communicated this to the world, after market close, on a Friday.

  Is it 9:30AM Monday morning yet?

  —

  QTR’s Fringe Finance is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Also, please Share this article.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 11/19/2022 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest