• With Le Pen Closing Gap In French Election Polls, Macron Smears Opponent As Russian Sympathizer
  With Le Pen Closing Gap In French Election Polls, Macron Smears Opponent As Russian Sympathizer

  As France’s right-wing nationalist candidate Marine Le Pen closes the gap with French President Emmanuel Macron ahead of the second round of the country’s presidential election, Macron has has started ramping up a smear campaign focusing on Le Pen’s links to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

  

  The narrative was delivered by Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire, who framed the election as a choice between an “ally of Vladimir Putin” and a president who has France’s best interests at heart.

  “Another battle is commencing with two visions of France,” he said in a Monday interview with RTL radio, suggesting that a Le Pen victory would mean France turning its back on the country’s EU partners, leaving working people (who have been protesting Macron by the millions) poorer.

  The nationalist leader finished 4.7 percentage points behind Macron in the first round of the French election on Sunday and the two will face each other in a runoff vote on April 24. While polls give 44-year-old president an advantage heading into the final phase of the campaign, Le Pen has been gaining momentum and she’s already added more than 10 points to her showing in the 2017 election. –Bloomberg

  

  While Le Pen has dropped a push for France to ditch the Euro, she opposes Macron’s globalization plans for further EU integration.

  That said, markets are clearly favoring a Macron win – with French 10-year yields jumping to a seven-year high last week after polls showed Macron’s lead over Le Pen narrowing.

  “A Macron victory would be welcomed by the markets as markets would price in diminishing political uncertainty and continued business-friendly administration,” said Lale Akoner, a senior market strategist at BNY Mellon Investment Management to Bloomberg via email. “

  Le Pen’s ties to Russia consist of securing a loan from a Russian company in 2014, and visiting Putin in 2017. However, she distanced herself from the Russian leader following his invasion of Ukraine – while Macron has been in regular communication with the Kremlin to try and end the crisis.

  

  Macron suffered a huge blow this week after a poll by Ipsos-Sopra Steria found that the French President is losing ground with every age group below 60, while Le Pen took around twice as much of the blue collar vote.

  

  Turnout, meanwhile, is expected to be at a record low according to an OpinionWay-Kea Partners poll published by Les Echos and Radio Classique – which also showed Le Pen narrowing the gap by one point.

  Now the battle may be for France’s liberals – after veteran leftist Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who fell short of making it into the final phase of France’s presidential election – told his supporters that they shouldn’t give a “single vote” to Le Pen.

  Mélenchon’s strong showing in Sunday’s first round, when he won 22 per cent of the vote, has put him and his voters in the position of kingmakers as incumbent president Emmanuel Macron battles Le Pen during the final days of campaigning. Macron, in particular, needs as many Mélenchon supporters as possible to back him to win on April 24.

  Mélenchon’s message of rejection for Le Pen would seem to favour the president. But Mélenchon stopped short of prompting supporters to vote for Macron, and his party is due to consult members on whether to do so. The president faces a fight to win over far-left supporters who are far less inclined to help him than in 2017, when he coasted to victory against Le Pen, and stop them from abstaining. -FT

  Either way, as FT notes, Mélenchon’s strong showing alongside Le Pen’s shows that French Politics is undergoing an upheaval that may end in a Trump-like upset.

  The second round of French elections will be held on Sunday, April 24.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/13/2022 – 02:45

• Slovakia In Talks With NATO Allies To Send MiG-29 Jets To Ukraine
  Slovakia In Talks With NATO Allies To Send MiG-29 Jets To Ukraine

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Slovak Prime Minister Eduard Heger said Monday that Slovakia is in talks with its allies about an arrangement to send Soviet-designed MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine as NATO is working to send heavier equipment to be used in the war against Russia.

  Last week, Slovakia announced that it sent a Soviet-designed S-300 missile defense system to Ukraine. In exchange, the US is deploying a Patriot missile system to Slovakia. The Slovak government is looking for a similar deal when it comes to the MiGs, and Heger said Slovakia wants to phase out the Soviet weapons.

  

  Heger said Slovakia “cannot sustain” Soviet equipment without a “relationship” with Moscow. “This is equipment that we want to finish anyway because we’re waiting for the F-16s,” he said. In 2018, Slovakia signed a deal to purchase US-made F-16 fighter jets, but they aren’t expected to be delivered until 2024.

  The Slovak prime minister said he wants guarantees from allies about the protection of Slovak airspace if the country gives up its MiG-29s. “After that, we can consider speaking about this equipment in regard with Ukraine as well,” Heger said. He said Ukraine is also seeking Zuzana self-propelled howitzers, which are made by Slovakia.

  As part of the NATO effort to send more heavy equipment to Ukraine, the German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall is prepared to send Ukraine 50 used Leopard 1 battle tanks. Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger said the company could deliver the tanks through its subsidiary Rheinmetall Italia if the German government gives permission.

  Ukrainian forces are only trained to use Soviet-designed tanks, but Papperger said they could be trained to use the Leopard 1s in just a few days.

  NEW: U.S. “does not object” to the provision of fixed-wing fighters to Ukraine, such as Soviet-era MiG-29 jets after Slovakia floated a transfer: senior U.S. defense official

  The U.S. nixed a Polish deal to give MiGs to Ukraine through American military base in Germany in March

  — Jack Detsch (@JackDetsch) April 12, 2022

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

  British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss recently said that NATO allies agreed that they should work towards Ukraine being able to use NATO equipment. On Sunday, Lithuania announced that it was starting a training program for Ukrainian troops.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/13/2022 – 02:00

• Taibbi: Straight Out Of Dr. Strangelove
  Taibbi: Straight Out Of Dr. Strangelove

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  More and more, we’re told outright war isn’t just necessary and right, but the thing that will solve America’s existential problems…

  

  Robert Kagan, neoconservative writer and husband to Deputy Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, wrote a piece called “The Price of Hegemony” in Foreign Affairs last week that was fascinating. If I’d written his opening, people would denounce me as a Putin-concubine:

  Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading.

  Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe.

  Kagan went on to make an argument straight out of Dr. Strangelove. Instead of doing what some critics want and focusing on “improving the well-being of Americans,” the U.S. government is instead properly recognizing the responsibility that comes with being a superpower. So, while Russia’s invasion may indeed have been a foreseeable consequence of a decision to expand our hegemonic reach, now that we’re here, there’s only one option left. Total commitment:

  It is better for the United States to risk confrontation with belligerent powers when they are in the early stages of ambition and expansion, not after they have already consolidated substantial gains. Russia may possess a fearful nuclear arsenal, but the risk of Moscow using it is not higher now than it would have been in 2008 or 2014, if the West had intervened then. And it has always been extraordinarily small…

  A month after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, blood seems to be rushing to all the wrong places across the Commentariat, which has begun in earnest the predictable process of asking the public to dismiss fears of nuclear combat. Headlines of the “We’ll take those odds” variety are springing up everywhere, from the Seattle Times (“Atrocities change the nuclear weapons calculus”) to Radio Free Europe (“Former NATO Commander Says Western Fears Of Nuclear War Are Preventing A Proper Response To Putin”) to Fox (which had on Sean Penn, of all people, to say to Sean Hannity, “Countries that have nuclear weapons can remain intimidated to use them, and we’re seeing that now with our own country”). This is fast becoming a bipartisan consensus. Check out Republican Adam Kinzinger’s recent comment:

  If we let nukes prevent us from action then expect literally every country to try to get nukes in next few years

  — Adam Kinzinger (@AdamKinzinger) April 12, 2022

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

  Most of us look back at 9/11 and wish we’d tried to narrow the scope of the problem, not expand it in grandiose ways and make it the central fact of the lives of every person on the planet. We were told right away that 9/11 meant so much more than a policing problem, that instead of a few nut-jobs slipping through the net, bin Laden’s Twin Tower attacks heralded an inevitable, and desirable, Final Battle between new and old worlds. We’re going through something similar now. The pundit excitement over the final clash between “Democracy and Autocracy” perhaps being at hand reminds me exactly of the open praying for signs of the Apocalypse I once heard among the Rapture-ready flock of pastor John Hagee in San Antonio.

  We saw a ton of this thinking after 9/11. World-domination advocates who’d been laughed out of meetings for years were taken seriously overnight. Rigid with jingoistic fervor, they were suddenly in print and on air everywhere, bursting with “plans for everyone,” as Iggy Pop put it. Such people always rush to the front of the debate in these moments and they’re always listened to, until about ten years later, when it quietly becomes okay to reflect on a question we probably should have pondered in the moment, i.e. “Hey, are these people crazy?”

  TK News subscribers can click here to read the rest.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/13/2022 – 00:05

• A $1 Trillion Reason Why The Yuan Won’t Collapse
  A $1 Trillion Reason Why The Yuan Won’t Collapse

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and commentator

  The talk about a Chinese recession gets louder by the day. Foreign capital is leaving in droves. The yield premium that the nation’s bonds have been enjoying for over a decade is disappearing.

  Yes, there are no shortage of reasons to be bearish on the yuan. But the massive dollar holdings accumulated by China Inc. suggest large currency depreciation is unlikely.

  About 373 million people in 45 cities including Shanghai are now under full or partial lockdown, making up 40% of China’s GDP, according to Nomura. In less than a week, Premier Li Keqiang issued a third warning about economic growth risks, adding a sense of urgency to Beijing’s push to counter the slowdown via infrastructure spending and monetary easing.

  The resulting policy divergence with the U.S. is undermining the support for the yuan. U.S. 10-year yields have risen above the Chinese counterpart for the first time in more than a decade, dimming the allure of the nation’s assets. But that’s not necessarily a game changer, as Macquarie Capital economists Larry Hu and Xinyu Ji point out. After all, the persistent narrowing of the yield differential last year didn’t stop the yuan rally, thanks to hefty exports.

  That said, it does look like there is a tight correlation between foreign bond flows and the nominal yield differential. This chart shows the spread versus the six-month change in foreign bond flows. It is perhaps not just a coincidence that foreign investors sold their holdings of Chinese government bonds by the most on record in March, even though the nation’s real yields remain comfortably higher than U.S. peers.

  

  In addition to weakening capital flows, the other pillar that has been supporting the yuan is also becoming less robust. Exports are expected to rise 13% in the year through March, rebounding from a holiday-impacted February. While still decent, the growth rate is slowing from a clip of more than 20% last year. The shutdown in Shanghai, the world’s largest port, since late March won’t help the April figure.

  But before one gets too bearish on the yuan, it’s worth pointing out that Chinese exporters haven’t converted all their dollar receipts into local currency since the pandemic started two years ago. Far from it. Foreign-currency deposits have swelled to $1 trillion — a whopping 39% increase from the end of 2019. These extra dollar savings may come in handy if the yuan starts to depreciate.

  

  Exporters have exhibited a counter-cyclical pattern when converting their overseas dollar receipts. When the yuan weakens, they sell more of their dollar revenues for the yuan at a cheaper exchange rate. And vice versa. This chart shows that the level of exporters’ currency-conversion ratio tends to move in tandem with three-month changes in the dollar-yuan exchange rate. Effectively, China Inc. behaves as an stabilizer in smoothing out the currency volatility.

  

  All told, the peak of the yuan is probably behind us. That’s not to say that betting on yuan depreciation is a no-brainer. China Inc. has enough firepower to take the other side of the trade.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 23:45

• D'Souza: Covering For The Big Guy
  D’Souza: Covering For The Big Guy

  Commentary authored by Dinesh D’Souza via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The mainstream media continues to cover for the Big Guy. The big guy is, of course, Joe Biden. And the Hunter Biden scandal has always been about Joe Biden. Why? Because it’s a family racket. Just as the Corleone family operated as a single unit, with Don Corleone in charge of the corrupt operation, so the Biden family operates as a unit, with Joe Biden as its chairman and ultimate authority.

  

  Of course, the Biden family knows that Joe’s name cannot be freely used. That’s why Hunter Biden and his associates are emphatic in their email and other communications to leave Joe’s name out of their transactions. Hunter associate James Gilliar at one point texted Tony Bobulinski, then a Biden family business partner, “Don’t mention Joe being involved.” Emails appear to typically refer to Joe Biden with code names like “Celtic” or the “Big Guy.”

  Yet it seems the big guy was always in on the deals. One of Hunter’s emails specifically references a 10 percent cut for Joe Biden. Moreover, Bobulinski said he personally met with Joe Biden to discuss Hunter’s business dealings. This is important because Joe Biden has consistently denied he knew anything about his son’s commercial activities.

  This is the same Joe Biden who took his son on board Air Force Two to China, where Hunter Biden struck an arrangement with business entities connected with the Chinese Communist Party. These arrangements gave him a stake in joint ventures with the Chinese worth tens of millions of dollars. Not since the Clinton Foundation has a high American official allegedly sold access on the international market—and quite likely the Biden family racket was modeled on the Clinton Foundation.

  Joe Biden even apparently shared offices with Hunter Biden. In 2017, Hunter emailed his office manager to “have keys made available for new office mates,” and one of them was Joe Biden. Yet when Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked about this recently, she put on her customary deadpan expression and merely said that Joe Biden was “not office mates” with Hunter Biden. Nothing further. End of story.

  Investigative reporter Peter Schweizer has documented Biden family deals with foreign entities in Ukraine, China, Costa Rica, and elsewhere. It’s a worldwide operation, and all the trails lead back to one man, Joe Biden. Without his name and at least some level of active participation, there would be no racket to carry out.

  Despite the evidence closely tying the Bidens together in these deals, the media has for ideological reasons been highly protective of their man in the White House. At first, the media treated the Hunter Biden laptop and its incriminating contents as Russian disinformation. In this, the press was assisted by 50 former intelligence officials who were apparently willing to lie to the American people to shield Joe Biden from his own corruption.

  Now the laptop has been confirmed both by the New York Times and the Washington Post to be legitimate. Tellingly, not one of the 50 intelligence officials has recanted or expressed any contrition about being part of a public deception scheme. Neither has the media. Instead, the new narrative is: True, Hunter Biden sold access in his family’s name, but Joe Biden had nothing to do with it.

  This has all the persuasive power of saying that Don Corleone knew nothing about his family’s activities and played no part in them whatever. It makes no sense. And Joe Biden’s direct involvement in his son’s activities has now been confirmed with a new email that has emerged. The email involves a college recommendation that Joe Biden wrote for a Chinese businessman who was partners with Hunter Biden.

  Jonathan Li is the CEO of a company BHR that entered into a joint venture with Hunter Biden’s company Rosemont Seneca. Hunter also held a 10 percent stake in BHR. In 2017, Li sent an email to Hunter Biden and his business associates Devon Archer and Jim Bulger. “Gentlemen,” he wrote, “Please find the attached resume of my son, Chris Li. He is applying [to] the following colleges for this year.”

  Li listed Brown University, Cornell University, and New York University. He also attached an “updated version” of his son’s resume. So then what happened? Let’s follow the email trail. “Let’s see how we can be helpful here to Chris,” Bulger responded to Hunter and the gang.

  A few weeks later, on Feb. 18, 2017, Eric Schwerin, president of Rosemont Seneca, replied to Li. “Jonathan,” he wrote, “Hunter asked me to send you a copy of the recommendation letter that he asked his father to write on behalf of Christopher for Brown University.” In other words, Joe Biden wrote the letter.

  Is it reasonable, at this point, to continue to say Joe Biden told the truth when he said he had nothing to do with his son’s business? Is it believable that he was never in on the deals, or stood to benefit from them? No, it’s not. On the contrary, it seems that Hunter Biden was Joe Biden’s frontman. This is a Joe Biden scandal, not a Hunter Biden scandal. If the circuitous family racket can be likened to the coils of a snake, Joe Biden is the head of the snake.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 23:25

• NASA Spots Massive Comet Heading Toward Earth
  NASA Spots Massive Comet Heading Toward Earth

  A massive icy comet emanating from the trans-Plutonian depths of our solar system is on a course to travel closer to earth than any comet of similar size – at least, so far as scientists have been able to tell.

  The comet, known as C/2014 UN271 (Bernardinelli-Bernstein), has a frozen nucleus that measures 80 miles across and is 50x bigger than the core of most comets that travel toward the inner area of our solar system.

  

  It’s believed to have a mass of about 500 trillion tons, making it 100,000x more massive than the typical comet found toward the inner solar system.

  The comet is traveling at about 22,000 miles per hour, moving from the edge of the solar system towards its the center.

  Fortunately, the comet isn’t expected to get closer than 1 billion miles from the Sun, which is further away even than Saturn. And it’s not expected to get even that close until 2031.

  American scientists have been aware of the comet since about 2010, at which point it was 3 billion miles from the Sun (about the same distance between Earth and Neptune. Since then, scientists have used telescopes both on Earth and in space to try and understand more about the comet).

  Scientists used NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope to examine the comet and estimate its huge size. Right now, scientists can only estimate the comet’s size, since it’s difficult to distinguish the core from the vaporous aura. Scientists used a computer model to try and differentiate the aura from the comet’s core.

  It’s believed that the comet is billions of years old – meaning it formed during the early days of our universe – and also that it came from the Oort Cloud, the icy enclosure of comets, asteroids and material that forms a spherical shield around our solar system. The Oort Cloud is a theoretical concept – scientists don’t have visual proof of its existence. But it’s believed this comet could help scientists learn more about the Oort Cloud, which is believed to be 5,000x further from the Sun as the Earth is.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 23:05

• With Lithium Prices Up Ninefold, Report Underscores US Dependence On Foreign Minerals
  With Lithium Prices Up Ninefold, Report Underscores US Dependence On Foreign Minerals

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

  A recent white paper has laid out some of the challenges in supplying minerals for any energy transition from fossil fuels, offering a timely warning for policymakers as the increased demand for electric vehicles (EVs) drives up the costs of materials used in such products.

  

  Notably, the benchmark prices of lithium, lithium carbonate, and lithium hydroxide have rapidly increased in recent months, as detailed at Benchmark Minerals.

  Hovering at just $115.80 per ton in September 2020, the benchmark price of lithium has surged to $1045.90 a ton in March 2022. That’s more than a ninefold increase.

  Zach Schumacher, a North American metals price expert with Argus Media, told The Epoch Times that the costs of EVs will likely increase as a result. The estimated average transaction price for a new electric vehicle was $56,437 in November 2021, according to Kelley Blue Book.

  The prices of other key minerals—including the rare-earth metal neodymium that goes into wind turbines—have also trended sharply upward in recent months and years.

  “Lithium is not the only raw material directly correlated to the EV market witnessing higher costs, so parsing out precisely how much of the increased costs for vehicles in the coming months originates from lithium alone could prove fairly difficult. Nickel, stainless steel, semiconductor and labor costs are among other costs that have all also risen compared to levels from recent years,” said Schumacher, who added that the prices of consumer electronics could also rise.

  “Increasingly, scholars are questioning the mineral requirements that would be needed to reach either 100 [percent] renewable or clean energy targets,” states the March report, which was authored by Phil Rossetti and George David Banks for the Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions (CRES) Forum.

  The document notes that EVs are six times as mineral intensive as vehicles that use conventional internal combustion engines, citing a report from the International Energy Agency (IEA).

  Renewable energy sources are also more mineral intensive than their hydrocarbon-based alternatives. Wind turbines, for example, need roughly nine times as many minerals as natural gas plants, according to the IEA report.

  “China is the dominant supplier for multiple critical minerals and is likely to remain so. In the case of minerals it does not supply—such as cobalt—China has near-monopolistic control of refining capacity through its state-owned enterprises,” the CRES Forum’s analysis states.

  “Policymakers should also understand the energy security implications of policies that lean heavily on mineral-intensive products for abating greenhouse gas emissions, as scarcity of materials could raise prices as well as create dependency on foreign suppliers that could have an interest in manipulating the market.”

  In addition to creating national security risks, the current situation also makes the United States culpable in using forced, or otherwise ethically questionable, labor.

  One crucial solar panel input, polysilicon, is largely produced in China’s Xinjiang region, likely through the slave labor of the region’s Uyghur ethnic minority.

  Likewise, much of the cobalt in lithium-ion batteries is obtained through child labor from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

  The CRES Forum report argues that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) impedes domestic mining of minerals for renewable energy, even more than it impedes hydrocarbon production.

  “Forty-two percent of DOE NEPA environmental assessments and environmental impact statements [are] for clean energy, transmission, or conservation efforts compared with 15 percent for fossil fuel,” it states, referencing an R Street analysis from one of the report’s co-authors, Phillip Rossetti.

  A major proposed project along these lines, the Thacker Pass Lithium Mine in Humboldt County, Nevada, received its Record of Decision under NEPA in January 2021. Nevada’s Division of Environmental Protection issued mining, water, and air permits to it earlier this year.

  Yet, the mine has continued to generate controversy, with Shoshone Paiute Gary McKinney writing in the Reno Gazette Journal that “our ancestors’ burial site is no place for a mine.”

  The Canadian developer of Thacker Pass, Lithium Americas, has made major deals with the Chinese firm Ganfeng Lithium, including through joint ownership of the Cauchari-Olaroz brine lithium carbonate project in Argentina.

  Lithium Americas’ website indicates that Ganfeng owns 46.7 percent of the project while Lithium Americas owns 44.8 percent. The remaining 8.5 percent is owned by Argentina’s state-run Jujuy Energía y Minería Sociedad del Estado (JEMSE).

  Even if new domestic mines such as Thacker Pass go online, CRES Forum’s meta-analysis of three studies on the energy transition suggests that demand could outpace proven reserves of multiple key minerals, including cobalt, lithium, nickel, chromium, and zinc.

  “In short, the potential mining requirements for a complete clean energy transition with existing technology is so large that it is not clear if it is economically viable to extract enough minerals to meet the needs modeled in those studies,” the report states.

  In February, President Joe Biden drew attention to a range of new investments aimed at reducing the United States’ reliance on China for lithium, rare earths, cobalt, and other critical minerals.

  This includes $35 million from the Department of Defense for a heavy rare earth element separation facility operated by MP Materials, owner of the country’s only rare-earth mine in Mountain Pass, California.

  MP Materials is partly owned by a Chinese firm, Shenghe Resources.

  “As proposed by Chinese government, and characteristic in Chinese rare earth industry, Shenghe Resources designed its equity structure on mixed ownership,” the website for the firm states, indicating that the company is partly owned by the state.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Shenghe Resources for comment.

  Reuters reported in late March that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) has described herself as “worried” about the Chinese stake in MP Materials.

  The investments announced in February also include a $140 million Department of Energy (DoE) project to obtain critical minerals from mine waste, coal ash, and similar resources.

  The CRES Forum report suggests that the challenges it describes could be mitigated by technological breakthroughs, including better approaches to carbon capture and the development of low-carbon fuels for conventional, non-electric vehicles.

  It also urges the United States to sanction companies or countries that use unethical labor, arguing that such moves must be made quickly, before the country is too reliant on such minerals.

  “As a major consuming market, the United States is best positioned to effect change by refusing market access to unethical suppliers,” it states.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 22:45

• Did CPI Just Peak?
  Did CPI Just Peak?

  A lot has been said about today’s “extraordinary“, scorching CPI print which we discussed on at least two occasions (here and here), but the biggest outstanding question is whether today’s blowout print was the top (despite Jeff Gundlach predicting on his latest DoubleLine call that inflation may hit 10%). Well, as we noted earlier, according to a number of Wall Street banks, today’s scorching number was indeed the peak of the inflation wave, and over the past few hours many more have joined them including Goldman…

  

  … Deutsche Bank…

  

  … and JPMorgan.

  

  So what’s behind these bold declarations? After all, the past year is littered with one after another wrong conclusion by Wall Street (and Fed) bankers that inflation was either transitory or couldn’t rise any higher. Is this time any different.

  Let’s take a look at the facts:

  First, there is the base effect, and indeed after March things tend to normalize due to the two-year anniversary of the post-covid collapse which troughed in March 2020 and has been ‘renormalizing’ ever since.

  Second, at 0.3% M/M, core CPI not only missed expectations of 0.5%, but rose at the lowest level since September 2022.

  

  Third, there is the modest slowdown in the all important OER, shelter and rent space: in March, OER and rents of primary residence both came in at 0.43% mom, cooling slightly from February. And even if on a Y/Y basis, shelter inflation printed at the highest level since 1991, it is likely that we have hit the peak for the sequential rate, although we will surely have elevated readings going forward for quite some time.

  

  Fourth, car prices: last Friday we asked “Are Used Car Prices About To Peak For Real This Time?” and today the BLS came close to giving us the answer, when the index for used cars and trucks fell 3.8% in March, its second consecutive monthly decline after a series of large increases, and singlehandedly was responsible for subtracting 20bps from the core print (core would have risen 0.5%, in line with expectations otherwise).

  

  One can argue that the drop is only just starting, and Pantheon Macro does just that, repeating what we said this morning and writing that “plunging used vehicle prices explains the undershoot in the March core CPI; they have much further to fall. .. the potential for it to be a huge drag on core inflation over the remainder of this year is very real.”

  

  Picking up on this, Deutsche Bank writes that with vehicle inventories being rebuilt and wholesale used car inflation trending down, automobile prices should cease being a major contributor to inflation, at least in the near term, and the bank expects used cars to be another meaningful drag on the April core CPI print.

  That said, there is a big footnote here, and as “the big short” Michael Burry pointed out, it is likely that the BLS may have figured out that in order to push inflation down it has to hammer car prices and that’s precisely what it plans to do next month when in addition to manipulating the artificially low OER series, the BLS is now taking aim the vehicle prices too.

  CPI says housing costs rose 5.0% last 12mos. Wrong. CPI would be 12.0% using real-world NAR housing data. BLS has smoothed out housing numbers forever because home prices have been a problem forever. So next month they will start smoothing out vehicle prices. #problemsolved pic.twitter.com/KDdwADZgZi

  — Cassandra B.C. (@michaeljburry) April 12, 2022

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

  Fifth, while banks are always wrong, one voice which still carries some credibility is that of Jeffrey Gundlach and speaking to CNBC today, he said that “we are near peak inflation“, then again exactly one month ago he also predicted that inflation would hit 10% (and one year ago, he also said that inflation would peak in July 2021), so perhaps he isn’t the best authority on the matter either.

  To be sure, there are various reasons to be skeptical that peak inflation is here. First, food and energy added significantly to the headline print, with the former growing 1% month-over-month for the second month in a row and the latter notching the second highest monthly gain in the series’ sixty-five year history (+11.0% vs. 13.5% in September 2005). While it is difficult to predict which way energy prices will head next, with the Biden admin making them the primary target of Democrat pre-midterm agenda even as the raging Ukraine war assures that commodities will remain very high for a long time, one thing is clear: food has yet to feel the impact given lagged pass-through and as Bank of America siad, is likely to remain hot throughout the year. In other words, while much of the covid-linked supply chain inflationary spike is fading, we are about to face an even bigger, Ukraine-war food inflation spike. Granted, this won’t hit core inflation as much, but try telling American households that high double-digit food inflation doesn’t count.

  

  Another reason to be skeptical of calls for peak inflation is that as noted above, most of the impact from the downside outliers was a function of used cars and trucks. As such, alternative measures of trend inflation like the trimmed mean (+0.55%) and median (+0.48%) CPI came in significantly stronger than core. On a twelve month basis, both of these measures of underlying inflation continued to push higher. This is a continuation of the previous trend, which has seen a variety of measures of underlying inflation rising.

  

  Add to this that while used cares have finally dropped (and they also dropped last summer only to surge right after), household furnishing and supplies (+1.0%) and apparel (+0.6%) both posted outsized gains indicating that supply chains remain snarled. Given recent geopolitical developments, Deutsche Bank warns that a major risk is that further deterioration in supply chains could eventually begin to impact vehicle prices again, precisely what we warned about last week.

  

  With both sides of the argument laid out, where do the banks stand? Well, as noted above, for better or worse they have decided to call peak inflation right here, right now, with DB writing that “our longer run view on core CPI remains steady, with inflation beginning to decline in the April data to end this year at 5.0% (Q4/Q4), 2023 at 3.4%, and 2024 at 2.7%. Food and energy inflation should serve to keep headline inflation above core, with the corresponding values for headline at 6.2%, 3.6%, and 3.0%, respectively.”

  

  And with both Goldman and JPM also jumping on the “peak inflation” bandwagon, all we now need is for central bankers to climb on board and to conclude that this time inflation – no longer transitory mind you – has finally peaked. That will be the clearest signal yet that a lengthy period of brutal stagflation is now inevitable.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 22:25

• Buchanan: The Message From Ukraine – Nukes Do Deter
  Buchanan: The Message From Ukraine – Nukes Do Deter

  Authored by Pat Buchanan,

  When he arrived at Christ the Savior Cathedral to pay his respects to the ultra-nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who had died of COVID-19, Russian President Vladimir Putin carried a clutch of red roses.

  The man beside him was carrying a briefcase.

  That briefcase appeared to be Russia’s version of the “football” that is carried by a military aide to U.S. presidents and contains the codes for launching strategic nuclear weapons.

  French King Louis XIV had stamped upon his cannon the inscription, “Ultima Ratio Regum” — The Last Argument of Kings.

  In our era, nuclear weapons are the ultima ratio of nation-states. And what Putin was saying with his briefcase-carrying aide beside him was that, rather than accept defeat and humiliation in the Ukraine war, he may resort to the use of tactical atomic weapons.

  And Putin is not the only one reminding us of the utility of having nuclear weapons and the folly of giving them up.

  In 1991, when the Soviet Union dissolved into 15 nations, a newly independent Ukraine controlled its own large arsenal of nuclear weapons.

  At the behest of the United States and in return for U.S. security guarantees, Kyiv gave them up and sent them all back to Russia.

  Ukraine is living today with the consequences of that decision.

  It is a victim of aggression by Russia, while the U.S. is inhibited in what it will do to assist Kyiv by an awareness that Russia has hundreds of tactical nuclear weapons, which Putin has signaled that, in the event of a true “existential” crisis, he may use.

  

  Ukraine is in its present crisis because Moscow has the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, while Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in the 1990s.

  The world is surely taking note of this fact.

  South Korea relies on U.S. nuclear weapons to deter a nuclear-armed North Korea. Seoul also relies on the U.S. to retaliate against the North for any first use of nukes against the South.

  And the issue is not an academic one.

  Last week, Pyongyang warned that in the event of a clash with the South, its nuclear weapons would be used “at the outset of war.”

  Seoul must today be observing Ukraine with some intensity. For there the U.S. is carefully calibrating whether the weapons they send to help Ukraine fight for its national existence violate a Moscow red line.

  Could South Korea expect similar U.S. caution as to what weapons it would use in defending the country from a nuclear-armed North?

  According to one U.S. poll, 71% of all South Koreans support the acquisition of their own arsenal of nuclear weapons.

  China, too, has been observing how the United States has been inhibited by Russia’s nuclear arsenal in deciding which weapons to send, and which not to send, to Ukraine.

  In Beijing, this question is surely being debated:

  If the Americans, who have no treaty commitment to defend Ukraine, are inhibited by the threat of war with a nuclear-armed Russia into limiting their military aid to Ukraine, will the Americans be similarly intimidated by a nuclear-armed China — from going to war for Taiwan?

  China may soon be testing U.S. resolve in the Taiwan Strait. For, like Ukraine, Taiwan has no treaty alliance obligating the United States to defend it.

  In East Asia, the nations most hostile to us and our allies — Russia, China, North Korea — all have nuclear weapons. But none of our friends and allies in East Asia — Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Australia — have nuclear weapons. All rely on us for nuclear deterrence.

  Observing the restrictions we have put on military aid to Ukraine, what must they be thinking now?

  Consider the Middle East.

  Iran is currently renegotiating a return to the nuclear arms deal of 2015. Under that agreement, Iran was granted relief from sanctions and a return to the world economy. In return, Tehran pledged not to test or acquire nuclear weapons and to open its nuclear facilities to inspection to show it was complying with the treaty.

  Why has Iran, which has the ability to enrich uranium to weapons-grade but has never done so, forgone the testing and the building of nuclear weapons?

  Iran appears to have concluded that its security would be more imperiled than enhanced if it sought to test a nuclear device preparatory to building a bomb.

  A nuclear weapons test, if successful, would bring to Iran the possibility of war with a nuclear-armed Israel, as well as the potential destruction of all of its nuclear sites by the United States.

  If Iran built a bomb, the Turks and Saudis might soon follow, and the ayatollah’s Iran would be less secure than it is today. Iran’s Persians, after all, are a minority in an Arab-dominated Middle East, and Iran’s Shia are but a fraction of the numbers of the Sunni Arab population.

  What the Ukraine war has demonstrated is the vulnerability of not having nukes.

  Taiwan and South Korea, especially, should take note.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 22:05

• CarMax Confirms Demand Destruction As Used-Car Prices Tumble 
  CarMax Confirms Demand Destruction As Used-Car Prices Tumble 

  Demand destruction is when prices get so high that consumers are hit with an affordability crisis. That is precisely what is happening with the used car market. 

  New earnings data from CarMax, the nation’s largest retailer of used cars, showed the number of used vehicles sold for the quarter ending Feb. 28 declined 6.5% while prices were at record highs. Average car prices rose 40% during the quarter, or $8,300, compared with a year ago. 

  A substantial increase in used car prices over the last year and the recent surge in interest rates could be the catalyst for what has recently sparked demand destruction as buyers go on strike, thus cooling red-hot prices. 

  “From an affordability standpoint, you’ve got interest rates going up, inflation, you’ve got the Ukraine-Russia war. There just a lot weighing on the consumer right now.

  For “the lower credit spectrum customer, certainly, we feel affordability has maybe often priced them out of the market,” Bill Nash, Carmax’s CEO, told investors on a conference call. 

  Last week, the Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index, a wholesale tracker of used car prices, dropped 3.8% in March from February, the largest monthly decline since April 2020 (only Feb 2007 and two prints in the fall of 2008 were worse before that).

  

  Slumping prices may reveal stressed-out consumers are taking a step back from the market as interest rates rise.

  

  Demand destruction is happening at a critical inflection point for the used car market. We’ve pointed out the emergence of this economic phenomenon since early February (read: here & here). Last Friday, we asked: “Are Used Car Prices About To Peak For Real This Time?”

  We also noted that Manheim tends to lead used auto CPI. On Tuesday morning, government inflation data showed that used cars and trucks fell 3.8% in March. Meanwhile, headline CPI was up a shocking 8.5% YoY. 

  

  Given that used vehicle price significantly contributes to the overall headline inflation rates, this could also be a sign of peak inflation. Today, Goldman Sach’s Jan Hatzius told clients that March core CPI has “likely peaked.” 

  Also, DoubleLine Capital CEO Jeffrey Gundlach told CNBC that inflation has peaked, but pressures will remain persistent as he believes the Federal Reserve is behind the curve.

  So what does this mean for readers? If you have a used vehicle you were probably thinking about selling, now is the time to do so. Consumers looking to purchase a used car may want to wait for prices to move lower. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 21:45

• Biden's Ghost Gun Rule Is Dead On Arrival Thanks To 0% Receiver
  Biden’s Ghost Gun Rule Is Dead On Arrival Thanks To 0% Receiver

  Submitted by The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN).,

  Yesterday, President Biden, the Department of Justice, and the ATF announced the details of their new 364-page rule for the redefinition of “frame or receiver.” In doing so, they have decided to attempt an illegal rewrite of the 1968 Gun Control Act. 

  If you’ve been paying close attention to headlines the past few weeks, you may have noticed a surge in articles pertaining to “ghost guns.”

  

  The corporate media has been setting up Biden for an easy “win” on guns with this new rule. Likely because of Biden’s low poll numbers headed into the midterms. 

  Initially announced in April of 2021, almost a full year later, we’re finally able to see what sort of egregious gun control has been put together for the law-abiding gun owner. 

  The rule stems from the gun control lobby’s obsession with home-built firearms. The problem here, though, is that to regulate privately made firearms, or “PMFs” as they’re defined in the new rule, the ATF had to cast an extremely wide legal net. 

  In the 364-page rule, we can see that the Biden admin intends to ban “ghost guns” by creating a new class of highly regulated items by redefining the term “firearm” to include parts and collections of parts that the ATF now considers to be “readily” convertible into functional firearms. 

  The example used in the press conference was a Polymer80 kit, which quickly sold out of all available models after the announcement of the rule change. 

  

  It’s important to note that from what we can tell from the rule change and the opinion of others in the know, this rule does not ban possession of firearms made from 80% kits. It also does not mandate the serialization of those already made firearms or 3D printed items for personal use. What it does do is require the serialization of 80% kits that are in possession of Federal Firearms Licensees (also known as FFLs) and manufacturers. It’s interesting because the expected outcome of this rule, as Biden pitched, was the complete and absolute ban of “ghost guns” altogether. 

  The rule also changes and complicates the definition of “frame or receiver.” What was once a simple short definition has changed to include multiple pages of diagrams, new terms and more. In addition, the ATF has added new definitions for “unfinished frame or receiver,” which ATF now considers to be firearms themselves, but only under certain, unclear conditions. 

  In addition, ATF has commanded Federal Firearms Licensees to hold 4473 records on-site indefinitely. This small change may go unnoticed by many, but this is a significant step towards a legitimate registry. This action shouldn’t surprise many gun owners, who already know that these rule changes are not about saving lives; they’re only about the consolidation of power.

  Many in the anti-gun lobby and corporate media class say that these actions are justified because privately made firearms are “untraceable.” This idea that a trace is some magical crime-solving tool is a misconception dreamed up by those who have little understanding of the difference between how legal and illegal firearms sales occur. 

  It’s not to find the gun when an agent “runs a trace,” despite what images the misleading name might conjure up. Instead, it’s to find who originally bought the firearm and from what dealer. This gun trace often leads to the fact that many guns are stolen or reported stolen and then used in crimes. Because of this, the trace ends with the original buyer who had their firearm stolen. Criminals aren’t filling out 4473 forms and submitting to NICS checks. It’s important to note here that many stolen firearms used in crimes may have their serial number removed completely, resulting in an “untraceable” gun, even though those guns wouldn’t fall into the “ghost gun” category.  

  Firearms Policy Coalition had this to say: 

  “Far from “clarifying” anything, the rulemaking tortures simple terms from law into multi-part definitions, with newly injected sub-terms like “readily” having their own lengthy definitions. This is clearly an attempt to sidestep Congress, as Biden even indicated in his remarks today.”

  Here’s the irony of the situation, though. Regardless of how overly complex it is or how wide a legal net the ATF decides to cast, this rule change will have little to no effect. 

  That’s because of the 0% Receiver. 

  In response to the announcement of the Biden Admin’s proposed rule change, Defense Distributed decided to shift its focus to the creation of 0% receivers. 

  Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed had this to say about the new rule:

  “The receiver rule is an illegal attempt to rewrite the GCA outside of Congress. Nevertheless, Ghost Gunner anticipated this maneuver and is now shipping Zero Percent receivers which perfectly defeat the rule from day one. Americans will always be able to build firearms in the privacy of their homes.”

  This rule change has caused a surge in demand for Defense Distributed’s Ghost Gunner 3. The Ghost Gunner is a small CNC Machine that users can insert a bar of aluminum, press a button, and after the machine mills out the metal, have a completely legal, privately made, non-serialized firearm frame ready to go. 

  Because all the Ghost Gunner 3 needs is a block of aluminum to produce the firearm frame, the Biden Admin & ATF would need to regulate blocks of aluminum to stop people from producing privately made firearms. While the DOJ may be able to convince a judge that an 80% lower is likely to be made into a gun, a block of aluminum is a much harder sell. 

  The same can be said for 3D printing. Are we to assume that PLA plastic is to be regulated as a firearm? 

  Because gun control has a hard time passing in the legislative branch (even with all three branches of government controlled by democrats currently), the Biden admin has resorted to governing by executive fiat, using the executive branch to pass new “regulations” using existing law. 

  As of right now, the rule change has 120 days to take effect after it hits the federal register. Many groups such as Gun Owners of America & Firearms Policy Coalition have already announced their intent to sue the Federal Government over these new rule changes.

  TMGN’s Steph and her team analyzed hundreds of pages of the new ghost gun rule and determined uppers won’t be serialized and more… 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 21:25

• Apple Assembler Pegatron Halts iPhone Production As China Combats COVID Outbreak
  Apple Assembler Pegatron Halts iPhone Production As China Combats COVID Outbreak

  Supply chains in Shanghai are becoming congested again amid Beijing’s zero-COVID policy that has shuttered factories and placed millions of people in lockdown. 

  iPhone assembler Pegatron Corp. is the latest company to suspend production at factories in Shanghai and nearby Kunshan, adhering to local government health requirements to mitigate the worst virus outbreak in two years., according to Bloomberg. 

  Taiwan-based Pegatron announced in a securities filing that the resumption of work at both iPhone plants would require authorization by the government. It said it would “actively cooperate” with local health officials to resume work as fast as possible but gave no timeline. 

  Pegatron said it has contacted customers and suppliers and has evaluated the impact of both plants shutting down without elaborating on details. 

  What’s important about Pegatron is that it’s the second-largest assembler of iPhones after Foxconn Technology Group. Pegatron kept production online for weeks after Foxconn was forced to shutter operations last month. Since Shanghai and neighboring Kunshan are now both under tight lockdowns, iPhone assembly in China could be reduced since top producers have shuttered operations.

  Bloomberg supply chain analysis shows Foxconn and Pegatron are the two largest producers of iPhones and other Apple products. There are no reports (yet) of supply disruptions of finished electronics. 

  

  On a seasonal basis, US companies generally begin to increase Chinese imports for the summer season. With factories shuttered and logistical networks and ports clogged, this has likely impeded shipments to the US. 

  Supply chains are breaking again, which could lead to empty shelves in US stores by summer. Consultancy Trendforce warns Pegatron is down to just a few weeks of stocks. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 21:05

• Canadian MPs Urge Passage Of Organ Trafficking Bill In Honor Of Late Rights Champion David Kilgour
  Canadian MPs Urge Passage Of Organ Trafficking Bill In Honor Of Late Rights Champion David Kilgour

  Authored by Isaac Teo via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  MPs rose in the House of Commons this week to table a petition requesting the passage of a bill combating organ trafficking in honour of David Kilgour, a former cabinet minister and renowned human rights advocate.

  

  Kilgour, who had a long career in politics, passed away on April 5 from a rare lung disease. He was 81.

  “This horrific practice was first brought to light by former member of Parliament David Kilgour,” said Conservative MP Pat Kelly. “It is a shame that he did not live to see its passage, but I certainly hope that this bill will pass.”

  Bill S-223 is a Senate bill that seeks to combat forced organ harvesting and trafficking by making it a criminal offence for an individual to go abroad to receive an organ from someone who did not give informed consent to the removal of the organ. It would also amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to render a permanent resident or foreign national inadmissible to Canada if they engaged in activities relating to trafficking in human organs.

  In 2006, Kilgour and Canadian human rights lawyer David Matas co-authored the ground-breaking report “Bloody Harvest”—later followed by a book of the same name—which investigated the Chinese regime’s forced organ harvesting from living Falun Dafa prisoners of conscience. The two said that based on their findings, they were able to confirm that the regime engaged in the heinous practice.

  Following the publication of the report, Kilgour and Matas travelled to numerous countries around the world, holding panels and talking to lawmakers to inform them about Beijing’s persecution campaign and organ harvesting of Falun Dafa adherents.

  

  ‘Incredible Legacy’

  While testifying before a Senate committee last year about Bill S-204, Bill S-223’s predecessor, Kilgour noted that many countries already have laws in place to combat organ trafficking, and said it’s “embarrassing” that Canada doesn’t yet have such legislation.

  In the last Parliament, S-204 got the unanimous support of the Senate, but before it had a chance to be fully voted in in the House of Commons, an election was called and Parliament was dissolved.

  There were several previous attempts to pass similar bills as private member’s bills, but they all died when Parliament was dissolved due to an election being called.

  Introduced by Sen. Salma Ataullahjan, Bill S-223 passed in the Senate on Dec. 9, 2021, and had its first reading in the House of Commons on Dec. 16, 2021.

  On April 6 and 7, 13 Conservative members tabled the petition and encouraged the passage of the bill.

  MP Garnett Genuis, who has introduced Senate bills on organ trafficking to the House in previous parliaments, took the opportunity to recognize Kilgour’s work.

  “I join colleagues on all sides of the House in recognizing the incredible legacy of David Kilgour, who passed away this week,” Genuis said.

  “David brought this issue to my attention and to many people’s attention. He, along with David Matas, wrote the initial report on this issue. He has been a tireless champion on it and on so many other human rights issues as well.”

  MP Damien Kurek said: “This bill has passed the Senate unanimously three times, and MPs from multiple parties have put forward a form of this bill over the past 13 years. The petitioners are hoping that it can be this Parliament that gets it done.”

  In urging the passage of the bill, MP Stephen Ellis said that as a former family physician, the legislation strikes “the heart of the matter for me,” and said Kilgour was “a great champion not only of this issue but of other human rights issues.”

  MP Tom Kmiec said it was Kilgour “who blew the doors open on this practice overseas and made this [legislation] possible. … God bless him for his work and God bless him for everything he did for this Parliament.”

  ‘Maverick With a Cause’

  On April 7, Liberal MP John McKay also paid tribute Kilgour in the House, noting to his former colleague’s passion for human rights, unyielding independence, and strong faith.

  “Everything in David’s life was animated by his deep Christian faith. The anti-politician’s politician, David ran for the Conservatives and won. He ran for the Liberals and won, and ultimately sat as an independent,” McKay said.

  “He had little or no time for the compromises of politics, or prime ministers or party leaders. If a government hung in the balance over Darfur, so what? If he was banned by the government of China for advocating on behalf of the Falun Gong or the Uyghurs, so what?”

  Kilgour was first elected as an MP for the Progressive Conservative Party in 1979, but was removed from caucus in 1990 after disagreeing with then-Prime Minister Brian Mulroney on bringing in the Goods and Services Tax.

  He joined the Liberals in 1992 and served as secretary of state to Latin America and Africa from 1997 to 2002, and as secretary of state to the Asia-Pacific region from 2002 to 2003 during the government of Jean Chrétien.

  In 2005, Kilgour left the Liberal Party over disagreements on principle and sat as an independent MP. He retired from politics in 2006.

  In an article on his website titled “Why I Left the Party,” Kilgour cited the unwillingness of Canada to join the international effort to stop the Rwanda genocide and rights atrocities in Sudan as a reason for his departure.

  “Nowhere is our foreign policy vacuum more evident than in Sudan, where more than 300,000 civilians have already perished in a disaster Romeo Dallaire has described as ‘Rwanda in slow motion,’” he wrote.

  Dallaire was the former force commander of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda before and during the 1994 genocide.

  Months after Kilgour’s call for action, the government of Paul Martin sent humanitarian aid to Sudan.

  McKay said Kilgour’s dedication to human rights causes was backed by such courage and conviction that it spurred others to follow suit.

  “David’s passion was so strong and his advocacy so effective that it was ultimately taken up by many others,” he said.

  He said while Kilgour can be described as a “a maverick with a cause,” he also knew how to bring people together to “move agendas.”

  “David lived by Matthew 22: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind,’ and ‘love your neighbour as yourself,’” he said.

  “David had a diverse set of neighbours, and he loved them all.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 20:45

• "Sh*t Show": Triggered Twitter Employees Melt Down Over Elon Musk's Uncertain Intentions
  “Sh*t Show”: Triggered Twitter Employees Melt Down Over Elon Musk’s Uncertain Intentions

  The staff at Twitter are apparently so triggered by Elon Musk’s involvement in the company that they were even stressed on their monthly “day of rest” they get off.

  It remains to be seen now that Musk has declined a board seat with the company whether his goals are to be an active or passive investor. 

  Twitter was so confident that Musk was going to join its Board of Directors, it had listed his name on the company’s IR page, Bloomberg reported on Monday.

  But now the lack of clarity surrounding Musk’s involvement has “signaled chaos” for some employees. A Q&A that was set up with Musk after it was expected that he would join the board of directors has been cancelled. 

  Now, instead of having to act in the best interest of the company, Musk can Tweet whatever he’d like to his 80 million followers, whenever he wants. 

  Chief Executive Officer Parag Agrawal has warned employees of “distractions ahead”. 

  

  Employees have said they are “super stressed” and “working together to help each other get through the week”. 

  Meanwhlie, not much has changed but for Musk spending the last couple days tweeting out ideas for the company’s subscription service and trolling the company over whether or not its San Francisco headquarters should be turned into a homeless shelter. 

  One Twitter employee told Bloomberg they were concerned that Musk was “just getting started, which is unfortunate.” Other employees described the situation as a “shit show”. 

  Rumman Chowdhury, a director on Twitter’s AI research team, said: “Musk’s immediate chilling effect was something that bothered me significantly.” 

  “Twitter has a beautiful culture of hilarious constructive criticism, and I saw that go silent because of his minions attacking employees,” he continued.

  Matt Navarra, a social media consultant, told Bloomberg: “This decision by Elon does not bode well for Twitter. Titter thought having Trump on the platform was tough. Elon Musk is going to be a corporate nightmare.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 20:25

• California Looks To Reduce Weekly Work Hours To 32
  California Looks To Reduce Weekly Work Hours To 32

  Authored by Alice Sun via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  California legislators proposed a new bill that would allow employees of bigger companies to work fewer hours in a week without losing any income, which critics said would become a “job killer.”

  

  Assembly Bill 2932, introduced by Assembly Members Cristina Garcia (D-Bell Gardens) and Evan Low (D-San Jose) in February, would require companies with more than 500 employees to reduce their weekly work hours from 40 to 32 hours—from the regular 5 to 4 workdays a week—and those who work more than 32 hours a week would be considered as working overtime and should be compensated at a rate of 1.5 times the regular pay rate for the extra hours.

  If signed into law, California will become the first state in the United States to reduce regular weekly workdays to 4 days.

  “There have been so many societal advances in the last 100 years,” Garcia said in a statement emailed to The Epoch Times. “It doesn’t make sense that we are still holding onto a work schedule that served the industrial revolution. It’s long overdue that this progress is shared with our workforce which deserves an improved quality of life.”

  Garcia said working fewer hours could improve employees’ productivity and wellbeing, and “the pandemic and the Great Resignation have made it crystal clear the time [for this change] is now.”

  The bill also requires “the compensation rate of pay at 32 hours to reflect the previous compensation rate of pay at 40 hours” and “prohibits an employer from reducing an employee’s regular rate of pay as a result of this reduced hourly workweek requirement.”

  It is unclear whether the “regular rate of pay” in the bill’s original language is referring to an employee’s original hourly wage or the total compensation.

  “This language may be interpreted as requiring the employer to pay the employee the same total compensation that they are presently earning at 40 hours for 32 hours of work,” Ashley Hoffman, policy advocate at the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber), wrote in an April 6 letter to Low.

  If this is the case, Hoffman explained, an employee originally making $20 per hour would be making $400 a week for 32 hours worked, equaling $25 an hour (25 percent increase) and leading to an overtime pay rate of $37.5 an hour (87.5 percent increase).

  Calling the bill a “job killer,” CalChamber stated that businesses are still recovering from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, and many companies have already been cutting down their current work hours and job openings.

  “Instead of imposing new costs on employers, the Legislature should reform California’s unnecessarily rigid wage and hour laws to allow employees flexibility in their weekly schedules that would better align with the modern workplace,” the chamber’s letter read.

  June Cutter, an attorney and small business owner who is running for California State Assembly District 76, also opposed the bill, saying the change would have an adverse effect on both employees and employers.

  “Legislators who have never operated a business (or perhaps never even held a private sector job) have no idea what the real implications of this bill will be,” Cutter wrote on Twitter. “People will lose wages, people will lose jobs, small businesses will fold.”

  The bill is currently under review by the Labor and Employment Committee.

  Low did not respond to a request for comment by press deadline.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 20:05

• Taiwan Holds Preparedness Drills Simulating Chinese Attack On Nuclear Power Plant
  Taiwan Holds Preparedness Drills Simulating Chinese Attack On Nuclear Power Plant

  With an eye on what’s been unfolding around Ukraine’s nuclear power plants, Taiwan has conducted drills that simulated an emergency response following an imagined attack on nuclear power plants in order to enhance readiness for potential Chinese military invasion.  

  “About 500 people, including police, firefighters, power utility workers and private volunteers, took part in the exercise held in the southern Taiwanese county of Pingtung” – which took place late last week.

  Regional media reporting indicated the simulation was based on military facilities and civilian buildings being hit by Chinese missiles, resulting in large fires. Crucially the drill was held in Pingtung County, which hosts two nuclear power plants.

  

  According to Japan’s international public media service NHK World, “After Russian forces attacked nuclear power facilities in Ukraine, Taiwan’s defense ministry instructed local authorities to include a response to possible military attacks in their disaster drills this year.”

  The report underscored further, “Other cities and counties are also preparing to hold drills that can help improve their capabilities to respond to a contingency.”

  Recently US Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral Samuel J Paparo warned the Beijing is closely studying Russia’s invasion of Ukraine “and learning from it” to see what lessons could be applied to a future theoretical Taiwan invasion. 

  “China is undoubtedly watching what’s happened in Ukraine, taking notes, and learning from it,” Adm. Paparo said earlier this month, as quoted in regional journal Taiwan Focus.

  “And there will be learning and there will be adjustments to the extent that they’re able to learn from it. And they will improve their capabilities based on what they learn at this time,” he added.

  Further, he described that he’d be “loath to say or to do anything that would relieve the urgency to prepare, to uphold the international rules-based order and to uphold the U.S.’ commitment for the defence of Taiwan, if there were an effort to unify Taiwan by force.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 19:45

• Taibbi: The Great Billionaire Space Caper
  Taibbi: The Great Billionaire Space Caper

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  Let’s fly the first black woman to the moon, but send the checks to Jeff Bezos! On the congressional hustle that perfectly captures 2022 America…

  

  In a story that shows how hard it is to deter a billionaire ravenous for public money, Jeff Bezos of Amazon and The Washington Post fame appears to have prevailed upon buddies in the Senate to keep alive a childhood dream of not only going to the moon, but getting the public to pay for it. A Bezos company officially lost this moon contract three times in less than a year, but the fourth time’s a charm: thanks to congress, his Jason Voorhees-like determination may be rewarded with a contract worth $6 billion or more.

  On March 28th, Joe Biden released his fiscal year 2023 budget, which despite eyebrow-raising changes — in particular, a 10% increase in defense spending — generated few headlines. One of the few items the press did cover was this passage:

  The Budget provides $7.5 billion, $1.1 billion above the 2021 enacted level, for Artemis lunar exploration. Artemis would return American astronauts to the Moon as early as 2025, land the first woman and person of color on the Moon…

  It was unclear if the budget language was describing one person, or two, or more (headline writers seemed confused on that front as well). Still, the FY 2023 budget merely put into writing what NASA announced last year, and what’s been the buzz on the Hill for a while: that the space agency’s next big goal is to put a black woman on the moon. “The Apollo generation,” NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said in March, “has passed the torch.”

  A lofty enough goal, but then there was the fine print. Much as the military once replaced cheap army cafeteria food with Cinnabon franchises and high-cost meals prepared by firms like KBR, and the NIH basically exists to provide free R&D to pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, NASA no longer builds much for itself. Instead, it’s lately become little more than a vehicle for funding the phallic moon race between Elon Musk’s SpaceX and Bezos-owned Blue Origin.

  The feud between the two billionaires began years ago, when congress funded the solicitation of three private commercial proposals for the next moon landing, including one from SpaceX, one from Blue Origin, and a third from a company called Dynetics located in Senator Richard Shelby’s home state of Alabama. Last April, Musk and SpaceX appeared to come out on top after NASA declared SpaceX the winner of a $2.9 billion contract to build the spacecraft that would deliver the next NASA astronauts to the lunar surface. Bezos’s Blue Origin had submitted a bid roughly twice that size.

  When NASA rejected his $5.9 billion bid, Bezos went ape. He fought back in multiple ways. Among the first moves was he and Blue Origin filing a 175-page complaint with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), asserting that NASA had “moved the goalposts at the last minute” by picking just one company’s lunar landing plan. It was expected that NASA would pick two firms, but decided on SpaceX only because of “short funding.” Essentially, Bezos was complaining that he’d submitted a higher bid than he needed to because he expected that NASA would be spending more money. Now that he knew he actually needed to watch costs, he sought a chance to submit a more taxpayer-friendly proposal.

  Lest anyone think I’m joking about the phallic aspect of this competition, check out the Twitter response from Musk to Bezos’s GAO complaint:

  Can’t get it up (to orbit) lol

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 26, 2021

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

  For years now, Musk and Bezos have provided ample material for America’s fading late-night TV comedy scene with their private space-dong race. When glimpses of Musk’s “Big Fucking Rocket” (BFR) space-tourism vehicle reached the public, Twitter exploded with cheering comments from Musk fans like “It looks like a dick with fins!” and “Chief, that looks like a $500 dildo.”

  When Bezos soon after went to the heavens in a private vessel, he did so in a rocket that was 18 meters tall, but somehow looked exactly five and one quarter inches high and appeared to have a metal glans. This prompted an onslaught of abusive tweets, Dr. Evil jokes, and chuckling headlines. (Click on Mashable’s “A small replica of Jeff Bezos’ penis-shaped rocket can be yours for $69” for a very amusing photo.) It was difficult to find TV coverage of the Bezos space jaunt that didn’t involve uncontrolled laughter.

  All this was funny, so long as the premise was “Rich guys spending their own money shooting themselves into space in huge overcompensating cylinders.” However, the Artemis project turned the SpaceX-Blue Origin battle on its head. This was not just a war to see who could build the bigger jockstrap, but to see who could get U the Taxpayer to pay for it.

  Musk appeared to win, and when Bezos’s GAO complaint failed, he moved on to filing a federal suit to “to restore fairness, create competition, and ensure a safe return to the Moon for America,” i.e. to give Bezos the effing contract. However, federal judge Richard Hertling quickly called BS on that and ruled against Bezos last November, seemingly checkmating the diminutive money-devourer.

  Bezos went on Twitter to say it wasn’t the ruling he wanted, but that Blue Origin “respects the court’s judgment” and wished “full success” for SpaceX. Of course it later turned out that Bezos had no intention at all of respecting the court’s judgment, which makes it a tad funnier that Musk decided at that point not to meet Bezos on the field of faux-graciousness. He tweeted the following about Hertling’s ruling:

  pic.twitter.com/deqktTvS3U

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 4, 2021

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

  Having struck out with the GAO and the federal courts, Bezos moved back to the Senate. Washington’s Maria Cantwell, Bezos’s home senator, had by then already introduced an amendment to the bill funding Artemis, essentially asking for a re-think of the decision to go with Musk only. The Amendment may be a museum-worthy effort in the history of woke-washing. Two key passages:

  Commercial entities in the United States have made significant investment and progress toward the development of human-class lunar landers…

  Maintaining multiple technically-credible providers within NASA commercial programs is a best practice that reduces programmatic risk.

  Translation: Bezos has already spent a lot of money trying to get taxpayers to send him to the moon, but since he already lost, let’s fund two moon programs!

  An additional subtext: “How will we ever get a black woman to the moon, if we don’t give Bezos billions?”

  Saying that “in carrying out the Artemis program, the Administrator should ensure that the entire Artemis program is inclusive and representative of all people of the United States, including women and minorities,” the Amendment language would authorize not just the $5.9 billion Bezos originally bid, but as much as $10 billion in new money for a second moon plan.

  Only Bernie Sanders seemed to think it odd that a man who bears a net worth of over $180 billion is working this hard to get the taxpayer to fulfill his childhood space fantasy (Bezos called watching Neil Armstrong walk on the moon a “seminal” moment in his life). At the end of last week, Sanders introduced a counter-amendment to remove the “$10 billion bailout” for Bezos’s “space hobby” from the moon bill.

  “Bezos has enough money to buy a $500 million yacht,” Sanders said on the Senate floor, showing pictures as he noted that neither Bezos nor Amazon pays much of any federal taxes. He then showed photos of Bezos’s $23 million, 25-bathroom mansion. “Not quite sure you need 25 bathrooms, but that’s not my business,” Sanders quipped.

  Sanders is skilled at billionaire-trolling, but the problem is, he’s had too much practice. The effort to snatch back money from Bezos seems a longshot to be successful. The question of whether or not the funds ultimately get appropriated will be resolved behind closed doors, after the current recess in congress, when the bill goes to committee. Anyone want to lay odds on how much House and Senate members end up doling out in private?

  Whoring out of NASA to billionaires is serious business. Back in 2015, a bill called the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, passed by unanimous consent, gave private commercial enterprises the ownership rights to celestial bodies discovered through space travel. “A U.S. citizen engaged in commercial recovery of an asteroid resource or a space resource shall be entitled to any asteroid resource or space resource obtained,” the bill read, “including to possess, own, transport, use, and sell it according to applicable law.”

  For this reason, congress appropriating NASA funds to the likes of Musk and Bezos to build long-distance rocketry and landers is not just about symbolic missions, but the space version of the NIH: giving space hobbyists free R&D to become mega-oligarchs via the limitless potential offered by space prospecting. “The first trillionaire there will ever be is the person who exploits the natural resources on asteroids,” is how Neil deGrasse Tyson put it, around the time of the passage of the 2015 act.

  The bards of Washington have rarely looked at this angle. Even Bloomberg highlighted “first Moon Trips for women, people of color” and “climate change research” in its recent coverage. Most reports have buried the lede on the Musk-Bezos badger-fight for taxpayer cash under NASA’s new rallying cry, which is essentially to make sure the next glories-of-space movie like First Man doesn’t have to include another “Whitey on the Moon” scene. Whoever comes out of the Artemis capsule first, a primary winner of the mission will be a billionaire with his teeth in your wallet. Maybe two, if congress gets its way.

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to TK News by Matt Taibbi

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 19:25

• President Biden Accuses Putin Of "Genocide", Says "Evidence Is Mounting"
  President Biden Accuses Putin Of “Genocide”, Says “Evidence Is Mounting”

  Following Russian President Putin’s comments that peace talks with Ukraine are at a “dead end,” and denied accusations being responsible for attacks in Mariupol and Bucha, US President Biden took to the stage this afternoon – to explain how he will fix the problem of “Putin’s Price Hike” (which is still not trending). However, it appears the 79 year old veered off script once again with the following comment…

  “Your family budget, your ability to fill up your tank, none of it should hinge on whether a dictator declares war and commits genocide half a world away.”

  President Biden calls the war in Ukraine “genocide.”

  “Your ability to fill up your tank, none of it, should hinge on whether a dictator declares war and commits genocide a half a world away.” pic.twitter.com/lYW7B0xKMB

  — CBS News (@CBSNews) April 12, 2022

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

  Last month, Biden accused Putin of being a “war criminal,” but this is the first time he has described the situation as a “genocide” – a term Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has used to describe the situation.

  He previously called Putin a “butcher” and called for his removal, saying that “he cannot remain in power,” implicitly calling for regime change.

  Biden on Putin: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” pic.twitter.com/atNZtCPvAM

  — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 26, 2022

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

  But that was immediately walked back by his handlers…

  White House official: “The President’s point was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region. He was not discussing Putin’s power in Russia, or regime change.” https://t.co/SGy7zJLydD

  — Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) March 26, 2022

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

  But unlike that slip, he is not walking it back, but doubling down, telling reporters this evening that:

  “Yes, I called it genocide. Because it has become clearer and clearer that Putin is just trying to wipe out the idea of being able to be Ukrainian.”

  

  He went to say that “the evidence is mounting, it’s no different than it was last week, the more evidence that is coming out of, literally the horrible things that the Russians have done in Ukraine and we’re gonna only learn more and more about the devastation.”

  Of course, words matter – just like they did when he called for Putin’s removal – but this time he appears to want to do things legally:

  “And we’ll let the lawyers decide internationally whether or not it qualifies but it sure seems that way to me.”

  Biden: I called it genocide because it has become clear that Putin is just trying to wipe out the idea of even being able to be a Ukrainian pic.twitter.com/h4SBfDQuFW

  — Acyn (@Acyn) April 12, 2022

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

  Not exactly ‘diplomatic’.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 19:06

• Brooklyn Subway Shooter Still At Large, NYPD Identifies Suspect From Credit Card At Scene
  Brooklyn Subway Shooter Still At Large, NYPD Identifies Suspect From Credit Card At Scene

  Update (1821ET): NYPD is searching for Frank James in connection to Tuesday’s Brooklyn subway shooting.

  NYPD News tweeted a picture of the suspect. 

  This is Frank James. He is a person of interest in the shooting that took place on the N train in Brooklyn Tuesday morning. Anyone with information on his whereabouts is asked to call @NYPDTips at 1-800-577-TIPS. pic.twitter.com/vSYb5UIu2k

  — NYPD NEWS (@NYPDnews) April 12, 2022

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

  

  Police said, “Anyone with information on his whereabouts is asked to call 1-800-577-TIPS.” 

  * * * 

  Update (1753ET): CNN’s Pervaiz Shallwani said law enforcement officials have identified “the suspect in the Brooklyn subway shooting after finding a credit card at the scene.” He also said the credit card was tied to a rental U-Haul cargo van found this evening. 

  NEW: Police were able to identify the suspect in the Brooklyn subway shooting after finding a credit card at the scene, a credit card that was used to the rent the U-Haul cargo van, two law enforcement sources tell me & @ShimonPro: https://t.co/XCkVRpbrRA

  — Pervaiz Shallwani (@Pervaizistan) April 12, 2022

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

  NYPD found the U-Haul cargo van tied to the suspect. 

  Here’s chopper video of the @uhaul suspected to be connected to the Brooklyn shooter.

  On the side of the van you can see “Allegheny West Moving & Storage.”

  More at @NBCPhiladelphia–>https://t.co/8yBphxinNe pic.twitter.com/R8n4TuewzJ

  — Danny Freeman (@DannyEFreeman) April 12, 2022

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

  Here’s a summary of today’s chaotic events at a subway station in the Sunset Park neighborhood of Brooklyn that began around 0830 ET (courtesy of The Guardian): 

  *The gunman in today’s attack remains at large, with New York mayor Eric Adams noting that police will likely release a suspect ID during another press briefing later today.

  *Joe Biden commented on the Brooklyn subway shooting, saying “we’re not letting up until we find the perpetrator,” and shouting out first responders and civilians who helped the injured this morning.

  *More than 20 people were injured during today’s attack, including 10 who were shot and five who are in critical, but stable, condition. Earlier today, the total was reported as 13 people injured with no numbers on how many had sustained gun shot wounds.

  *The weapon the suspect used to shoot multiple people on a subway train and platform earlier on Tuesday in Brooklyn may have been recovered at the scene by law enforcement, CNN is reporting.

  *New York Police Department police commissioner Keechant Sewell described the suspect as a 5ft 5in-tall Black man with a heavy build, wearing a green construction-type vest and a hooded sweatshirt.

  * * * 

  Update (1528ET): AP News reports NYPD is “scouring the city for the shooter and a U-Haul truck with Arizona license plates.” 

  “Police sources tell ⁦CBS2 the NYPD is searching for a U-Haul van with Arizona plates #AL31408 in connection with the shooting.”

  ⁦@WCBSTV⁩ https://t.co/Ha76gj2wz3

  — Carl Quintanilla (@carlquintanilla) April 12, 2022

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

  The suspect (a Black male) remains at large. 

  We need the public’s help apprehending the individual responsible for shooting multiple people today on the subway in #Brooklyn. The suspect is a Black male, who was wearing a green construction vest & a gray hooded sweatshirt. Call @NYPDTips at #800577TIPS with any information. pic.twitter.com/d2wTfNbMDD

  — Commissioner Sewell (@NYPDPC) April 12, 2022

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

  * * * 

  Update (1241ET): Updates from the press conference on the Brooklyn subway shooting: 

  • 16 people were treated for injuries
  • 10 have gunshot wounds
  • 5 people are in critical condition

  The suspect is a 5’5″ tall Black male with a heavy build, wearing a green construction-type vest and a gray hooded sweatshirt. 

  NYPD Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell said the incident occurred around 0830 ET on the Manhattan-bound N-train when “an individual on that train donned what appeared to be a gas mask. He then took a canister out of his bag and opened it. The train at that time began to fill with smoke.” 

  Sewell said the suspect then “opened fire, striking multiple people on the subway and in the platform.” 

  

  NYPD says the suspect is still on the run. Police aren’t investigating the incident as an act of terrorism at this time. 

  Gov. Kathy Hochul said, “this is an active-shooter situation right now.” 

  * * * 

  Update (1054ET): White House press secretary Jen Psaki tweeted President Biden has been briefed on the latest developments in Brooklyn’s shooting incident. 

  @POTUS has been briefed on the latest developments regarding the New York City subway shooting. White House senior staff are in touch with Mayor Adams and Police Commissioner Sewell to offer any assistance as needed.

  — Jen Psaki (@PressSec) April 12, 2022

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

  Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has also been briefed on the incident. 

  @SecMayorkas has been briefed on the current situation in Brooklyn and is closely following ongoing developments. @DHSgov will continue to support @NYPDnews, other local and state officials, and the people of New York in any way needed.

  — Marsha (Catron) Espinosa (@MCatronDHS) April 12, 2022

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

  * * * 

  Update (1004ET): The ATF has arrived on the scene of the shooting incident in Brooklyn. The agency will be reviewing shell casings to determine what type of weapon was used. 

  .@ATFNewYork is on scene of the shooting incident in Brooklyn assisting @NYPDnews. pic.twitter.com/GoMXdKspIK

  — ATF HQ (@ATFHQ) April 12, 2022

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

  Here’s the location of the incident. 

  

  * * * 

  Update (0958ET): NBC News reports the suspect is a Black male, 5-foot-5 and 175 to 180 pounds wearing an orange construction vest and gas mask. A massive manhunt is on the way.

  

  * * * 

  Update (0953ET): NBC News reports at least 13 were injured in the Brooklyn subway shooting incident. The media outlet said surrounding schools are on lockdown as NYPD searches for the suspect. 

  

  NBC said the suspect used a “smoke gernade” then started shooting. 

  

  * * * 

  At least six people have been shot, and multiple explosives were found at a Brooklyn subway station during the Tuesday morning rush hour. 

  NBC New York reports the incident occurred around 0830 ET as police received reports of shots fired in Sunset Park, near Fourth Avenue and 36th Street. 

  Several law enforcement sources told NBC New York that the suspect was “dressed in clothing that resembles those worn by MTA workers threw some device and opened fire.” 

  Twitter users posted scenes of the gruesome incident. 

  Multiple people shot at 36 street station by two people in #sunsetpark. All are currently being transported to the hospital #NewYork #Brooklyn pic.twitter.com/3Va2iXf0JQ

  — Derek French Photo (@derekcfrench) April 12, 2022

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

  ⚡️⚡️According to eyewitnesses, two people could have arranged shooting in the subway, one was dressed in the uniform of a subway employee. According to the American media, many non-detonating explosive devices were found at the scene. 👉 Ax Live #Ukraine #UkraineWar #Russia pic.twitter.com/P6dtoOrrqM

  — Ukraine War SitRep 🇺🇦 (@UKRWarSitRep) April 12, 2022

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

  🚨 Breaking 🚨 #Brooklyn subway shooting pic.twitter.com/0J2kcy0rXP

  — Malcom Boyce (@MeetMalcom) April 12, 2022

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

  People escape the carriage with gasmask-wearing gunman in NY subway pic.twitter.com/H0uUB1g6az

  — RT (@RT_com) April 12, 2022

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

  New York City Fire Department said they found “several undetonated devices.” 

  New York City Fire Department says they found “several undetonated devices” as well as multiple shooting victims at this scene: https://t.co/poGYkU6Z4I

  — Anders Hagstrom (@Hagstrom_Anders) April 12, 2022

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

  Some said they survived a “mass shooting incident.”

  

  ABC7 New York said a manhunt is underway for a “gunman described as wearing a gas mask and an orange construction vest.” 

  *Developing

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 18:53

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• EU Investment Groups Worth $140 Trillion Urge For Stricter Corporate Climate Change Disclosures
  EU Investment Groups Worth $140 Trillion Urge For Stricter Corporate Climate Change Disclosures

  Investors managing a combined $140 trillion have come together to put pressure on corporations to disclose their plans on how to deal with climate change in the future. 

  Investment groups have combined not only to seek out more disclosure about adaptations to climate change, but also to demand that companies meet pledges to become carbon neutral by 2050, Bloomberg reported Monday morning.

  The groups, called Responsible Investment and the European Sustainable Investment Forum (sigh), are urging that the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive require companies to prepare “transition plans”. 

  They made their request known “in a letter to Mairead McGuinness, the top financial services official at the European Commission,” Bloomberg reported. 

  The letter says these plans will provide investors “with the tools they need to finance the net-zero transition” and that they should extend “as a bare minimum” to companies who have said they would be carbon neutral by 2050, the report says. 

  

  The EU parliament is currently working on legislation to provide investors with more transparency as to environmental, social and governance risks that companies may face. Coming disclosures will identify what climate scenarios company plans are based on and assumptions that companies are making. 

  Recall, back in February, we published a piece from contributors at The Epoch Times called “ESG Investing – The Great Wall Street Money Heist”. 

  ESG refers to the Environmental, Social, and Governance risk theoretically embedded in a business. However, while ESG investing is about taking these risks into account in investment decisions, these are all the things NOT on a company’s balance sheet or earnings statements. Such is the inherent problem.

  However, as is also the case, with the recent surge in liberal policies, woke activism, and demand for social justice, Wall Street is more than willing to sell products to fill a need. Not surprisingly, with plenty of media coverage, ESG investing has become an enormous business.

  Following the financial crisis, ESG funds had roughly a ZERO market share of total assets under management. Today, ESG-labelled funds in the United States exceed $16 trillion.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 02:45

• Africa Is Becoming China's "Second Continent" As US Lags Behind
  Africa Is Becoming China’s “Second Continent” As US Lags Behind

  Authored by Judith Bergman via The Gatestone Institute,

  • “America cannot ignore Africa. Africa’s challenges, opportunities, and security interests are inseparable from our own…. Our competitors clearly see Africa’s rich potential. Russia and China both seek to convert soft and hard power investments into political influence, strategic access, and military advantage. China’s economic and diplomatic engagements allow it to buttress autocracies and change international norms in a patient effort to claim their second continent.” — General Stephen Townsend, Commander of United States Africa Command, Senate Armed Services Committee, March 15, 2022.

  • About 40 out of Africa’s 54 countries participate in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the global infrastructure and economic development project that the Chinese Communist Party launched in 2013. BRI aims to build an economic and infrastructure network connecting China with Europe, Africa and beyond, and has already strengthened China’s global influence from East Asia to Europe by making countries worldwide increasingly dependent on China.

  • “China is dependent on Africa for imports of fossil fuels and commodities… Beijing has increased its control of African commodities through strategic direct investment in oil fields, mines, and production facilities, as well as through resource-backed loans that call for in-kind payments of commodities. This control threatens the ability of U.S. companies to access key supplies.” — US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 2020 annual report to Congress.

  • In June 2021, in an extremely belated attempt to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the Biden administration together with the G7 launched a new global infrastructure initiative, the Build Back Better World (B3W)…. The initiative, however, comes across as far too little, too late. Between 2007 and 2020, China invested $23 billion in infrastructure projects in Africa, according to the Center for Global Development, a US think tank. That is reportedly “$8 billion more than… the other top eight lenders combined…”

  • It will be very near impossible for the US or others to catch up on that, especially with the planned B3W initiative, because that initiative is not focused on much-needed tangible investments. Instead, its four focus areas are climate, health and health security, digital technology, and gender equity and equality.

  • “More troubling is B3W’s apparent excision of hard physical infrastructure from its remit… In Africa, which lags all other regions of the world in the availability of paved roads and electricity [and rail], that deficit that deficit is set to grow without a massive influx of hard infrastructure investment…” — Gyude Moore, senior policy fellow, Center for Global Development, African Business, February 13, 2022.

  • In the absence of a serious coordinated international effort, China will go on to fill that infrastructure gap, as it continues to consolidate its influence in Africa while the US lags behind.

  

  China continues to deepen its engagement in Africa on all levels. Recently it engaged in a flurry of diplomatic activity with African countries. In March alone, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi held bilateral talks with his African counterparts in Algeria, Egypt, The Gambia, Niger, Somalia, Tanzania and Zambia. The talks came only two months after Wang Yi visited Eritrea, Kenya and Comoros. Also in March, Chinese President Xi Jinping had a phone conversation with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, during which the two spoke about deepening cooperation between the two countries. Ramaphosa affirmed that he supports China’s policies on Taiwan, Tibet, and other “major issues”.

  Africa is important to China for several reasons. “Beijing has long viewed African countries as occupying a central position in its efforts to increase China’s global influence and revise the international order,” the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission wrote in its 2020 Report to Congress.

  “Over the last two decades, and especially under General Secretary Xi’s leadership since 2012, Beijing has launched new initiatives to transform Africa into a testing ground for the export of its governance system of state-led economic growth under one-party, authoritarian rule.

  “Beijing uses its influence in Africa to gain preferential access to Africa’s natural resources, open up markets for Chinese exports, and enlist African support for Chinese diplomatic priorities on and beyond the continent.”

  While China has continuously been deepening its involvement in Africa, the US has not come anywhere near China’s engagement and high-level attention. Since 2011, trade between the US and Africa has been in decline. This inaction means that in the emerging US-China rivalry in Africa, China is far ahead.

  China is now Africa’s largest trade partner. In 2000, trade between China and Africa had been at a mere $11 billion. From 2020 to 2021, trade between Africa and China reportedly increased by 35% — from $187 billion to $254 billion.

  About 40 out of Africa’s 54 countries participate in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the global infrastructure and economic development project that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) launched in 2013. BRI aims to build an economic and infrastructure network connecting China with Europe, Africa and beyond, and has already strengthened China’s global influence from East Asia to Europe by making countries worldwide increasingly dependent on China.

  While China has been increasing its annual Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) in Africa — its FDI flows grew from just $75 million in 2003 to $4.2 billion in 2020 — annual American FDI flows to Africa have been heading the other way. “Chinese FDI flows to Africa have exceeded those from the U.S. since 2013, as U.S. FDI flows have generally been declining since 2010,” according to the China Africa Research Initiative at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.

  “America cannot ignore Africa. Africa’s challenges, opportunities, and security interests are inseparable from our own,” General Stephen Townsend, Commander of United States Africa Command recently said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on March 15.

  “Our competitors clearly see Africa’s rich potential. Russia and China both seek to convert soft and hard power investments into political influence, strategic access, and military advantage. China’s economic and diplomatic engagements allow it to buttress autocracies and change international norms in a patient effort to claim their second continent.”

  Already in May 2021, Townsend had warned that China was overtaking America in Africa:

  “The Chinese are outmaneuvering the U.S. in select countries in Africa. Port projects, economic endeavors, infrastructure and their agreements and contracts will lead to greater access in the future. They are hedging their bets and making big bets on Africa,” he said.

  The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission wrote in its 2020 Report to Congress:

  “China is dependent on Africa for imports of fossil fuels and commodities constituting critical inputs in emerging technology products. Beijing has increased its control of African commodities through strategic direct investment in oil fields, mines, and production facilities, as well as through resource-backed loans that call for in-kind payments of commodities. This control threatens the ability of U.S. companies to access key supplies.”

  In June 2021, in an extremely belated attempt to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the Biden administration together with the G7 launched a new global infrastructure initiative, the Build Back Better World. According to a Biden administration fact-sheet about the initiative:

  “President Biden and G7 partners agreed to launch the bold new global infrastructure initiative Build Back Better World (B3W), a values-driven, high-standard, and transparent infrastructure partnership led by major democracies to help narrow the $40+ trillion infrastructure need in the developing world…

  “B3W will be global in scope, from Latin America and the Caribbean to Africa to the Indo-Pacific. Different G7 partners will have different geographic orientations, but the sum of the initiative will cover low- and middle-income countries across the world.”

  The initiative, however, comes across as far too little, too late. Between 2007 and 2020, China invested $23 billion in infrastructure projects in Africa, according to the Center for Global Development, a US think tank. That is reportedly “$8 billion more than what the other top eight lenders combined, including the World Bank, African Development Bank, and the US and European development banks, contributed.” It will be very near impossible for the US or others to catch up on that, especially with the planned B3W initiative, because that initiative is not focused on much-needed tangible investments. Instead, its four focus areas are climate, health and health security, digital technology, and gender equity and equality.

  According to Gyude Moore, a senior policy fellow at the Center for Global Development:

  “More troubling is B3W’s apparent excision of hard physical infrastructure from its remit… In Africa, which lags all other regions of the world in the availability of paved roads and electricity, that deficit is set to grow without a massive influx of hard infrastructure investment… At current rates, the minimum deficit of the road network will be 60,000km by 2040 and an additional 30,000km gap for the rail network.”

  In the absence of a serious coordinated international effort, China will go on to fill that infrastructure gap, as it continues to consolidate its influence in Africa while the US lags behind.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/12/2022 – 02:00

• What Are The Effects Of America's Narcissism Epidemic?
  What Are The Effects Of America’s Narcissism Epidemic?

  Authored by Ross Pomeroy via RealClear Science (emphasis ours),

  There’s a strong case to be made that since the end of World War II, Americans have grown increasingly narcissistic on average – more entitled, with an inflated sense of self-importance.

  

  Psychologists Jean Twenge and W. Keith Campbell are most responsible for collecting data and creating a narrative to support this claim. According to the duo, the rise began with the Baby Boomers, who grew up in an era of relative ease and plenty after their grandparents endured a Great Depression and their parents soldiered and sacrificed through World War II. By the time they were college-aged, Boomers eschewed the collectivist mindset of their elders in favor of individualism.

  The trend continued with Boomers’ kids. As Dennis Shen wrote for the London School of Economics’ Phelan United States Centre, “One study comparing teenagers found that while only 12% of those aged 14-16 in the early 1950s agreed with the statement “I am an important person”, 77% of boys and more than 80% of girls of the same cohort by 1989 agreed with it.”

  And, of course, the rise in narcissism has persisted since. In 2008, Twenge published a study comparing college students’ scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory scale to scores from students in 1979, finding that levels of narcissism had risen roughly 30 percent.

  Additional research has evinced this increase. “59% of American college freshmen rated themselves above average in intellectual self-confidence in 2014, compared with 39% in 1966,” Shen wrote.

  Owing to the elevated prevalence of social media services over the past decade, it’s highly likely that the rise in narcissism has only accelerated of late. We see it on Twitter, where users flock to share their ‘brilliant’ opinions. We see it on Instagram and TikTok, where people carefully curate their online personas. We also see it in traditional media sources, where elite-educated journalists often make themselves the story and focus on tending their Twitter profiles. Narcissism also reigns on television news. Gone are the days of humble correspondents and “just the facts” anchors, replaced by talking heads and opinionated hosts more interested in their ratings than the truth.

  Of course, while narcissism has risen, that doesn’t mean we are all narcissists. It exists both as a trait, which is on a spectrum, and a personality disorder, which is much more extreme and debilitating. Narcissistic personality disorder has actually remained fairly stable in the U.S. over the past decades. This means that the average American is more self-centered than they used to be, but decidedly not stuck in their own head.

  What are the wider effects of this psychological transition? As Shen speculated, partisanship has exploded as people have grown more enamored with their own beliefs and less open to others’. Debt-financed conspicuous consumption “to elevate one’s status in front of others, rather than out of necessity” has risen. And an increasing disdain for government could partly be attributed to a focus on somewhat arrogant self-sufficiency.

  There is also another way to look at the rise in narcissism – as a defense mechanism. Narcissism is often driven by low self-esteem and insecurity. Since the 1950s, wealth inequality has risen, cost of living has exploded, especially for housing, and puchasing power has stagnated. Combine these economic pressures with the competitive, pressure-filled media environment since the turn of the century and you have a recipe for a rise in narcissism. And sadly, narcissism is linked to elevated hostility and aggression towards others. One hopes that Americans can find a way to cool their collective narcissism before it boils over.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 23:40

• 'Unfriendly Visit': Austrian Chancellor Is 1st EU Leader To Meet With Putin Since War Began
  ‘Unfriendly Visit’: Austrian Chancellor Is 1st EU Leader To Meet With Putin Since War Began

  On Monday Austria’s Chancellor Karl Nehammer became the first EU leader to meet face-to-face with Vladimir Putin since the war began on Feb.24. He said that talks were “open and tough” but that it was “not a friendly visit.”

  Following the meeting which was at Putin’s Novo-Ogaryovo residence just outside Moscow, the Austrian leader’s office issued a statement saying, “This is not a friendly visit. I have just come from Ukraine and have seen with my own eyes the immeasurable suffering caused by the Russian war of aggression.”

  

  Nehammer is said to have confronted Putin on multiple war crimes and human rights abuses alleged against Russian troops during the 75-minute meeting. 

  Austria’s official statement of the meeting continued:

  ”I addressed the serious war crimes in Bucha and other places and emphasized that all those responsible for them must be held accountable,” Nehammer said, according to the statement. “I also told President Putin in no uncertain terms that sanctions against Russia will remain in place and will continue to be tightened as long as people are dying in Ukraine.”

  On what’s widely being alleged in the West as the ‘Bucha massacre’ – which left a reported 300 Ukrainian civilians dead, many of them in the streets – Nehammer described that when confronted Putin blamed Ukrainian militants, saying they were “responsible for the crimes in Bucha” and not Russian troops.  

  The Austrian head of state came under fire for the visit, as going to Moscow to meet Putin face-to-face was hugely controversial in some quarters among EU officials. However, Nehammer described the purpose as to confront the Russian President “with the facts”. 

  “What is important is a personal meeting, phoning is one thing, but you really need to look each other in the eye, you need to talk about the cruelty of war,” Nehammer described of the rationale for the official visit. He told Putin that those guilty of war crimes “have to be brought to justice.”

  With Sweden and Norway well on the road to NATO membership, France committed to grandstanding, and Ireland being rather…preachy, Austria is the only remaining European choice for an interlocutor.
  Apparently it went badly. https://t.co/DhsK79ad7P

  — Peter Zeihan (@PeterZeihan) April 11, 2022

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

  “Of course, when you talk to him for the first, second, third time, we can’t expect him to change his view … I didn’t expect that. But it is important to confront President Vladimir Putin. Every day is a day too long in the war, every … death is one too many,” he told reporters during a post-meeting press conference in Moscow.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 23:20

• Victor Davis Hanson: Will GOP Play By The Dems' "New Rules"?
  Victor Davis Hanson: Will GOP Play By The Dems’ “New Rules”?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

  The Debasement of our Professional and Political Classes

  The left-wing professional and political classes bequeathed a number of new protocols during the Trump derangement years. And it will be interesting to watch whether the Republicans abide by them in November should they take back the House and perhaps the Senate—and the presidency in 2024 as well. 

  Will they follow the New Testament’s turn-the-other-cheek forbearance, or go for Old Testament style eye-for-an-eye retribution? 

  

  What Are the New Rules?

  Will Republican magnanimity suffice to shame the Democrats to be more professional in the future? Or will tit-for-tat deterrent reciprocity alone ensure a return to norms? Specifically, will Biden be impeached Trump-style, after losing the House in November? Say, to give just one possible example, for deliberately not enforcing and, indeed, undermining U.S. immigration law? 

  Will Speaker Kevin McCarthy, in Pelosi-fashion, start yanking troublesome radical Democrats off House committees? 

  Will a conservative Robert Mueller-like “wise man” head a $40 million, 22 month-long special counsel investigation of the Biden-family influence-selling syndicate—arrayed with a “dream-team,” “all-star,” and “hunter-killer” right-wing lawyers to ferret out “Big Guy” and “Mr. Ten Percent” quid pro quo profiteering? 

  Would a Republican-led House set up a special committee to investigate the racketeering and “conspiracies” across state lines that led to a near “coup” and “insurrection” marked by “the riots of 2020?” Would such watchdogs offer up criminal referrals for all those responsible for attacking a federal courthouse and torching a police precinct or for setting an historic church afire? Or causing $2 billion of damage, over 30 deaths, and 1,500 law enforcement officer injuries—while carving out illegal no-go zones in major downtowns? 

  Given the need for “accountability,” the “threats to democracy,” and a need for “transparency,” would another congressional committee investigate the Afghanistan fiasco of summer 2021? Will it learn who was lying about the disaster—Joe Biden or the Joint Chiefs—and how and why such a travesty occurred? 

  Would a rebooted January 6 committee reconvene under new auspices—with Democratic members limited to those selected by a new Speaker McCarthy—to revisit the lethal shooting of Ashli Babbitt, to review thousands of hours of released surveillance video, to subpoena all email communications between the previous congressional leadership and the Capitol police, to demand the lists of all the FBI informants in the crowd, and to interrogate the sadistic jailers and overzealous prosecutors who have created America’s first class of political prisoners subjected to punishment without trial? Such a multifaceted legal inquiry would eat up most of Biden’s final two years in office. As accomplished leakers, Republicans then would also supply “bombshells” and “walls or closing in” special news alerts on cable TV, the fuel of supposedly “imminent” and “impending” indictments, based on special counsel leaks to conservative media. 

  Following the Democratic cue, should the Republican-majority Senate consider ending the “disruptive” and “anti-democratic” filibuster? Should there be a national voting law rammed through the Congress, overriding state protocols, and demanding that all national election balloting must require a photo ID? 

  Will Speaker McCarthy, Pelosi-style, in furor at more of Joe Biden’s chronic lies, tear up the president’s State of the Union address on national television? 

  A Permanently Politicized Bureaucracy?

  Will the new Washington apparat likewise adhere to the Democratic Party’s new precedents? 

  Perhaps a newly appointed chairman of the Joint Chiefs can reassure a Republican majority that its primary mission is not battle readiness—and certainly not climate change or “white rage”— but rather ferreting out service personnel with known ties to radical groups like BLM or Antifa or other “subversive” and “racist” organizations? 

  Will a conservative Lois Lerner emerge from the IRS shadows to start slow-walking nonprofit-status applications from left-wing organizations on the eve of a presidential election? 

  Will the FBI become a Republican retrieval service to hunt down and keep inert embarrassing lost laptops, diaries, and hard drives of absent-minded conservative grandees? 

  In the middle of a campaign, will the CIA Director believe it is his duty to inform the senior Republican leaders in the Senate that he has good “information” that leftists are intriguing with foreign governments to warp the election? 

  The Lettered Classes 

  And what of our corporate and professional classes? 

  Should conservative zillionaires pool their resources and, Zuckerberg-style, select key precincts in the next general election, hire armies of activists, and then absorb and supersede the work of state or county registrars? Only that way, could they ensure the “right” people vote and their “correct” ballots were accurately counted? 

  Should conservatives start rounding up “professionals,” “scientists,” and “scholars” to express their superior morality and erudition in pursuit of political agendas? 

  Certainly, a recent trend has been a spate of letters of “conscience” and “statements of concern” signed by revolving-door government, academic, and corporate grandees who pose as disinterested experts to mold public opinion. 

  When we read such letters of principle—characterized by shared and collective outrage by assorted professionals, replete with letters and/or titles after their name—beware! 

  Do we remember the recent “stellar” cast of Nobel-Prize winning and near-Nobel laureates who admonished us that Biden’s massive deficit spending programs would never lead to inflation? 

  In circular fashion, Biden solicited and then cited this “blue-chip” group of experts led by Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz. Stiglitz warned the hoi polloi not to worry about printing trillions of dollars at the very moment pent-up demand from the COVID lockdowns was surging, when for millions the government kept issuing checks that made staying home more lucrative than working, when interest rates were at near zero, and when the national debt was cresting at $30 trillion. 

  The distinguished economists promised us that if we just followed the Biden lead, then inflation would actually decrease. Or as they put it, “Because this agenda invests in long-term economic capacity and will enhance the ability of more Americans to participate productively in the economy, it will ease longer-term inflationary pressure.” [emphasis added]. 

  As inflation nears or exceeds eight percent per annum, will they write an apology or instead issue yet another letter assuring us that inflation is easing? 

  Do we remember the 50 “former intelligence officials” letter writers rounded up by former National Intelligence and CIA Directors James Clapper and John Brennan? (The latter two previously had confessed to lying under oath to Congress.) Yet just two weeks before the 2020 election, these revered “professionals” assured us that Hunter Biden’s laptop was not just fake but likely Russian disinformation. 

  Or as the shameful 50 put it in their sorta, kinda conspiratorial style, “. . . our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.” The guidance of Brennan and Clapper alone—apart from the clear evidence that the laptop was Hunter’s—should have made all Americans “deeply suspicious” that the Biden campaign “played a significant role in this case.” 

  Do we remember “the over 1,000 health professionals” who in 2020 signed a letter of conscience, assuring us that: 

  . . . we wanted to present a narrative that prioritizes opposition to racism as vital to public health, including the epidemic response. We believe that the way forward is not to suppress protests in the name of public health but to respond to protesters demands in the name of public health, thereby addressing multiple public health crises. 

  So, in “follow the science fashion” we were told not just that some violations of strict masking, quarantines, and lockdowns were more equal than others, but that flagrantly ignoring health mandates entirely was, in Orwellian fashion, actually good for the health of the exempt. 

  Do we remember the 27 Lancet “scientists” who signed the now infamous letter reassuring us the Wuhan lab played no role in the origins in COVID? Do we also recall that all but one of these progressive humanitarians failed to disclose that they themselves had connections with Wuhan? 

  Leftist professionals in politics, government, and private enterprise debased themselves for short-term political gain, or in furor at their bogeyman Trump, or in anger at the unwashed. They have now set precedents, which if embraced by conservatives and applied to the Left, would be called unethical at best and fascistic at worst. 

  In the end, all the warped grandees accomplished was to further discredit the entire notion that those with high salaries, prestigious degrees, impressive titles, and insidious influence are somehow less likely to lie, connive, cheat, and conspire than those whom they libel and attack. 

  *  *  *

  Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush. Hanson is also a farmer (growing raisin grapes on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author most recently of The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump and the newly released The Dying Citizen.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 23:00

• Skynet Does Dallas: 7-Foot-Tall Robots Are Being Used To Enforce Mask Policy At Love Field Airport
  Skynet Does Dallas: 7-Foot-Tall Robots Are Being Used To Enforce Mask Policy At Love Field Airport

  Dallas Love Field is in the midst of testing robotic assistant devices to help ensure that people in the airport are complying with rules – namely, whether or not they are wearing a mask – a rule that is still mandated at all airports in the U.S.

  

  The robots, called Security Control Observation Towers (definitely not dystopian at all), are located by baggage claim and security checkpoints, Fortune wrote last week. They can tell whether or not a passenger is wearing a face mask. 

  If you’re not wearing a mask, brace yourself for a “verbal warning”, which Fortune says “could escalate in volume and severity if the infraction is not corrected”.  Definitely not a scene out of Idiocracy, right? 

  

  Love Field is one of two airports that are testing the kiosks, which are 7 feet tall. Airports are able to set individual rules for their kiosks, the report says. Love Field has yet to determine whether or not they will become permanent fixtures, though we’d bet that it’s more likely than not.

  In other dystopian Texas news, a robotic security guard named ROAMEO (Rugged Observation Assistance Mobile Electronic Officer) also debuted at Six Flags Over Texas several months ago, the report notes.

  That robot is also tasked with mask enforcement, as well as noticing when people are in restricted areas. 

  We can hear these security towers now: “Your kids are starving. Carl’s Jr. believes no child should go hungry. You are an unfit mother. Your children will be placed in the custody of Carl’s Jr.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 22:40

• Ex-CIA Ray McGovern: Corporate Media Deploys The Big Guns On Ukraine
  Ex-CIA Ray McGovern: Corporate Media Deploys The Big Guns On Ukraine

  Authored by Ray McGovern of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity,

  Judith Miller and US Air Force General Philip Breedlove are back! At first I thought it a sickening flashback. Two nights ago, there were Judy Miller and former NATO Commander Philip Breedlove on TV pontificating on Ukraine.

  For younger readers, Judy was the NY Times Archdeacon blessing all those reports of “weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (that weren’t there) and ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda (that weren’t there either). As for Breedlove, as a sad sign of the times, he appears (via Radio Free Europe) on Reader Supporter News, with zero allusion to his pedigree on truth and falsehood (See: “FOCUS: Former NATO Commander Says Western Fears of Nuclear War Are Preventing a Proper Response to Putin.”)

  

  Breedlove’s all-too-familiar, damn-the-torpedoes line on the need to confront Russia head-on in Ukraine brought back more sickening memories.

  For this is precisely what he tried to do – behind President Obama’s back – when he was commander of NATO troops (2013-2016). It got so bad that we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) sought to warn German Chancellor Angela Merkel about Breedlove’s checkered record for credibility in advance of a NATO summit in early July, 2014. We urged Merkel to temper Breedlove’s distemper.

  Verbatim excerpts are below

  “We longtime U.S. intelligence officers again wish to convey our concerns and cautions directly to you prior to a critically important NATO summit – the meeting that begins on July 8 in Warsaw. We were gratified to learn that our referenced memorandum reached you and your advisers before the NATO summit in Wales and that others too learned of our initiative via the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, which published a full report on our memorandum on Sept. 4, the day that summit began.”

  Below are continued excerpts from the 2016 Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity memorandum which clearly warned of what was to come…

  Wales to Warsaw

  The Warsaw summit is likely to be at least as important as the last one in Wales and is likely to have even more far-reaching consequences. We find troubling – if not surprising – NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg’s statement at a pre-summit press event on July 4 that NATO members will agree to “further enhance NATO’s military presence in the eastern part of the alliance,” adding that the alliance will see it’s “biggest reinforcement since the Cold War.”

  The likelihood of a military clash in the air or at sea – accidental or intentional – has grown sharply, the more so since, as we explain below, President Obama’s control over top US/NATO generals, some of whom like to play cowboy, is tenuous. Accordingly we encourage you, as we did before the last NATO summit, to urge your NATO colleagues to bring a “degree of judicious skepticism” to the table at Warsaw – especially with regard to the perceived threat from Russia.

  Many of us have spent decades studying Moscow’s foreign policy. We shake our heads in disbelief when we see Western leaders seemingly oblivious to what it means to the Russians to witness exercises on a scale not seen since Hitler’s armies launched “Unternehmen Barbarossa” 75 years ago, leaving 25 million Soviet citizens dead. In our view, it is irresponsibly foolish to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin will not take countermeasures – at a time and place of his own choosing.

  

  Putin does not have the option of trying to reassure his generals that what they hear and see from NATO is mere rhetoric and posturing. He is already facing increased pressure to react in an unmistakably forceful way. In sum, Russia is bound to react strongly to what it regards as the unwarranted provocation of large military exercises along its western borders, including in Ukraine.

  Before things get still worse, seasoned NATO leaders need to demonstrate a clear preference for statesmanship and give-and-take diplomacy over saber-rattling. Otherwise, some kind of military clash with Russia is likely, with the ever-present danger of escalation to a nuclear exchange.

  Extremely worrisome is the fact that many second-generation NATO leaders seem blithely unaware – or even dismissive – of that looming possibility. Demagoguery like that coming from former Polish President Lech Walesa, who brags that he would “shoot” at Russian jets that buzz US destroyers assuredly are not at all helpful. Walesa’s tone, however, does reflect the macho attitude prevailing today in Poland and some other NATO newcomers.

  We believe Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier was correct to point out that military posturing on Russia’s borders will bring less regional security. We applaud his admonition that, “We are well advised not to create pretexts to renew an old confrontation.”

  A Need For Candor

  Speaking of “pretexts to renew an old confrontation,” we believe the time has come to acknowledge that the marked increase in East-West tensions over the past two years originally stemmed from the Western-sponsored coup d’e’tat in Kiev on Feb. 22, 2014, and Russia’s reaction in annexing Crimea.

  Although we have a cumulative total of hundreds of years of experience in intelligence, we had never before seen planning for a coup d’e’tat exposed weeks in advance – and then carried out anyway. Few seem to remember that in early February 2014, YouTube published a recording of an intercepted conversation between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US ambassador in Kiev, during which “Yats” (for Arseniy Yatsenyuk) was identified as Washington’s choice to become the new prime minister of the coup government in Kiev.

  We suggest that it is past time for Western leaders to admit that there is not one scintilla of evidence of any Russian plan to annex Crimea before the coup in Kiev and the coup leaders began talking about Ukraine joining NATO. If senior NATO leaders continue to be unable or unwilling to distinguish between cause and effect, increasing tension is inevitable with potentially disastrous results – all of them unnecessary and avoidable, in our view.

  Ukraine Still Festering

  In our August 2014 memorandum for you, we suggested that you be “appropriately suspicious of charges made by the US State Department and NATO officials alleging a Russian invasion of Ukraine.” Actually, the gravity of the situation was considerably worse than we realized at the time.

  We now know that US Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, who was Supreme NATO Commander until two months ago, was pressing hard for confrontation with Russia and the anti-coup separatists in eastern Ukraine. This comes through clearly in Breedlove’s recently disclosed emails , which now confirm what we believed in 2014; namely, that everyone needed to examine closely Breedlove’s exaggerated claims, many of them based on fuzzy photos and other highly dubious “intelligence.”

  Lobbying for approval to wage a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine, Breedlove was highly critical of President Barack Obama’s policy, which Breedlove disparaged as simply: “Do not get me into a war.” (As though this were some kind of cowardly order!)

  The emails show that behind Obama’s back, Breedlove kept trying to “leverage, cajole, convince, or coerce the US to react” to Russia. One of Breedlove’s email correspondents wrote back to him: “Given Obama’s instruction to you not to start a war, this may be a tough sell,” but this did not stop Breedlove from trying.

  In 2015, as your own intelligence analysts were able to tell you, Breedlove went beyond hyperbole to outright fabrication with claims that “well over a thousand combat vehicles, Russian combat forces, some of the most sophisticated air defense weapons, and battalions of artillery”, had been sent to eastern Ukraine. These were the kinds of faux claims Breedlove used in attempts to enlist help from the senior military and Congress in getting Obama to supply weapons to Ukrainian armed forces.

  Lest we seem to be singling out Gen. Breedlove, his predecessor as Supreme NATO Commander, Adm. James Stavridis, hardly provided good example. A year after the US led some NATO countries in a Blitz of aircraft and missile strikes against Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi, Stavridis and former US Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder wrote in Foreign Affairs: “NATO’s operation in Libya has rightly been hailed as a model intervention.”

  The operation was just the opposite, of course. The chaos now reigning in Libya, with hundreds of refugees drowning in the Mediterranean, offers abundant proof that your government’s decision to keep Germany at arms-length from that “model intervention” was a wise one.

  While it is somewhat awkward for us to offer such candid comments on the character and caliber of the most senior US generals and admirals, many of whom end up getting appointed to senior political positions at NATO – such a critique is unavoidable. The important reality to which we draw your attention pertains not only to their qualifications, but also to their dismissive attitude toward President Obama.

  We observed in our Aug. 30, 2014 memorandum that President Obama “has only tenuous control over the policymakers in his administration.” That this includes senior military leaders can be seen in Obama’s failure to remove Gen. Breedlove, who – in addition to his intense maneuvering behind Obama’s back – made little effort to hide his open disdain for the cautious approach of his Commander-in-Chief toward the possibility of armed confrontation in volatile places like Ukraine.

  * * *

  The following is from the first VIPs Memorandum for Chancellor Merkel (Aug. 30, 2014) – about what is known about the credibility due to former leaders of NATO.

  Hopefully, your advisers have reminded you of NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s checkered record for credibility. It appears to us that Rasmussen’s speeches continue to be drafted by Washington. This was abundantly clear on the day before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq when, as Danish Prime Minister, he told his Parliament: “Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. This is not something we just believe. We know.

  Photos can be worth a thousand words, they can also deceive. We have considerable experience collecting, analyzing, and reporting on all kinds of satellite and other imagery, as well as other kinds of intelligence. Suffice it to say that the images released by NATO on Aug. 28 provide a very flimsy basis on which to charge Russia with invading Ukraine. Sadly, they bear a strong resemblance to the images shown by Colin Powell at the UN on Feb. 5, 2003, that, likewise, proved nothing.

  That same day, we warned President Bush that our former colleague analysts were “increasingly distressed at the politicization of intelligence” and told him flatly, “Powell’s presentation does not come close” to justifying war.

  We urged Mr. Bush to “widen the discussion ” beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.”

  Consider Iraq today. Worse than catastrophic.

  Although President Vladimir Putin has until now showed considerable reserve on the conflict in the Ukraine, it behooves us to remember that Russia, too, can “shock and awe.” In our view, if there is the slightest chance of that kind of thing eventually happening to Europe because of Ukraine, sober-minded leaders need to think this through very carefully.

  END of excerpt from Aug. 30, 2014, VIPs Memorandum for Chancellor Merkel.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 22:20

• Chipotle Sets To Debut Chip-Making Robots To Mitigate Labor Shortage
  Chipotle Sets To Debut Chip-Making Robots To Mitigate Labor Shortage

  Chipotle Mexican Grill is experimenting with a new tortilla chip robot that would help it offset labor shortages amid the Great Resignation. 

  Miso Robotics CEO Michael Bell told Fox News’ Neil Cavuto Friday that his company partnered with Chipotle to develop a chip-making robot as the fast-food company struggles with the current labor shortage. He said, “automation is the solution.” 

  “The restaurant industry had a labor gap before the pandemic… the pandemic just accelerated this big gap between the number of jobs and the available labor,” Bell added.

  

  He noted America’s labor shortage would continue for some time as millions of jobs go unfilled. Meanwhile, executives, such as the ones at Chipotle, are seeking to leverage AI to automate mundane tasks that low-skilled workers would typically complete. 

  So far, tests at Chipotle’s innovation lab in Irvine, California, have gone great. The robot, named “Chippy,” is set to debut at an undisclosed location in southern California.  

  

  Chippy has proven itself to follow Chipotle’s tortilla chip recipe accurately. 

  

  This is just another example of how the labor shortage is ushering in investment in automation by major corporations to displace low-skill/low-wage human workers. At this rate, by the end of this decade, one would suspect many fast-food restaurants would have some to all of their kitchens automated, a move to drive down costs. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 22:00

• Moderna Recalls 764,900 COVID-19 Vaccine Doses After Contamination Found
  Moderna Recalls 764,900 COVID-19 Vaccine Doses After Contamination Found

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

  The U.S. pharmaceutical and biotechnology company Moderna Inc. on Friday issued a recall in Europe involving 764,900 doses of its COVID-19 vaccine “Spikevax” after contaminants were discovered in a vial.

  “The lot is being recalled due to a foreign body being found in one vial in the lot manufactured at the company’s contract manufacturing site, ROVI,” Moderna and Spain’s ROVI Pharma Industrial Services said in a joint statement.

  

  The drugmaker did not specify what kind of foreign substance was found and had recalled the whole lot out of “an abundance of caution.”

  The contamination was traced in just one vial of the batch and investigators do not believe the contamination posed a risk to other vials in the lot.

  “Moderna conducted a cumulative search of its global safety database, and no safety concerns were reported in individuals who received the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine from this lot. To date, no safety or efficacy issues have been identified,” according to the statement.

  The lots were distributed from Jan. 13 to Jan. 14 in Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden. To date, more than 900 million doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine have been administered worldwide.

  Last year, Moderna had several lots of its COVID-19 vaccines recalled by Japanese authorities after an investigation found stainless steel contaminants in some vials. The recalled batches were manufactured by the same Spanish company, ROVI.

  Japan’s biggest drugmaker, Takeda Pharmaceutical, said in a statement the contamination was traced back to the production run by ROVI. The findings were discovered by an investigation carried out by the two companies, not the Japanese health ministry.

  Three men in Japan had fallen severely ill in August 2021 after being administered a second dose of the now-recalled COVID-19 vaccine and died shortly after. Takeda said in a statement at the time there is no evidence they are linked to the vaccine, Reuters reported.

  “Stainless steel is routinely used in heart valves, joint replacements, and metal sutures and staples. As such, it is not expected that injection of the particles identified in these lots in Japan would result in increased medical risk,” the company said.

  The first two deaths reported in the country linked to contaminated Moderna doses were two men, aged 30 and 38. They both died two days after receiving a second dose from a tainted batch of vaccines.

  The third case was a 49-year-old man, who also fell ill after receiving his second dose, and died the next day, the health ministry said, noting that his only known health issue was a buckwheat allergy.

  From NTD News

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 21:40

• Market Braces For Scorching CPI As White House Warns Of "Extraordinarily Elevated" Inflation Numbers
  Market Braces For Scorching CPI As White House Warns Of “Extraordinarily Elevated” Inflation Numbers

  If last month’s hotter than expected inflation report sparked fears of a 50bps rate hike, tomorrow’s March CPI print may spark calls for 75bps.

  Tuesday’s CPI report, which will the last one the Fed will get ahead of its meeting in May, comes amidst heightened speculation that the Fed could move by 50bps at the next meeting, and futures are pricing in an 88% chance of a 50bps move.

  

  While consensus expects an 8.4% print tomorrow – the highest since January 1982 when the Fed Funds rate was 12% (compared to just 0.50% now)…

  

  …  Deutsche Bank economists expect that the CPI increase will be even higher than that – with a monthly gain in headline CPI of +1.3% (vs consensus 1.2%) pushing the year-on-year rate up to +8.6% (vs consensus of 8.4%) – which hasn’t been seen since 1981. Some more details from the bank’s preview:

  While we did see some preliminary impacts in the February data from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the bulk of the direct  inflationary impact should be felt in the March data, with gas prices rising almost 20% from February. Should our forecasts hit the  mark, this would push year-over-year rates for March headline and core CPI to 8.6% and 6.6%, respectively.

  At the component level, our focus, per usual of late, will be on rents and vehicle prices. As to rents, we expect continued elevated prints, +0.6% for primary rents and +0.5% for OER, similar to their showing last month. Given that rents are one of the components of the CPI for which the Phillips curve seems to work, these outsized monthly prints are a function of the tight labor market. Indeed, income growth is a leading indicator of the series. While our expectation is that rental prints stay near their current values for the rest of the year, there is some risk that the prints accelerate further should the labor market continue to tighten. To this point, both primary rents and OER picked up slightly in February as the unemployment rate fell by two-tenths.

  

  As to vehicle prices, we expect new car prices to have notched relatively moderate gains, +0.4%, in March given the potential for some supply chain disruptions. However, used car prices should show a meaningful decline, -0.8%. For the former, to the extent that vehicle retailers have begun to rebuild their inventories, the additional supply has helped to put downward pressure on price gains for new vehicles. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the recent resurgence of covid in China, inventory rebuilds may take a bit longer, however. As to used cars, wholesale used car prices have fallen 5.4% over February and March, so we fully expect further price declines over the next couple months given the typical 2-3 month lag structure.

  

  That said, DB’s economists add that barring further severe disruptions, the March data is likely to be the peak in terms of year-over-year rates for both headline and core since the base effects from last year’s surge in used car prices will begin rolling off in the April data.

  Not everyone agrees, and JPM economist Michael Feroli writes that “real consumer spending is set to rise in the coming year despite near-term inflationary headwinds to demand and medium-term headwinds from tighter monetary policy. Despite some indication in the Chase card spending data of a drag in spending in March, the headline composite for the ISM services survey strengthened last month, with broad-based gains in key details. The headline composite for the ISM services survey rose from 56.5 to 58.3 in March, partially reversing three months of decline during the Omicron surge. The details of the report were upbeat, with gains in business activity, new orders, and employment. The supplier delivery time index edged down in March, more than reversing the increases in the previous two months that had coincided with the Omicron surge and signaling some easing in supply chain pressures.”

  And just to may sure that the March CPI print is as bad as it gets, there is a distinct possibility that the White House do a “kitchen sinking” tomorrow – as Joe Biden press secretary and MSNBC employee Jen Psaki said today, the White House is bracing for “extraordinarily elevated” inflation numbers to be reflected in Tuesday’s data from the Labor Department, which of course will be blamed on PutInflation, and sharply higher energy costs stemming from the Russian invasion of Ukraine (never mind Biden’s release of more than 1 million barrels/day from the strategic midterm reserve).

  “We expect March CPI headline inflation to be extraordinarily elevated due to Putin’s Price Hikes” Psaki said, clearly ignoring that inflation hit 7.8% in February when the only Price Hikes were Biden’s.

  “Because of the actions we’ve taken to address the Putin price hike, we are in a better place than we were last month,” Psaki said, referring to BIden’s release of millions of barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a move which will prove cataclysmic should there be a true emergency in the next few months as opposed to just Democrats losing the midterms.

  PSAKI: “We expect March CPI headline inflation to be extraordinarily elevated due to Putin’s Price Hike.” pic.twitter.com/xImSTGKCnV

  — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) April 11, 2022

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

  “I will say that anytime there’s heightened monthly data or inflation reporting or numbers, it is a reminder to us, our allies on the Hill and hopefully to many of the American people that we need to do more to reduce costs for the American people,” Psaki said.

  One of those things, of course, is to crash the market, which according to former NY Fed president Bill Dudley is what is needed to push inflation lower (spoiler alert: adding a market crash to his list of achievements will have no impact on supply-chain driven inflation, but it will certainly guarantee that Biden will have the lowest approval rating of any president in history).

  Finally, will a truly “shocking” CPI print tomorrow open the door to a 75bps hike? According to JPM, “Tuesday’s CPI print should give us clarity on the Fed’s behavior where investors worry about (i) an emergency meeting to hike rates and (ii) a greater than 50bps hike.” That said, the bank believes that both of those outcomes remain unlikely since “Powell believes in transparency and thus is unlikely to surprise the market and risk unintended outcomes given his stated preference to use a data-based approach that tests how much the market can bear.”

  Still, JPM concedes that a CPI print materially above consensus – which looks all but assured – would renew these fears while an in-line print should hold anchor expectations to no emergency meeting, 50bps hike in May, and the Fed sticking to the QT plan detailed in last week’s Minutes.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 21:20

• Naming Names
  Naming Names

  Authored by James Howard Kunstler via DailyReckoning.com,

  One reason American movies are so bad these days is they have forgotten how to tell a story. Stuff just happens to characters. Cause, effect and consequence no longer exist in the workshops of Hollywood.

  And one might sense that these imperatives are likewise missing from what used to be known as real life in the USA, with all its stories and narratives. Stuff just happens to the people in this country now. And then sometimes, stuff un-happens.

  With the Russian operation in Ukraine alarming the populace, you might have forgotten the late COVID-19 epidemic that provoked so much public hysteria and government policy overreach.

  Stuff happened during those two-plus years of COVID-19, and even with Ukraine blaring from the cable news channels, COVID-19 stuff is still happening. Vaccine mandates are still in force, in New York City, for instance — except for performers and ballplayers, who are exempted now, as announced this week by Mayor Eric Adams.

  If you detect any specious reasoning behind that diktat, at least you know who made it happen.

  

  “Safe and Effective”

  But so many other things just happened with COVID-19, rather serious things, and no one has had to answer for them, certainly not Dr. Anthony Fauci, who just days ago talked up another booster shot of his obviously defective mRNA “vaccines.”

  Dr. Fauci proposed that despite a raft of emerging statistics from the life insurance realm that indicate a shockingly high number of mysterious all-causes deaths for people in the prime of life. Several conditions appear to be killing them:

  1) Blood clotting in the capillaries of various organs, apparently caused by the “vaccine’s” main active ingredient, spike proteins.

  2) Heart inflammation (pericarditis and myocarditis).

  3) A mystifying array of neurological afflictions.

  4) Switched-off immune system toggles, including the cellular mechanism for preventing the growth of cancers.

  This developing picture of a public health catastrophe, growing more robustly detailed by the week, has somehow not alarmed the general public, not least because the entire public health officialdom does not want them to know about it.

  Names

  In fact, as averred to above, they are all still busy promoting the “vaccines” that are responsible.

  Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC, is rather well-known — though her duties appear limited to the public impersonation of a “concerned mom” — but whoever heard of Rebecca Bunnell, Ph.D., director of the CDC’s Office of Science?

  Does science play any part in the emerging disaster of sharply rising all-causes deaths? It would be good to know, don’t you think? Anyone heard from Daniel Jernigan, MD, deputy CDC director for public health science and surveillance (DDPHSS)? You’d think he would be out there surveilling things.

  How about Brian C. Moyer, Ph.D., director of the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics. He would be in charge, presumably, of the VAERS system, which tabulates adverse vaccine events.

  That system evidently under-reports adverse events by a shocking amount — some say only 1% are ever recorded. Why is that? Because it is a website that is so notoriously ill designed and hard to use that the CDC pledged to fix it more than 10 years ago and never got around to it.

  Why is that, Dr. Moyer? Has anyone asked him? I don’t think so.

  More Names

  There is the appalling and still on-going campaign to suppress COVID early-treatment off-label drugs such as ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, fluvoxamine, etc., though the protocols have been proven highly effective in clinical practice as well as scores of internationally peer-reviewed studies.

  Hundreds of thousands of Americans died because these drugs were maliciously outlawed. In many states, doctors can be punished with loss of medical licenses for using these safe and effective drugs, or even talking them up.

  Who exactly in public health was responsible for this suppression? Who gave the orders for it?  Or did it just happen? Was it Francis Collins, recently retired director of the National Institutes for Health (NIH)? He must have at least approved the policy.

  Stephen M. Hahn, MD, who was commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration from December 2019 to January 2021, the heart of the COVID event timeline? Janet Woodcock, who was acting commissioner from January 2021 to February 2022 — and was previously the longtime chief of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research?

  Or the current chief of that outfit, one Patrizia Cavazzoni, MD? Or Jacqueline A. O’Shaughnessy, Ph.D., the FDA’s acting chief scientist? Was outlawing early treatment in their purviews? Did they even know about it? How could they not?

  Even More Names

  Consider another killer on the scene: the drug remdesivir, a Dr. Fauci production, originally for hepatitis C, manufactured by Gilead Sciences. U.S. public health has anointed remdesivir the standard of practice for patients severely ill with Stage 2 inflammatory COVID in the ICUs all over America.

  It is well-known that remdesivir destroys kidney function in as little as five days. This supposed antiviral agent is being used after the high-viral-load Stage 1 phase of COVID is over. How many ICU patients have been killed by remdesivir?

  Why not ask Judith A McMeekin, Pharm.D, the FDA’s associate commissioner for regulatory affairs? Or Sam Posner, acting director for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases? Or Rima F. Khabbaz, MD, director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases?

  Or Debra Houry, MD, acting principal deputy director of the CDC and, since 2014, director of the Center for Injury Prevention and Control? Or the CDC’s chief medical officer, Mitchell Wolfe, MD? Or Nathaniel Smith, MD, CDC’s deputy director of public health service and implementation?  Or maybe Jay C. Butler, deputy CDC director for infectious dseases?

  You see, there are real people in high places with exalted credentials who must in some way be responsible for the epic blunders committed during the COVID-19 saga. Or else they allowed these actions to happen on purpose.

  Will any actual persons answer for any of this?

  I’m Not Done Yet

  Oh, by the way, perhaps you noticed the ruckus over University of Pennsylvania transgender swimmer Lia Thomas (born William Thomas) recently winning the Women’s 500-yard freestyle race in the NCAA nationals.

  How did it happen that the 6’4” Thomas, oddly still in possession of normal male genitalia, got permission to compete against, shall we say, natural-born women?

  You can ask Mark Emmert, the NCAA president, or Wendell E. Pritchett, president of the University of Pennsylvania, or Alanna W. Shanahan, Penn director of athletics, or Lauren C. Procopio, assistant director for men’s/women’s Swimming.

  You see, there are real people behind all these disorders of our national life. Many more besides just the notorious Dr. Fauci… and many more work under all these directors of this and that.

  What have they done? Or did stuff just happen?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 21:00

• Bird Flu Spreads Across US, Egg Prices Soar  
  Bird Flu Spreads Across US, Egg Prices Soar  

  A contagious strain of highly pathogenic avian influenza wiped out flocks across the US and killed millions of birds. The direct effect has been a nasty ripple effect of tight poultry meat and egg supplies, sending retail prices sky-high — adding to record-high food inflation. 

  The latest estimates from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) show around 24 million poultry birds like chickens and turkeys have died or been culled due to the virus since February. 

  Bloomberg published a shocking map of the bird flu spreading across the US, covering nearly half of the country. 

  

  Even though the virus poses limited risks to humans, the virus has been detected in the nation’s leading egg producer: Iowa. The spread continues as “wild bird migration patterns continue. The disease is being introduced to our domestic population,” Chloe Carson, the communications director of the Iowa agriculture department, told CNN.

  National egg prices are off the charts for this time of year because of tight supplies. The average price of a dozen eggs has jumped to $2.60, up from $1.20 in early January. 

  

  Last week, US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said poultry farms are better prepared to mitigate virus spreading following new guidelines after the previous bird flu outbreak in 2015. 

  As for now, the spread shows no signs of abating and adds to higher living costs for Americans struggling under the Biden economy of record-high food and gas prices.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 20:40

• Amid Sharp Rise In Accumulation, Bitcoin Price Action Increasingly Disconnected From On-Chain Demand
  Amid Sharp Rise In Accumulation, Bitcoin Price Action Increasingly Disconnected From On-Chain Demand

  Analyst Retrospective April 2022, by Copper.co

  How to value Bitcoin continues to be a seriously debated topic despite on-chain metrics showing a clear direction in demand. Small and medium investors have upped their take of the supply and exchange balances continue to drop. Decentralized Finance markets are showing more parked wrapped Bitcoin and less borrowing of the cryptocurrency too. But, cash and carry plays are only showing lukewarm returns and funding rates remain flat.

  * * *

  Volatility makes Bitcoin seem like a complex asset to assess when in reality, it’s a pure supply and demand play. There are no cashflows. Its ability to be used in transaction settlement outside of moving in and out of exchanges is a tiny portion still. It ultimately boils down to whether or not there are more enthusiastic long-term buyers than short-term sellers. On-chain data gives investors a better picture. Traders, on the other hand, are creating copy/paste bots with the most obvious technical analysis metrics. Some win, some lose.

  Sharp rise in accumulation

  The sharpest visible rise in holdings has happened with medium size investors holding 1-10 Bitcoins. For the first time since 2020, markets have not taken account the increase in holdings (see chart).

  

  This begs the question whether markets have new information on the price of Bitcoin outside demand, or there is a significant lag in accounting for reduced supply. Due to US equity market correlation, it’s more plausible that it’s the latter.

  Since the start of February 2022, the addresses increased their size by a whopping 51k Bitcoins in less than three months at the fastest rate and most accumulation seen since the end of 2020, when Bitcoin was still at the $10k mark (see chart). The on-chain
  cost of these holdings averages to $47k per Bitcoin. This was also the average cost seen by small retail investors in 2021.

  

  In essence, these addresses alone have siphoned off over 89% of the new Bitcoin supply for the period of 1 February till 6 April 2022, when investors began to buy in heavily.

  

  And these investors are opportunistic. Observable is that they are more price sensitive and begin to exit before a new price top is formed. Their current direction and thesis are crystal clear. And these on-chain investors haven’t been the only consistent buyers either.

  Adding up, bit by bit

  There are numbers of players within the Bitcoin investment space, but none other than small retail holders who self-custody have been so consistent in demand with a long-term perspective.

  Since the start of the year, 0-1 BTC addresses increased by nearly 40k Bitcoins. That alone would be 47% of the new supply this year. However, readers of Copper’s research already knew this from our previous Analyst Retrospective.

  Average daily accumulation from small retail investors kicked off 2Q22 in grand style, hitting a new high of 0.06% (see chart 3).

  

  At average growth rates, and into the next Bitcoin halving estimated in May 2024, current prices would imply very little new supply overhang would be left just from these small retail investors. Even at a 0.03% daily change, which compounds quickly, would see retail investors siphon off all of the new supply (see chart 4).

  

  It would be very diffcult not to see prices increase. Bitcoin doesn’t break supply and demand economics into new theories; it adheres to the most classic of equations. Price volatility, of course, is a different story and still a riddle to traders and investors alike.

  But what we can say for certain is that 90% equivalent of the new Bitcoin supply minted in 2022 has gone on-chain to addresses holding 0-10 BTC. There is little new supply overhang from small and medium investors alone.

  DeFi short sellers take pause

  Another metric to keep a close eye on is supply changes on DeFi protocols. The most utility in borrowing wrapped Bitcoin is really to short it on decentralised exchanges. But there has been a growing shi% in supply and demand dynamics on popular protocol Compound Finance (see chart 5).

  

  Lending utilization for wBTC on Compound hit a new low of just 3%. More Bitcoin is making its way into the supply side, while demand has dropped more than four times seen at different cycles during 2021. And it’s not that the returns are great by any stretch of the imagination with annual yields standing at less than a 0.01%. The expectation is clearly value appreciation.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 20:20

• 8-Mile Long Russian Convoy Signals Huge Assault Readied To Take Donbas: Pentagon
  8-Mile Long Russian Convoy Signals Huge Assault Readied To Take Donbas: Pentagon

  During a Monday press briefing the Pentagon told reporters that it’s observed major Russian preparations for a bigger move deeper into the Donbas region of Ukraine. 

  Press Secretary John Kirby told reporters that based on US intelligence, the Russian military is now “trying to resupply and reinforce their efforts in the Donbas.” This also as Western media reports have described an eight-mile long armored and infantry convoy that appear to be preparing for the fresh assault. 

  NEW: U.S. believes that Russia’s 8-mile long military convoy that’s heading toward Ukraine’s contested city of Izyum originated near Belgorod and Valukyi: senior U.S. defense official.

  Here’s an April 8 satellite photo of the northern extent of the convoy.

  📷:@Maxar pic.twitter.com/ODIVpNio9Z

  — Jack Detsch (@JackDetsch) April 11, 2022

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

  “The convoy, exposed in commercial satellite imagery, stretches an estimated eight miles. It appears to contain vehicles to command and supply infantry units and possibly helicopters, said the official, who provided intelligence assessments on condition of anonymity,” USA Today writes.

  Kirby in the briefing described that “It does seem to be a mix of personnel carrying vehicles as well as armored vehicles and maybe some artillery, maybe some enabling capabilities.”

  He further cited satellite imagery that shows the convoy headed south toward Izyum, which is at the front line of the extent of Russian advance in Donbas. Kirby described these as major reinforcements.

  Last month Russian forces drew back their positions outside of Kiev and with Russian commanders issuing formal statements confirming that the ‘special operation’ would now focus on liberating the Donbas region in the east. This has fueled speculation both that the Kremlin may be disappointed in how things are going so far, given the fierce Ukrainian resistance, and could be eyeing a partition of the country into eastern and western halves. 

  According to The Hill citing Pentagon leadership, the US has been expecting the battle for Donbas to intensify imminently: 

  The comments come after Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley on Thursday warned there is a “significant battle yet ahead” around the Donbas, where the Kremlin intends to “mass forces and continue their assault” on the country after failing to take the capital of Kyiv.   

  Here are today’s control-of-terrain maps for #Russia‘s invasion of #Ukraine from @TheStudyofWar and @criticalthreats. We are not mapping the alleged chemical attacks in #Mariupol, but will cover that incident later tonight in our daily written update. pic.twitter.com/Sp5ohQmXyQ

  — ISW (@TheStudyofWar) April 11, 2022

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

  President Zelensky too is now warning of an impending major new Russian push to take the whole of Donbas, telling South Korean lawmakers in a virtual address, “The occupiers have sent dozens of thousands of soldiers and colossal numbers of equipment to prepare new attacks,” according to NBC News. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 20:00

• DOJ Election Threat Taskforce Appears To Have 'Something To Hide': Watchdog Group President
  DOJ Election Threat Taskforce Appears To Have ‘Something To Hide’: Watchdog Group President

  Authored by Masooma Haq and Roman Balmakov via The Epoch Times,

  Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) is being weaponized against opposing voices. Fitton’s group filed a lawsuit against the DOJ recently to get documents connected to the department’s election threat task force, after almost a year of no response to their Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Fitton thinks the DOJ has something they don’t want the public to know.

  “We want answers about it. And of course, when you don’t give us answers, and you don’t comply with the law that requires that records be turned over, it suggests to me that you got something to hide,” Fitton told the host of EpochTV’s “Facts Matter,” Roman Balmakov, during a recent interview. “So, what are they nervous about, that they don’t want to give to us?”

  

  Fitton’s comments come after the DOJ’s July action to form an election threats task force to investigate alleged widespread threats to election officials.

  “You know, I think we had asked for this material last year initially, and we still don’t have anything,” he said. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit at the end of March for a FOIA request they submitted in August 2021 for all records related to the August virtual task force meeting.

  According to Judicial Watch, the group is “a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability, and integrity in government, politics, and the law.”

  According to the DOJ, “the task force is leading the Justice Department’s efforts to address threats of violence against election workers, and to ensure that all election workers—whether they be elected, appointed, or those who volunteer—be permitted to do their jobs free from threats and intimidation.” The task force will partner with U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the FBI field offices to assess allegations of threats against election workers.

  The DOJ has charged two people in connection with election threats since the launch of the task force.

  “So not only do you have the DOJ involved, you get the FBI, you’ve got I think their national security operation involved as well, and the Department of Homeland Security. And you know, I read it as, ‘Don’t you dare ask questions about the way elections are being conducted, otherwise, you’ll be on our government radar.’”

  Fitton believes that these efforts by the DOJ violate the public’s constitutional rights and target political opposition, and work more to intimidate people.

  “So, what they do is they pretend that their political opponents are to be treated as national security threats, potential terrorists, lawbreakers, and then follow up with an intimidation effort that suggests law enforcement will be watching you if you talk on these specific topics.”

  The DOJ declined to comment on the lawsuit and why they had not released the documents to Judicial Watch.

  Broader Problem of Corruption

  “Well, … frankly, most federal agencies are irredeemably corrupt, and they need to be really reformed in dramatic ways, if not dismantled, depending on the agency entirely,” said Fitton.

  When it comes to bad public policy and misconduct, the Justice Department is at the center of the storm, he said.

  “They defend the indefensible,” said Fitton. “So, everything you don’t like, if the federal government’s breaking the law, and you think that’s going on and there’s abuse, usually, there’s a Justice Department attorney or agency that’s more than willing to defend that and is pushing it or protecting them from accountability by pretending that records about government misconduct are secret and can’t be turned over.”

  Fitton said the DOJ is too big and has too much money. “You’ve got this basic waste, fraud, and abuse issue, in addition to the politicization because no one’s watching the store. We need the watch the watchers.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 19:40

• Watchdog Blasts $54M In Chinese Gifts To UPenn After Biden Center Announced
  Watchdog Blasts $54M In Chinese Gifts To UPenn After Biden Center Announced

  A government watchdog has asked the US attorney investigating Hunter Biden to investigate $54.6 million in Chinese donations to the University of Pennsylvania – most of which happened after the university’s February 2017 announcement that it would create the Biden Center – and $23.1 million of which were anonymous and started in 2016, according to public records.

  

  According to the NY Post, the vast majority of donations from China to UPenn occurred after the announcement that the university would create the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement shortly after Biden’s term as vice president had just ended.

  The center, which is located in Washington, DC., opened its doors in February 2018. Antony Blinken, whom Biden named as Secretary of State, briefly served as its managing director.

  The Ivy League university received $15.8 million in anonymous Chinese gifts that year, including one eye-popping $14.5 million donation in May 2018, records show.

  The flurry of donations may be related to Hunter Biden’s business interests in China, the National Legal and Policy Center, a Virginia-based watchdog, alleged in complaints sent in May and October 2020 to the Departments of Education and Justice. -NY Post

  Last week NLPC asked Delaware US Attorney David Weiss to include the Chinese donations as part of his federal tax probe of Hunter Biden.

  “We’ve asked … Weiss to pursue the larger network of individuals and institutions who benefited from millions doled out by foreign interests connected to Hunter Biden’s work in China and Ukraine,” Tom Anderson, director of the NLPC’s Government Integrity Project, told the Post.

  The group’s 12-page complaint was originally filed in October 2020 with the DOJ’s Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) unit.

  According to UPenn spokesman Stephen MacCarthy, “The Penn Biden Center has never solicited or received any gifts from any Chinese or other foreign entity. In fact, the University has never solicited any gifts for the Center.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 19:20

• Food Shortages Loom As Chinese Farmers Face Trouble Amid Pandemic
  Food Shortages Loom As Chinese Farmers Face Trouble Amid Pandemic

  Authored by Zhao Fenghua and Luo Ya via The Epoch Times,

  Jilin Province in China has announced that efforts will continue to ensure that spring plowing continues despite a province-wide COVID-19 lockdown. However, online videos showed police interrupting farmers working in the fields throughout China.

  Fearing the delay in spring plowing could lead to a food shortage, analysts say the crisis is beyond fallow fields, viable seeds and fertilizers are the real crisis Chinese farmers are facing.

  Lockdown Threatens Food Supply

  Jilin, located in China’s corn belt, is an important processing and production region for the country’s cereals.

  The authorities locked down the entire province on March 14.

  The lockdown has affected 24 million people and threatened the national food supply.

  On April 6, Jilin authorities claimed that to safeguard the spring plowing, more than 80 percent of seeding sheds covering 19,768 acres of land were ready, and over 90 percent of corn and soybean seeds had been delivered.

  

  However, online Chinese videos showed farmers from various parts of the country were removed as they plowed the fields by local police for violating lockdowns, and were subject to either detention or quarantine for 14 days.

  The Chinese edition of The Epoch Times was only able to reach one local seed company to confirm the official line on the readiness of seeds. The staff member said the company had been closed since the lockdown in early March. “In the pandemic, everyone is staying at home for the PCR test,” she said, adding that she didn’t know when business will resume.

  Seed Crisis May Lead to Food Shortage

  Liu is a Chinese journalist who requested anonymity. He believes the lack of viable seeds is more serious than the restrictions during lockdown.

  He said: “Seeds and fertilizer are the two main things for spring plowing. But China’s viable grain seeds come in at a high price.”

  According to Liu, many Chinese farmers have become victims of the opaque procurement practice in China. Some even had near-zero harvest because of bad seeds.

  He explained that the seeds are controlled by foreign entities, and they are very expensive. “The farmers no longer keep the good seeds from previous harvest like in the old days,” he said.

  Liu said: “Foreign companies control the technology of the seeds that come into China. Some domestic seed companies, completely out of touch with modern seed technology, even sold inferior seeds which they claimed as self-bred seeds. As a result, the farmers had a poor harvest.”

  Liu blamed the many Chinese crop seed producers for the problems with the seeds.

  Over the years, Chinese farmers have suffered economic loss owing to inferior seeds.

  In one 2019 Chinese media report, a case of inferior seeds cost 205 farmers in Jiangxi Province around $726,000 loss, totaling 800 acres of fields.

  In 2020, fake seeds led to no harvest in a 279-acre field involving 40 farmers in Inner Mongolia.

  

  A farmer waiting to sell grain at a state grain reserves depot in Yushu of Jilin Province, China, on Jan. 8, 2009. (China Photos/Getty Images)

  Chen Weijian is the chief editor of Chinese human rights magazine Beijing Spring.

  He indicated the lockdowns will seriously affect the price and production of fertilizers and pesticides. “Without pesticides and fertilizers, there’s no productivity in the Chinese soil,” he said.

  “I believe that the food crisis in China will become more prominent in two or three years,” he added, referring to the huge loss of farming land over the years of government-led rural land expropriation.

  Recently, Beijing forced rural areas to restore farm fields in various parts of China. Some local officials responded to the latest policy by turning basketball courts and roads into farming fields by laying layers of soil on cement for plantation.

  Chen said that this reveals the food shortage has reached an embarrassing point for Beijing.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 19:00

• Fauci Admits Defeat: Says COVID Here To Stay, People Need To 'Calculate Individual Risk'
  Fauci Admits Defeat: Says COVID Here To Stay, People Need To ‘Calculate Individual Risk’

  While President Joe Biden campaigned on a promise to “shut down the virus, not the economy,” Dr. Anthony Fauci – the highest paid employee in the US government – was taking a much more cautious approach – suggesting that Covid might never go away.

  

  And with Washington DC now a superspreader party town for the far-less deadly Omicron strain, Fauci has now explicitly thrown in the towel on trying to rid the world of Covid-19 – telling ABC‘s “This Week” that the virus is here to stay, and people will just have to decide what level of risk they’re willing to take.

  “This is not going to be eradicated and it’s not going to be eliminated,” Fauci told host Jonathan Karl.

  “What’s going to happen is that we’re going to see that each individual is going to have to make their calculation of the amount of risk that they want to take in going to indoor dinners and in going to functions, even within the realm of a green zone map of the country where you see everything looks green but it’s starting to tick up,” he added.

  Here’s Dr. Fauci agreeing with Dr. Leana Wen and saying what so many have been saying for years:

  “This is not going to be eradicated … Each individual is going to have to make their [risk] calculation … We’re going to have to live with some degree of virus in the community.” pic.twitter.com/iapD3VuhM1

  — Scott Morefield (@SKMorefield) April 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js“We’re going to have to live with some degree of virus in the community,” Fauci continued, adding that “The best way to mitigate that, Jon, is to get vaccinated.”

  Yes, a vaccine developed for a completely different strain which wanes in protection just six weeks after the receipt of a fourth dose, according to a recent Israeli study.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 18:40

• Special Counsel John Durham Continues His Focus On The Hillary Clinton Campaign
  Special Counsel John Durham Continues His Focus On The Hillary Clinton Campaign

  Authored by ‘Techno Fog’ via ‘The Reactionary’ substack,

  Special Counsel John Durham continues his focus on the Hillary Clinton Campaign…

  …And: John Podesta has been interviewed.

  

  Special Counsel John Durham has asked high ranking officials from the Clinton Campaign and Hillary for America, including the Clinton Campaign’s Chair (who we believe to be John Podesta1), about their awareness of the activities conducted by Fusion GPS on Hillary’s behalf.

  

  This confirms an important avenue of Durham’s investigation: whether the Hillary Campaign or Hillary for America were part of a conspiracy to traffic false information to the FBI and other governmental entities.

  While we reported on this development back in December, Durham’s latest filing (available here) provides context to his statement that Hillary for America, the Hillary Clinton Campaign, and former employees of that campaign were involved “in matters before the Special Counsel.”

  

  Those “matters” apparently now include the Alfa Bank data (the purported secret communications between Russian Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization). The importance of this data was suggested in another filing (April 8, 2022), where Sussmann’s lawyers provided to the Court a March 30, 2022 letter from Special Counsel Durham to Sussmann’s attorneys.

  That letter addresses the Special Counsel’s understanding that Sussmann’s lawyers would not “offer evidence, or engage in questioning, that would imply, assert, or seek to prove the authenticity of the relevant DNS data or the actual truth of the allegations at issue concerning a secret channel of communications between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank.”

  It also served as a warning. Should Sussmann’s attorneys try to establish the accuracy of the Alfa Bank/Trump data, the Special Counsel’s expert would be ready to testify that the data was falsified:

  

  That statement is the strongest thus far that the Special Counsel has determined the Alfa Bank/Trump data was spoofed in order to mislead the press and the FBI. A conspiracy, if you will.

  Moving on – besides Alfa Bank, what else might these “matters” referenced by Durham include?

  For starters, whether the Clinton Campaign or Hillary for America knew about, or directed the activities of, Charles Dolan (the longtime Clinton ally and the “source” of Steele dossier primary subsource Igor Danchenko). As we noted back in January, we believe that Dolan has testified before a grand jury on these issues.

   Recall that Durham informed the Court that the Igor Danchenko (Steele’s primary subsource) trial might include the following issues:

  1. The Clinton Campaign’s knowledge or lack of knowledge concerning the veracity of information in the Fusion GPS reports sourced by Danchenko,

  2. The Clinton Campaign’s awareness or lack of awareness of Dancehnko’s collection methods and sub-sources,

  3. Meetings or communications between and among the Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, and/or Steele regarding or involving Danchenko

  4. Danchenko knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the Clinton Campaign’s role in and activities surrounding the Fusion GPS reports, and

  5. The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.

  Let’s go with a hypothetical and assume for a moment that the Clinton Campaign was involved in conspiracies to traffic false information to the FBI/DOJ via the Steele dossier and the Alfa Bank allegations. (Still an assumption at this time – beware the danger of false hope. We saw the other side get trapped and humiliated with their promises of indictments.)

  Why go to those lengths – and why risk criminal exposure? Especially with polling predicting a near-certain Hillary win?

  Dare I suggest it all goes back to the DNC “hack”.

  Privilege Issues

  One of the filings we discussed above (regarding Podesta) is Durham’s motion to compel the production of documents against the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Hillary for America, Fusion GPS, and Perkins Coie. Each one of these entities has “withheld and/or redacted documents and communications” from the Special Counsel. Fusion GPS, for example has withheld 1,455 documents.

  Not to be outdone, Hillary for American and the DNC have asserted privilege over communications between Rodney Joffe (“Tech Executive-1” in the Sussmann indictment) and Fusion GPS – despite the DNC or HFA not being attached to those e-mails. Rodney Joffe, according to Durham, “has asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination over any responsive documents within his personal possession, custody, or control.”

  What exactly does Durham want from the Clinton Campaign, et al.? Here’s some examples:

  1. The unredacted contract between Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS. (View the redacted version here.)

  2. “38 emails and attachments between and among” Perkins Coie, Rodney Joffe, and/or Fusion GPS employees.

  3. Communications between Fusion GPS and Rodney Joffe relating to the Alfa Bank allegations.

  The primary basis of the privilege asserted by the DNC, et al., is that the work-product from Fusion GPS or Rodney Joffe was done in anticipation of litigation. When asking whether a document is prepared “in anticipation of litigation,” courts will look to whether “the document can fairly be said to have been prepared or obtained because of the prospect of litigation.” FTC v. Boehringer, 778 F.3d 142, 147 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

   The protects afforded by the work-product doctrine are the very reason why Perkins Coie referenced “potential and/or on-going litigation” in its contract with Fusion GPS. In other words, they planned ahead for the possibility that this privilege might need to be asserted. (This is the privilege Fusion GPS was asserting when it was sued by the owners of Alfa Bank.)

  

  The good news?

  The DNC, Hillary for America, Fusion GPS, and Perkins Coie will likely be compelled by the Court to produce the documents requested by Durham. Their arguments of “privilege” are weak for a number of reasons, including: (1) the work was of a political nature and did not involve legal advice; (2) the work was not done in anticipation of litigation; (3) any privilege was waived, as Fusion GPS, the DNC/HFA, and Perkins Coie all did their part to distribute the information to the press, government officials, etc.

  Dates of Interest

  Finally, the latest filings provides dates of the Fusion/Perkins contract and the grand jury subpoenas:

  • April 1, 2016: Fusion GPS enters into a contract with Perkins Coie.

  • March 22, 2021: The Special Counsel serves Fusion GPS with a grand jury subpoena to produce documents relating to (1) the Alfa Bank hoax, and (2) the use of Russian phones “by Donald Trump and/or individuals affiliated with Donald Trump.” The Russian phone allegations were those brought by Sussmann to the CIA in February 2017.

  • July 9, 2021: The Special Counsel requests Fusion GPS produce its retention contracts/agreements with the DNC and Hillary for America.

  • September 16, 2021: The Special Counsel issued grand jury subpoenas to Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS, “requiring them to produce – in redacted form – the documents previously listed on privilege logs prepared by counsel for those entities so that such documents would be available for admission into evidence.”

  As to the reason to provide the “privilege” arguments, one can’t help but think that the DNC, the Clinton Campaign, and the rest of them are trying to hid the most damning evidence and incriminating communications.

  * * *

  The Reactionary is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Pope Calls On Russian & Ukraine Leaders To Observe Easter Truce
  Pope Calls On Russian & Ukraine Leaders To Observe Easter Truce

  Pope Francis in a Palm Sunday address from the Vatican called on Russia and Ukraine to observe an Easter truce following six weeks since the Russian invasion. The Roman Catholic leader has been increasingly vocal in condemning the war.

  He said that leaders on both sides must “make some sacrifices for the good of the people” in the message which kicked off Roman Catholic Holy Week, which is the seven days leading up to Easter.

  

  The mass he served in St. Peter’s Square is said to be the first such he’s led amid crowds since the start of the pandemic two years ago. During the sermon, he called for …”weapons to be laid down to begin an Easter truce, not to reload weapons and resume fighting, no! A truce to reach peace through real negotiations.”

  While not saying the names Russia or Ukraine directly, he denounced “the folly of war” and “senseless acts of cruelty,” further questioning, “In fact, what a victory would that be, who plants a flag under a pile of rubble?”

  However, it was very clear the words were in referencing to the ongoing war. “When we resort to violence … we lose sight of why we are in the world and even end up committing senseless acts of cruelty. We see this in the folly of war, where Christ is crucified yet another time,” he said.

  He also decried “the unjust death of husbands and sons” … “refugees fleeing bombs” … “young people deprived of a future” … and “soldiers sent to kill their brothers and sisters” – as the Associated Press quoted. 

  While Ukraine-Russia talks are still ongoing, with President Zelensky recently signaling he’s ready for neutrality regarding the NATO question, there’s been little progress given that anytime a potential ‘breakthrough’ is reported, what immediately follows are accusations and denials from both sides. Each side is seeking leverage through battlefield victories, with Russian forces concentrating operations in the east and south.

  The pope blessed the flag of 2014 Euromaidan coup. The message couldn’t be worse. https://t.co/Be8K4jSun8

  — Alex (Sasha) Krainer (@NakedHedgie) April 8, 2022

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

  In the scenario that an Easter truce does take hold, it would likely come on April 24 – which is the Eastern Orthodox date this year for Pascha – instead of the Western observation of April 17.

  During a trip to the island nation of Malta over a week ago, the Pope had for the first time denounced Putin’s decision to go to war, yet characteristically without naming the Russian leader directly. The Pope had said, “Once again, some potentate, sadly caught up in anachronistic claims of nationalist interest, is provoking and fomenting conflicts, whereas ordinary people sense the need to build a future that will either be shared or not be at all.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 02:45

• Hudson: The Dollar Devours The Euro
  Hudson: The Dollar Devours The Euro

  Authored by Michael Hudson,

  It is now clear that today’s escalation of the New Cold War was planned over a year ago, with serious strategy associated with America’s plan to block Nord Stream 2 as part of its aim of blocking Western Europe (“NATO”) from seeking prosperity by mutual trade and investment with China and Russia.

  

  As President Biden and U.S. national-security reports announced, China was seen as the major enemy. Despite China’s helpful role in enabling corporate America to drive down labor’s wage rates by de-industrializing the U.S. economy in favor of Chinese industrialization, China’s growth was recognized as posing the Ultimate Terror: prosperity through socialism. Socialist industrialization always has been perceived to be the great enemy of the rentier economy that has taken over most nations in the century since World War I ended, and especially since the 1980s. The result today is a clash of economic systems – socialist industrialization vs. neoliberal finance capitalism.

  That makes the New Cold War against China an implicit opening act of what threatens to be a long-drawn-out World War III. The U.S. strategy is to pry away China’s most likely economic allies, especially Russia, Central Asia, South Asia and East Asia. The question was, where to start the carve-up and isolation.

  Russia was seen as presenting the greatest opportunity to begin isolating, both from China and from the NATO Eurozone. A sequence of increasingly severe – and hopefully fatal – sanctions against Russia was drawn up to block NATO from trading with it. All that was needed to ignite the geopolitical earthquake was a casus belli.

  That was arranged easily enough. The escalating New Cold War could have been launched in the Near East – over resistance to America’s grabbing of Iraqi oil fields, or against Iran and countries helping it survive economically, or in East Africa. Plans for coups, color revolutions and regime change have been drawn up for all these areas, and America’s African army has been built up especially fast over the past year or two. But Ukraine has been subjected to a U.S.-backed civil war for eight years, since the 2014 Maidan coup, and offered the chance for the greatest first victory in this confrontation against China, Russia and their allies.

  So the Russian-speaking Donetsk and Luhansk regions were shelled with increasing intensity, and when Russia still refrained from responding, plans reportedly were drawn up for a great showdown to commence in late February – beginning with a blitzkrieg Western Ukrainian attack organized by U.S. advisors and armed by NATO.

  Russia’s preemptive defense of the two Eastern Ukrainian provinces and its subsequent military destruction of the Ukrainian army, navy and air force over the past two months has been used as the excuse to start imposing the U.S.-designed sanctions program that we are seeing unfolding today. Western Europe has dutifully gone along whole-hog. Instead of buying Russian gas, oil and food grains, it will buy these from the United States, along with sharply increased arms imports.

  The prospective fall in the Euro/Dollar exchange rate

  It therefore is appropriate to look at how this is likely to affect Western Europe’s balance of payments and hence the euro’s exchange rate against the dollar.

  European trade and investment prior to the War to Impose Sanctions had promised a rising mutual prosperity between Germany, France and other NATO countries vis-à-vis Russia and China. Russia was providing abundant energy at a competitive price, and this energy was to make a quantum leap with Nord Stream 2. Europe was to earn the foreign exchange to pay for this rising import trade by a combination of exporting more industrial manufactures to Russia and capital investment in developing the Russian economy, e.g. by German auto companies and financial investment. This bilateral trade and investment is now stopped – and will remain stopped for many, many years, given NATO’s confiscation of Russia’s foreign reserves kept in euros and British sterling, and the European Russophobia being fanned by U.S. propaganda media.

  In its place, NATO countries will purchase U.S. LNG – but they will need to spend billions of dollars building sufficient port capacity, which may take until perhaps 2024. (Good luck until then.) The energy shortage will sharply raise the world price of gas and oil. NATO countries also will step up their purchases of arms from the U.S. military-industrial complex. The near-panic buying will also raise the price for arms. And food prices also will rise as a result of the desperate grain shortfalls resulting from a cessation of imports from Russia and Ukraine on the one hand, and the shortage of ammonia fertilizer made from gas.

  All three of these trade dynamics will strengthen the dollar vis-à-vis the euro. The question is, how will Europe balance its international payments with the United States? What does it have to export that the U.S. economy will accept as its own protectionist interests gain influence, now that global free trade is dying quickly?

  The answer is, not much. So what will Europe do?

  I could make a modest proposal. Now that Europe has pretty much ceased to be a politically independent state, it is beginning to look more like Panama and Liberia – “flag of convenience” offshore banking centers that are not real “states” because they don’t issue their own currency, but use the U.S. dollar. Since the eurozone has been created with monetary handcuffs limiting its ability to create money to spend into the economy beyond the limit of 3 percent of GDP, why not simply throw in the financial towel and adopt the U.S. dollar, like Ecuador, Somalia and the Turks and Caicos Islands? That would give foreign investors security against currency depreciation in their rising trade with Europe and its export financing.

  For Europe, the alternative is that the dollar-cost of its foreign debt taken on to finance its widening trade deficit with the United States for oil, arms and food will explode. The cost in euros will be even greater as the currency falls against the dollar. Interest rates will rise, slowing investment and making Europe even more dependent on imports. The eurozone will turn into an economic dead zone.

  For the United States, this is Dollar Hegemony on steroids – at least vis-à-vis Europe. The continent would become a somewhat larger version of Puerto Rico.

  The dollar vis-à-vis Global South currencies

  The full-blown version of the New Cold War triggered by the “Ukraine War” risks turning into the opening salvo of World War III, and is likely to last at least a decade, perhaps two, as the U.S. extends the fight between neoliberalism and socialism to encompass a worldwide conflict. Apart from the U.S. economic conquest of Europe, its strategists are seeking to lock in African, South American and Asian countries along similar lines to what has been planned for Europe.

  The sharp rise in energy and food prices will hit food-deficit and oil-deficit economies hard – at the same time that their foreign dollar-denominated debts to bondholders and banks are falling due and the dollar’s exchange rate is rising against their own currency. Many African and Latin American countries – especially North Africa – face a choice between going hungry, cutting back their gasoline and electricity use, or borrowing the dollars to cover their dependency on U.S.-shaped trade.

  There has been talk of IMF issues of new SDRs to finance the rising trade and payments deficits. But such credit always comes with strings attached. The IMF has its own policy of sanctioning countries that do not obey U.S. policy. The first U.S. demand will be that these countries boycott Russia, China and their emerging trade and currency self-help alliance. “Why should we give you SDRs or extend new dollar loans to you, if you are simply going to spend these in Russia, China and other countries that we have declared to be enemies,” the U.S. officials will ask.

  At least, this is the plan. I would not be surprised to see some African country become the “next Ukraine,” with U.S. proxy troops (there are still plenty of Wahabi advocates and mercenaries) fighting against the armies and populations of countries seeking to feed themselves with grain from Russian farms, and power their economies with oil or gas from Russian wells – not to speak of participating in China’s Belt and Road Initiative that was, after all, the trigger to America’s launching of its new war for global neoliberal hegemony.

  The world economy is being enflamed, and the United States has prepared for a military response and weaponization of its own oil and agricultural export trade, arms trade and demands for countries to choose which side of the New Iron Curtain they wish to join.

  But what is in this for Europe? Greek labor unions already are demonstrating against the sanctions being imposed. And in Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has just won an election on what is basically an anti-EU and anti-U.S. worldview, starting with paying for Russian gas in roubles. How many other countries will break ranks – and how long will it take?

  What is in this for the Global South countries being squeezed – not merely as “collateral damage” to the deep shortages and soaring prices for energy and food, but as the very objective of U.S. strategy as it inaugurates the great splitting of the world economy in two? India has already told U.S. diplomats that its economy is naturally connected with those of Russia and China. Pakistan finds the same calculus at work.

  From the U.S. vantage point, all that needs to be answered is, “What’s in it for the local politicians and client oligarchies that we reward for delivering their countries?”

  From its planning stages, U.S. diplomatic strategists viewed the looming World War III as a war of economic systems. What side will countries choose: their own economic interest and social cohesion, or submission to local political leaders installed by U.S. meddling like the $5 billion that Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland bragged of having invested in Ukraine’s neo-Nazi parties eight years ago to initiate the fighting that has erupted into today’s war?

  In the face of all this political meddling and media propaganda, how long will it take the rest of the world to realize that there’s a global war underway, with World War III on the horizon? The real problem is that by the time the world understands what is going on, the global fracture will already have enabled Russia, China and Eurasia to create a real non-neoliberal New World Order that does not need NATO countries and which has lost trust and hope for mutual economic gains with them. The military battlefield will be littered with economic corpses.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 02:00

• Elon Musk Will No Longer Join Twitter Board Of Directors
  Elon Musk Will No Longer Join Twitter Board Of Directors

  Following Elon Musk’s recent acquisition of 9.2% of Twitter and last Tuesday’s formal announcement that he would be joining the Board of Directors, Musk has declined the board seat.

  

  “Elon Musk has decided not to join our board,” wrote CEO Parag Agrawal, adding “We were excited to collaborate and clear about the risks. We also believed that having Elon as a fiduciary of the company where he, like all board members, has to act in the best interests of the company and all our shareholders, was the best path forward.”

  “Elon’s appointment to the board was to become officially effective 4/9, but Elon shared that same morning that he will no longer be joining the board. I believe this is for the best. We have and will always value input from our shareholders whether they are on our Board or not.”

  Elon has decided not to join our board. I sent a brief note to the company, sharing with you all here. pic.twitter.com/lfrXACavvk

  — Parag Agrawal (@paraga) April 11, 2022

  Word of Musk’s appointment to the board sent liberals into fits – as the inclusion of the free-speech advocate was seen as a threat to left-wing heterodoxy that underpins Twitter’s culture.

  Of course, for those paying attention, this means that Musk can now own more than 14.9% of the company – a limit that board members must adhere to.

  As the Wall Street Journal notes, “It was unclear why Musk refused the board seat. Adding Musk would have restricted how big a stake in the company he could own. Musk could now do anything from selling his stake to potentially pursuing a hostile takeover of the company.”

  We await the next Musk tweet with bated breath…

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/11/2022 – 00:07

• China Undercuts Sanctions On Russia: Where Are The "Consequences"?
  China Undercuts Sanctions On Russia: Where Are The “Consequences”?

  Authored by Judith Bergman via The Gatestone Institute,

  • “For China… the Ukrainian crisis provided a unique opportunity to increase its access to Russia’s natural resources, particularly gas, gain contracts for infrastructure projects and new markets for Chinese technology, and turn Russia into a junior partner in the relationship between the two countries.” — Report by the European Council on Foreign Relations, February 2015.

  • In addition to undermining sanctions through the commodities trade, China is possibly also helping Russia hide its money.

  • Despite all of the above, the Biden administration continues to talk about China as if proof were still needed that it is undercutting sanctions on Russia.

  • China has clearly been giving material help to Russia. So where are the “consequences”?

  • The closest that the U.S. has come to going beyond words is the announcement, along with other G7 leaders, of an “enforcement initiative” to prevent Russia from evading sanctions, but it is — presumably deliberately — unclear what that initiative actually entails.

  • “The trade and the purchase of long-term energy supplies undercut the sanctions, because it shows Putin he has got somebody in his corner for the next five years or more.” — Michael Pillsbury, author of The Hundred-Year Marathon, Fox News, March 21, 2022.

  • The Biden administration, by repeatedly threatening “consequences” and issuing “warnings” to China, “if” it helps Russia undercut sanctions, merely continues to project indecision, weakness and lack of leadership …[and] will only result in the additional loss of credibility and the further degradation of U.S. deterrence to the detriment of the West.

  

  Despite tough Western sanctions on Russia, President Vladimir Putin’s war on Ukraine has now lasted for more than a month and Putin is showing no signs of backing down. The power helping him to withstand the effects of the sanctions and continue the war is Russia’s most powerful ally — China. Pictured: Putin meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Moscow on June 5, 2019. (Image source: kremlin.ru)

  Despite tough Western sanctions on Russia, President Vladimir Putin’s war on Ukraine has now lasted for more than a month and Putin is showing no signs of backing down. The power helping him to withstand the effects of the sanctions and continue the war is Russia’s most powerful ally — China.

  Shortly before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24, Russia and China entered into contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars. On February 4, Putin announced new Russian oil and gas deals with China worth an estimated $117.5 billion. On February 18, six days before the invasion, Russia announced a $20 billion deal to sell 100 million tons of coal to China. On the day of the invasion, China, lifting restrictions that had been in place previously due to concerns about plant diseases, agreed to buy Russian wheat.

  All of these deals, by undermining Western sanctions on Russia, are lifelines to Putin and his war on Ukraine. “China could emerge as a major buyer for Russian wheat and sunflower oil as wide-ranging financial sanctions threaten Russia’s agriculture trade flows to its traditional markets in Europe,” S&P Global Commodity Insights wrote.

  China, perhaps with a covetous eye toward Taiwan, has not condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and has repeatedly stated that it is against sanctioning Russia. Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng called Western sanctions “outrageous.” China has not even tried to conceal that it continues to do business with Russia. As Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Wang Wenbin said in his press briefing, “China and Russia will continue to conduct normal trade cooperation in the spirit of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit.”

  There is nothing new or surprising in China’s decision to supply the lifeline that enables Putin to stay afloat. After Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula in March 2014 and was met with Western sanctions, Russia turned to China. In May 2014, Russia and China signed a gas supply deal worth $400 billion, making China Russia’s second-largest gas market after Germany. A February 2015 report by the European Council on Foreign Relations stated:

  “After the European Union and the United States imposed sanctions on Russia [in 2014], President Vladimir Putin made a dramatic turn to China and signed a series of deals, including a $400 billion deal to export gas to China last May. Moscow is now attempting to reorient its entire economy towards Asia as a way to mitigate the negative impact of Western sanctions. For China, meanwhile, the Ukrainian crisis provided a unique opportunity to increase its access to Russia’s natural resources, particularly gas, gain contracts for infrastructure projects and new markets for Chinese technology, and turn Russia into a junior partner in the relationship between the two countries.”

  In addition to undermining sanctions through the commodities trade, China is possibly also helping Russia hide its money. According to Foreign Affairs:

  “Russia may have stashed tens of billions of dollars in reserve assets in opaque offshore accounts, where it holds dollar-denominated securities beyond the reach of international sanctions and asset freezes…there are signs, too, that Russia may have moved some of its dollars with help from a foreign government… It is not yet clear which intermediaries Russia would have used to stash Treasuries offshore. One strong possibility, however, is China, with which Putin now appears allied.”

  Despite all of the above, the Biden administration continues to talk about China as if proof were still needed that it is undercutting sanctions on Russia. US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said on March 13:

  “We are communicating directly, privately to Beijing, that there will absolutely be consequences for large-scale sanctions evasion efforts or support to Russia to backfill them. We will not allow that to go forward and allow there to be a lifeline to Russia from these economic sanctions from any country, anywhere in the world.”

  After Sullivan held a seven hour long meeting with Chinese diplomat Yang Jiechi on March 14, a senior Biden administration official told reporters:

  “I’m just going to reiterate that we do have deep concerns about China’s alignment with Russia at this time, and the national security adviser was direct about those concerns and the potential implications and consequences of certain actions,”

  On March 18, in a video call with Chinese President Xi Jinping, U.S. President Joe Biden warned that there would be “implications and consequences if China provides material support to Russia,” but without being specific. One unnamed senior U.S. official even said, “The president really wasn’t making specific requests of China. I think our view is that China will make its own decisions.”

  China has clearly been giving material help to Russia. So where are the “consequences”?

  The closest that the U.S. has come to going beyond words is the announcement, along with other G7 leaders, of an “enforcement initiative” to prevent Russia from evading sanctions, but it is — presumably deliberately — unclear what that initiative actually entails. prior to Biden’s trip to Europe, Sullivan told reporters on March 23:

  “[T]he G7 leaders tomorrow will agree on an initiative to coordinate on sanctions enforcement so that Russian efforts to evade the sanctions or other countries’ effort to help Russia evade the sanctions can be dealt with effectively and in a coordinated fashion.”

  After the G7 meeting, the White House released a statement by the G7, which merely said:

  “We will continue to cooperate closely, including by engaging other governments on adopting similar restrictive measures to those already imposed by G7 members and on refraining from evasion, circumvention and backfilling that seek to undercut or mitigate the effects of our sanctions.”

  There was no mention of China; again, it all seemed too little, too late.

  “They’re [China] the invisible hand behind Putin,” said Michael Pillsbury, author of The Hundred-Year Marathon.

  “They are the ones who are funding the war. Roughly half of Russia’s gold and currency reserves are controlled now by the U.S. and by the West, he [Putin] can’t get access to them. But the other half the Chinese can provide access to and they’ve been doing it… The trade and the purchase of long-term energy supplies undercut the sanctions, because it shows Putin he has got somebody in his corner for the next five years or more. There’s a number of ways that China’s support is just crucial for Putin. I believe the Chinese could stop the war with one phone call to him. It would be like the banker calling you… so far it’s not happening… Probably the only way to get ahead is going to be American sanctions on China… the war will go on because the banker is not going to make that call.”

  The Biden administration, by repeatedly threatening “consequences” and issuing “warnings” to China, “if” it helps Russia undercut sanctions, merely continues to project indecision, weakness and lack of leadership. The constant repetition of these warnings without follow-up actions by the Biden administration will only result in the additional loss of credibility and the further degradation of U.S. deterrence to the detriment of the West.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 23:30

• Visualizing The History Of Energy Transitions
  Visualizing The History Of Energy Transitions

  Over the last 200 years, how we’ve gotten our energy has changed drastically⁠.

  As Visual Capitalist’s Govind Bhutada details below, these changes were driven by innovations like the steam engine, oil lamps, internal combustion engines, and the wide-scale use of electricity. The shift from a primarily agrarian global economy to an industrial one called for new sources to provide more efficient energy inputs.

  The current energy transition is powered by the realization that avoiding the catastrophic effects of climate change requires a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. This infographic provides historical context for the ongoing shift away from fossil fuels using data from Our World in Data and scientist Vaclav Smil.

  

  Coal and the First Energy Transition

  Before the Industrial Revolution, people burned wood and dried manure to heat homes and cook food, while relying on muscle power, wind, and water mills to grind grains. Transportation was aided by using carts driven by horses or other animals.

  In the 16th and 17th centuries, the prices of firewood and charcoal skyrocketed due to shortages. These were driven by increased consumption from both households and industries as economies grew and became more sophisticated.

  Consequently, industrializing economies like the UK needed a new, cheaper source of energy. They turned to coal, marking the beginning of the first major energy transition.

  

  As coal use and production increased, the cost of producing it fell due to economies of scale. Simultaneously, technological advances and adaptations brought about new ways to use coal.

  The steam engine—one of the major technologies behind the Industrial Revolution—was heavily reliant on coal, and homeowners used coal to heat their homes and cook food. This is evident in the growth of coal’s share of the global energy mix, up from 1.7% in 1800 to 47.2% in 1900.

  The Rise of Oil and Gas

  In 1859, Edwin L. Drake built the first commercial oil well in Pennsylvania, but it was nearly a century later that oil became a major energy source.

  Before the mass production of automobiles, oil was mainly used for lamps. Oil demand from internal combustion engine vehicles started climbing after the introduction of assembly lines, and it took off after World War II as vehicle purchases soared.

  Similarly, the invention of the Bunsen burner opened up new opportunities to use natural gas in households. As pipelines came into place, gas became a major source of energy for home heating, cooking, water heaters, and other appliances.

  

  Coal lost the home heating market to gas and electricity, and the transportation market to oil.

  Despite this, it became the world’s most important source of electricity generation and still accounts for over one-third of global electricity production today.

  The Transition to Renewable Energy

  Renewable energy sources are at the center of the ongoing energy transition. As countries ramp up their efforts to curb emissions, solar and wind energy capacities are expanding globally.

  Here’s how the share of renewables in the global energy mix changed over the last two decades:

  

  In the decade between 2000 and 2010, the share of renewables increased by just 1.1%. But the growth is speeding up—between 2010 and 2020, this figure stood at 3.5%.

  Furthermore, the current energy transition is unprecedented in both scale and speed, with climate goals requiring net-zero emissions by 2050. That essentially means a complete fade-out of fossil fuels in less than 30 years and an inevitable rapid increase in renewable energy generation.

  Renewable energy capacity additions were on track to set an annual record in 2021, following a record year in 2020. Additionally, global energy transition investment hit a record of $755 billion in 2021.

  However, history shows that simply adding generation capacity is not enough to facilitate an energy transition. Coal required mines, canals, and railroads; oil required wells, pipelines, and refineries; electricity required generators and an intricate grid.

  Similarly, a complete shift to low-carbon sources requires massive investments in natural resources, infrastructure, and grid storage, along with changes in our energy consumption habits.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 23:00

• Three Million Years To Become The Next Elon Musk
  Three Million Years To Become The Next Elon Musk

  Elon Musk is the billionaire with the highest net worth in the world according to Forbes’ annual billionaires list, pushing Amazon chairman Jeff Bezos off his throne. The Tesla founder accumulated $219 billion to-date, while Bezos actually lost $6 billion over the course of one year and now stands at $171 billion. As Statista’s Florian Zandt shows in the chart below, based on average annual national wages shows, no normal person could ever hope to amass the wealth of their country’s richest billionaire by working a regular job.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  To reach Musk levels of wealth, for example, the average U.S. resident would need to work three million years at the average annual wage of $69,392 given by the OECD for the year 2020.

  Germans, on the other hand, would have to spend 900,000 years working for $53,475 per year to match Dieter Schwarz’ fortune of $47 billion. Schwarz is the owner of Schwarz-Gruppe, the conglomerate behind the supermarket chains Kaufland and Lidl, among others. When looking at the median income, the data for which was not available for every country at the time of this article’s publication, the numbers get even more unfathomable. According to the St. Louis Federal Reserve, the median personal income stood at $35,805 in the U.S. in 2020, which would ramp up the time needed to match Elon Musk to 6.1 million years.

  While the owners behind brands like Louis Vuitton, Moët Hennessy or Zara are expected to feature prominently on this kind of list, the richest Canadian billionaire is emblematic for a new breed of the super rich: Changpeng Zhao is the CEO of the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange Binance and has amassed a fortune of $55 billion to-date, a number his fellow Canadians would, on average, have to work 1.2 million years for.

  While these numbers are already astronomical in affluent Western states, the wealth and income disparity is even bigger in nations with a lower average income and higher wealth disparity like India and China.

  For example, the wealth of Mukesh Ambani, managing director of multinational conglomerate Reliance Industries Limited, was estimated at around $91 billion at the time of the billionaires list‘s publication. With an average annual wage of roughly $5,000, residents of India would have to work more than 17 million years to match Ambani’s fortune.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 22:00

• "Hate Speech": Linkedin Disables Air-Force Vet's Account After Criticizing Loan-Forgiveness
  “Hate Speech”: Linkedin Disables Air-Force Vet’s Account After Criticizing Loan-Forgiveness

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  We have discussed the expanding censorship programs at Twitter, Facebook, and other social media. These programs have notably targeted conservative viewpoints on contemporary controversies.

  Now, LinkedIn has added its company name to this ignoble effort, according to An Air Force veteran whose account was disabled after criticizing the calls for loan forgiveness.

  The site declared opposing to the Democratic plan for loan forgiveness to be “hate speech.”

  

  Smith is the founder of the non-profit organization Code of Vets, a group created in honor of her father who died at 57 after years of struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder. Like many Americans, she opposed the loan forgiveness calls from Democratic members and has shared her own use of military service to help pay for college.

  Smith posted her take on student loan forgiveness on various social media platforms.

  “I am not responsible for your student debt. I grew up in poverty in NC. Ate from a garden, name was on community Angel tree for Christmas, bought clothes from yard sales & if I was lucky, on a rare occasion Sky City. I joined the Air Force then went to college. I made it happen.”

  LinkedIn then disabled or restricted her account as well as her Code of Vets account. LinkedIn told Smith in an email that the Code of Vets post “goes against our policy on hate speech,” according to a screenshot she shared on Twitter.

  I was locked out of @LinkedIn just now for this exact post below. It went viral. This is the second time this platform has targeted me. I am frustrated and disappointed. Freedom of Speech has been secured by our blood, sweat and lives. This has got to stop.

  Will @LinkedInHelp https://t.co/sd5yqvKtz3 pic.twitter.com/0vL6Fj64vP

  — Code of Vets ™ (@codeofvets) April 7, 2022

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

  LinkedIn has not responded to media inquiries, which is typical of social media companies. The company simply said that she can appeal.

  If this is the entirety of the posting, it is hard to imagine a more glaring example of bias and censorship.

  Some in the company simply support loan forgiveness and declared opposition to the Democratic plan to be “hate speech.”

  Both public and private censorship leads to an insatiable appetite for silencing those with opposing views.

  This is why I have described myself as an Internet Originalist:

  The alternative is “internet originalism” — no censorship. If social media companies returned to their original roles, there would be no slippery slope of political bias or opportunism; they would assume the same status as telephone companies. We do not need companies to protect us from harmful or “misleading” thoughts. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not approved speech.

  If Pelosi demanded that Verizon or Sprint interrupt calls to stop people saying false or misleading things, the public would be outraged. Twitter serves the same communicative function between consenting parties; it simply allows thousands of people to participate in such digital exchanges. Those people do not sign up to exchange thoughts only to have Dorsey or some other internet overlord monitor their conversations and “protect” them from errant or harmful thoughts.

  Social media companies seem to have written off conservatives and others with dissenting views. They have also readily embraced censorship as a noble task. Indeed, after the old Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was criticized for his massive censorship efforts, Twitter replaced him with CEO Parag Agrawal who has expressed chilling anti-free speech sentiments. In an interview with Technology Review editor-in-chief Gideon Lichfield, he was asked how Twitter would balance its efforts to combat misinformation with wanting to “protect free speech as a core value” and to respect the First Amendment.  Agrawal responded;

  “Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation. The kinds of things that we do about this is, focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.

  One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard. The scarce commodity today is attention. There’s a lot of content out there. A lot of tweets out there, not all of it gets attention, some subset of it gets attention.”

  He added that Twitter would be “moving towards how we recommend content and … how we direct people’s attention is leading to a healthy public conversation that is most participatory.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 21:30

• China's "Breathtaking" Nuclear Expansion Confirmed – Beijing Officials Cite Fear Of US-Led Regime Change
  China’s “Breathtaking” Nuclear Expansion Confirmed – Beijing Officials Cite Fear Of US-Led Regime Change

  The Chinese government has greatly “accelerated” its nuclear weapons program due to a revised threat assessment of risk posed by the United States, according to a new in-depth Wall Street Journal report that cites both Chinese and US officials. It follows a Pentagon assessment from last year which laid out Beijing’s drive to “modernize, diversify and expand” its nuclear arsenal. 

  The fresh WSJ investigative report appears to confirm the prior US military assessment that China seeks to expanding “land, sea and air-based nuclear delivery platforms” while establishing more necessary infrastructure to support it.

  While its nuclear goals predate Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the war which kicked off on Feb.24 is believed to have given greater impetus to the belief China needs a stronger deterrent arsenal. Specifically, the report underscores that “Chinese leaders see a stronger nuclear arsenal as a way to deter the U.S. from getting directly involved in a potential conflict over Taiwan.”

  

  Satellite imagery cited in the report additionally appears to confirm accelerating work on over 100 suspected new missile silos in remote desert regions of Western China. While some of this has been subject of much Western reporting and speculation over the past number of months, based also on open source satellite analysis, the weekend WSJ report has some bombshell and alarming lines such as the following, which says Chinese Communist government leadership fears covert Washington regime change efforts down the road:

  The people close to the Chinese leadership said China’s increased focus on nuclear weapons is also driven by fears Washington might seek to topple Beijing’s Communist government following a more hawkish turn in U.S. policy toward China under the Trump and Biden administrations.

  American military officials and security analysts are concerned China’s nuclear acceleration could mean it would be willing to make a surprise nuclear strike. The people close to the Chinese leadership said Beijing is committed to not using nuclear weapons first.

  However, while China does have an official ‘no first use’ nuclear policy doctrine, the United States does not and has even been long resistant to it over years of activist lobbying of both Democrat and Republican administrations. 

  The precise numbers of China’s nuclear warheads are not known, but it’s generally understood to be far behind that of the United States, likely by a magnitude of multiple thousands. One official cited in the report, described as “close to the leadership” in Beijing, said: “China’s inferior nuclear capability could only lead to growing US pressure on China.”

  Testimony by the head of the U.S. Strategic Command showed for the first time that China’s ICBM-launched hypersonic glide vehicle tested in July flew 40,000 km for more than 100 minutes. https://t.co/0M7Bl364uQ

  — The Japan Times (@japantimes) April 5, 2022

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

  And further on the way the Ukraine crisis has impacted China’s thinking – remembering too that Washington has of late piled on the pressure warning Beijing to cease any and all support to Moscow – the WSJ describes the following: 

  Nervous international reaction to Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s call for his nuclear forces to be put on alert following his invasion of Ukraine has offered Chinese officials a real-world lesson about the strategic value of nuclear weapons. So did Ukraine’s decision in 1994 to turn over the nuclear weapons left in the country after the breakup of the Soviet Union in return for security assurances from the U.S. and Russia.

  Watching the tense situation continue to unfold, one former Chinese military officer was cited in the report as saying, “Ukraine lost its nuclear deterrence in the past and that’s why it got into a situation like this” – again which has only served to reinforce China’s worries over its nuclear preparedness. 

  Last week the head of U.S. Strategic Command, Adm. Charles Richard, warned US lawmakers over the “breathtaking expansion of strategic and nuclear capabilities” which he said translates to the PLA military being able to “execute any possible nuclear employment strategy.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 21:00

• Yuan Trading Dries Up As Shanghai Lockdown Drags On
  Yuan Trading Dries Up As Shanghai Lockdown Drags On

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and analyst

  Three things we learned last week:

  1. Yuan trading has evaporated since Shanghai went into lockdown. Onshore yuan trading volume declined to $16 billion on Friday, the lowest since March 2020 and down from the daily average of $30 billion last month. The interbank market is dominated by banks buying and selling currencies on behalf of their clients. These transactions are backed by import and export contracts or investment activities. So the dwindling trading reflects a significant slowdown in economic activity. Shanghai accounted for 29% of yuan trading by banks for their clients in February, more than any other region in China.

  
   
  2. Bad news is perceived to be good news for Chinese markets now. Real-estate and construction stocks rallied last week because investors expect Beijing to take action to shore up the economy, including boosting infrastructure spending and relaxing housing restrictions. Premier Li Keqiang vowed to stabilize foreign trade and investment after a meeting with businesses and economists, state media reported Friday. Economists expect the PBOC to cut the one-year medium-term lending facility rate to 2.75% from 2.85% this week.

  
   
  3. U.S.-China policy divergence has led to capital outflows. Overseas investors dumped a record 51.8 billion yuan ($8 billion) of Chinese government debt in March, according to Bloomberg calculations based on data from Chinabond. While Beijing is poised to ease, Fed officials have turned more hawkish. The minutes of the Fed’s March meeting showed officials are likely to shrink the central bank balance sheet by more than $1 trillion a year while raising interest rates “expeditiously” to cool inflation. Three-year and five-year Treasury yields are already higher than their Chinese counterparts, reducing the allure of China’s debt. Another hot CPI report this week is likely to widen the interest-rate differential further.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 20:30

• Where The Super Rich Reside
  Where The Super Rich Reside

  According to the Forbes Billionaires List of 2022, most of the world’s richest people are at home in the United States. As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, the country counted 867 billionaires per the list’s last release Tuesday. This is several more than the second-ranked country, China, with 607 and many more than in third-placed India with 165.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  According to Forbes, 236 new billionaire were minted in the last year, translating into an average of 4.5 new billionaires every week.

  This included the first billionaires from Estonia, Bulgaria, Uruguay and Barbados. The newcomer from the latter country, you guessed it, is singer Rihanna, who build her fortune through her music career and cosmetics line Fenty.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 20:00

• Morgan Stanley: This Yield Curve Inversion Is Different
  Morgan Stanley: This Yield Curve Inversion Is Different

  By Guneet Dhingra, strategist at Morgan Stanley

  “The only thing we have to fear…is fear itself” – Franklin D Roosevelt (March 4, 1933)

  An economic recession in the US is on the minds of all investors today – in no small part due to the inversion of the 2s10s Treasury curve. Observations over the last 70 years suggest that almost every time the 2s10s yield curve has inverted,a recession has followed close behind (it’s correlation, not causality though). We think that this time is different.We think that an inverted yield curve is here to stay, without necessarily being a signal fora recession ahead. To borrow FDR’s famous words, the only thing investors have to fear about an inverted yield curve today…is fear itself.

  Believers in the predictive power of the yield curve posit that inverted curves reflect rate cuts in the future, which in turn must be a sign of a growth slowdown ahead,and ultimately a recession. Unless one believes that the curve inversion in 2019 predicted the 2020 Covid recession, it is likely that the predictive power of the yield curve inversion would have been debunked in 2020 itself

  The signal from the yield curve inversion worked better a couple of decades ago, when yield levels were closely tied to inflation, GDP and, ultimately, Fed policy. However, the yield curve today is uniquely affected by two factors which limit the macro signal in the curve.

  First, a number of technical distortions mean that the yield curve is artificially flatter than comparable points in the past. A combination of:

  1. a significant amount of Fed QE,
  2. significant demand from defined benefit US pension funds, and
  3. sporadic flight-to-quality demand for Treasuries

  … has depressed 10-year and 30-year yields well below the levels consistent with inflation and growth. We estimate that these distortions have kept the curve up to 50-100bp flatter than its true level. Arguably, a 2s10s curve below -75bp should be the new recession signal, instead of 2s10s below 0bp.

  Second, the Fed’s intention to deliver restrictive policy fits with inverted curves. The March FOMC dot plot shows that the Fed expects to see a terminal fed funds rate close to 3% in 2023, about 50bp higher than the Fed’s perception of the neutral rate at around 2.5%. In essence, the Fed is telegraphing an inverted curve, and the rates market is reflecting the Fed’s policy path. Importantly, the inversion priced into markets doesn’t reflect rate cuts back to zero in 2024, but rate cuts back to a neutral rate of 2.5% (Exhibit 1) – hardly a signal for a recession down the line.

  

  Our view that the yield curve inversion is different this time found resonance across various research teams at Morgan Stanley. In our collaborative note on yield curve inversion, our economics team highlighted strong economic fundamentals and alternative recession models signalling a low probability of recession. Our US bank analysts highlighted the case for continued loan growth for banks in the coming years even with some inversion. Our credit strategy team highlighted continued improvement in balance sheet leverage, strong liquidity and low defaults – not the hallmarks of late-cycle. Our REITs team notes the strong fundamentals for commercial real estate as well.

  Can the curve keep inverting deeper without signalling a recession? The answer depends on how high markets can price the terminal rate. From a historical perspective many investors see 1994 as a template for this hiking cycle. In 1994, the terminal rate ended up 100-150bp above the Laubach-Williams estimate of the then neutral rate in that cycle. Investors currently see the long-run dot as the neutral rate – around 2.5% – and therefore markets could price a terminal rate100-150bp above neutral, at around 3.5-4.0%, and yet hope for a soft landing like in 1994.

  Finally, could the Fed’s plans for its balance sheet limit curve inversion? The yield curve can steepen if the Fed considers selling Treasuries (not our base case), but the curve should not steepen due to quantitative tightening, where the Fed is merely allowing Treasuries to mature off its balance sheet. Contrary to popular perception, quantitative tightening (QT) is not the opposite of quantitative easing (QE). The ultimate impact of QT on the rates market depends on the US Treasury, not the Fed. And we think that the US Treasury will respond to QT by increasing short-term Treasury supply – more likely to flatten the curve than steepen it.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 19:30

• Baby Formula Shortage Hits Walgreens As Rationing Begins 
  Baby Formula Shortage Hits Walgreens As Rationing Begins 

  Infant formula is in short supply as US retailers begin rationing. A combination of COVID-19-related snarled supply chains and a major baby formula recall earlier this year exacerbated shortages.

  At least 29% of the top-selling baby formula products were out of stock by mid-March, according to an analysis by Datasembly, which tracked baby formula stock at 11,000 retailers. 

  “This is a shocking number that you don’t see for other categories,” Ben Reich, CEO of Datasembly, told CBS News.

  “We’ve been tracking it over time and it’s going up dramatically. We see this category is being affected by economic conditions more dramatically than others,” Reich added. 

  Now America’s second-largest pharmacy, Walgreens, with over 9,000 locations, announced it would ration baby formula. A spokesman for the company confirmed consumers are only limited to three baby formula products per transaction due to “increased demand and various supplier issues.”

  

  Besides COVID-related shortage of formula and other vital ingredients, packaging woes, soaring freight costs, and labor shortages, a major baby formula recall in January exacerbated shortages.

  Consumers have noticed shortages at retailers as internet searches for “baby formula shortage” rocket to the highest level ever. 

  

  This is just more evidence America is on its way to becoming Venezuela as shortages of items persist, and the highest inflation in four decades is crushing households. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 19:00

• Hedge Fund CIO: "We Have Never Experienced An Economic Cycle That Looks Anything Like This"
  Hedge Fund CIO: “We Have Never Experienced An Economic Cycle That Looks Anything Like This”

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River ASset Management

  “My massive bias is to believe things always work out okay,” said Simplicity, walking Occam’s Razor. “But today somehow feels unique, and when I look at supply and demand in oil, grains, base metals too, there’s an undeniable tail risk here,” he said, having analyzed the fundamentals of such things over a long career.

  “Without a perfect North American growing season, there will be shortages, perhaps we’ll have them even with perfection, it’s too early to be sure.” And Simplicity paused, sharpened by decades of trading markets that oscillate wildly in times of great uncertainty as producers, consumers and speculators struggle to balance supply and demand. “It’s critical to size your positions small enough so that you don’t discover you’re trading a 3-year perspective with a 3-day stop-loss.”

  Overall:

  “One thing is certain: To be effective, the Fed will have to inflict more losses on stock and bond investors than it has so far,” said Bill Dudley, former Fed President, saying bluntly what his active-duty central bankers barely dare whisper.

  “Market participants expect higher short-term rates to undermine economic growth and force the Fed to reverse course in 2024 and 2025 – but these very expectations are preventing the tightening of financial conditions that would make such an outcome more likely,” explained Dudley, scratching the surface of the disquieting predicament the Federal Reserve now finds itself in.

  And because the world’s developed-market central banks adopted US policy in recent decades, the Fed’s quandary is now a global phenomenon. “This would mean hiking the federal funds rate considerably higher than currently anticipated. One way or another, to get inflation under control, the Fed will need to push bond yields high and stock prices lower,” Dudley said.

  Cooling an over-heated, capacity-constrained, hyper-financialized economy, in a time of deglobalization and war, without first tightening financial conditions is proving rather difficult. Like all complex problems, this one took decades to create.

  

  Back when the US economy had less debt and leverage, when financial assets had lower valuations, and when wealth was less concentrated, the ups and downs of the real economy drove financial markets. In such a world, the Fed quite easily used conventional rate policies to influence our behaviors to achieve their objectives.

  When those became less effective, they introduced unconventional policies, and forward guided their intentions to become highly predictable. The effect was the hyper-financialization of our economy.

  Now, with such high levels of debt, leverage, valuations, and wealth-concentration, it is financial markets that drive the real economy, not the other way around. We have never experienced a modern economic cycle that looks anything like this. And Dudley may be right in his prescription. But if it is one thing, it is certainly not certain.

  * * *

  Rate of Change: “Looking back on the 1970s, you find 3 distinct inflationary cycles,” said the CIO. “Inflation first peaked in 1970 at just over 6%, then backed off,” he continued. “It peaked again in 1975 at around 12%, declined, then made a final push to nearly 15% in 1980.” That was it. “In the first two cycles, equities fell when inflation rose, and rose when inflation fell,” he said. “Then in the third cycle, inflation went up and for some reason equities did too. I don’t know why. But maybe it’s not only about inflation, but also the rate of change of inflation.”  

  Autarky: “What’s the really fancy word for it?” asked the CIO, annoyed that he couldn’t recall it. I simply shrugged, quite happy to keep it simple. “Anyhow, screw it, it’s some word that refers to nations which strive to become self-sufficient, economically independent,” he said. “There will be a move toward that for the years, decades probably. What the hell is that word?” he asked, sighed. “But the thing is, not every country can become self-sufficient so as much as everyone will want to if they need to, hardly anyone can, and that’ll slow the whole process.”

  “This is really driving me nuts,” said the CIO. “But I’m not going to Google it, I’ll remember the word, it’s right there, I can just about touch it,” he said. I had already found it but didn’t want to rob him of the pleasure. “What’s more likely to happen will be a shift toward trade blocks, unions of like-minded nations, partners, allies.” I was tempted to suggest such a world would be bifurcated, but that word is a bit much for me, and besides, I was pretty sure that meant two-worlds, when in fact there could be three or more. “This word is driving me crazy.”

  Domo Arigato: “The age of optimization and maximization is over,” said the CIO. “It will be replaced by a resurgence of manufacturing, and Japan is filled with such companies,” he said. “Japanese equities have been penalized for years because they employed inadequate financial engineering.” Now they’re comparatively cheap. “With the weakening Yen, Japan’s minimum wage priced in US dollars is the cheapest in the G-7,” he said. “The percent of Japan’s workforce near the minimum wage is high. And the real exchange rate is back to where it was in 1975.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 18:30

• California's High Power Prices Could Derail Liberal EV Dream 
  California’s High Power Prices Could Derail Liberal EV Dream 

  California electricity rates are increasing far faster than the rest of the country. Last year, electricity prices rose 1.7 times faster than the rest of the county, and residential prices jumped 2.7 faster.

  These increases are terrible news for residents who want to swap their combustion engine vehicles for electric ones. 

  

  Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E), Southern California Edison Co. (SCE), and San Diego Gas & Electric’s (SDG&E) exceptionally high power rates make charging an electric vehicle very costly and could soon be as expensive as filling up a combustion engine vehicle at the gas station, according to Environment & Energy Publishing. 

  “It’s a huge problem,” said Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at the University of California, Berkeley’s graduate business school. He said if people who embraced EVs begin to “tell their neighbors about their catastrophic electric bills” after charging up at home, “that’s gonna be a huge problem.” 

  “Or we’re gonna mandate electrification and then there’s just going to be huge political blowback.” 

  “Mandating electrification when you’re charging people 30 or 40 cents a kilowatt-hour is going to be immensely expensive,” Borenstein said.

  Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network, recently told attendees at a conference that “if you want people to make big investments in electrification, there needs to be some kind of a payoff for them.” 

  “And the payoff has got to be that we make electricity rates look very affordable by comparison to the alternatives,” Toney said. 

  The bad news is that energy prices aren’t coming down any time soon as consumers are grappling with the highest inflation rate since the early 1980s. The even worse news is the entry cost of owning a new EV, such as a Tesla, is out of reach for most Americans and continues to increase as industrial metal prices for batteries increase. 

  Suppose there are limited cost savings benefits to buying an EV because power prices are the most expensive in the country. There could be a substantial political blowback as progressives in the Golden State have already mandated that gas car sales will be banned in 13 years (or by 2035). 

  If California wants to live out its liberal electrified utopia, it may want to consider increasing nuclear power generation on the grid to lower power prices. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 18:00

• The Fed Can't Fix The Economy, But It Can Break It
  The Fed Can’t Fix The Economy, But It Can Break It

  Authored by John Wolfenbarger via The Mises Institute,

  The Federal Reserve states that it “conducts the nation’s monetary policy to promote maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates in the U.S. economy.” However, let’s look at how well the Fed has done that job since its founding in 1913.

  

  Economy and Long-Term Interest Rates

  Since 1913, the US unemployment rate has ranged from 2.5 percent in the early 1950s to 25.0 percent during the Great Depression. Inflation has ranged from positive 24 percent to negative 16 percent. Inflation is currently 7.9 percent, well above the Fed’s 2 percent target. While the Fed has some influence over money supply, they have no control over money demand or how money is spent, which has a significant impact on employment and inflation.

  The Fed’s goal to “moderate long-term interest rates” below free market levels is a form of price fixing. Since price fixing never works for long, it is no wonder the Fed has been unsuccessful in this goal. Since 1913, ten-year Treasury rates have ranged from 0.5 percent in 2020 to 16 percent in 1981. Interest rates have been much more volatile than before the Fed, as shown below.

  

  Source: Chart courtesy of multpl.com, with annotations by BullAndBearProfits.com.

  Money Supply and Short-Term Interest Rates

  Maybe the Fed can’t control the economy, but at least they can control the money supply and short-term interest rates, right? Think again.

  The Fed controls the monetary base, which is currency plus bank deposits at the Fed. But the popular M2 money supply measure is 3.6 times larger than the monetary base, and the broader money supply is driven by the desire of commercial banks to lend and of people to borrow from them. The Fed has no control over that.

  The Fed also controls the federal funds rate, which is the interest rate at which commercial banks borrow and lend to each other overnight. But as shown below, the Fed follows market-driven interest rates, such as the two-year Treasury rate (red line), when setting the federal funds rate (black line), since they have no way of knowing where rates should be.

  

  Source: Chart courtesy of FRED, with annotations by BullAndBearProfits.com.

  The Fed’s Real Purpose

  The Fed’s real purpose is to enable banks to make loans by creating money out of thin air and then to bail them out when their loans go bad. It has been successful in that goal, as we saw with the bank bailouts during the Great Recession.

  As Murray N. Rothbard explained:

  Banks can only expand comfortably in unison when a central bank exists, essentially a governmental bank, enjoying a monopoly of government business, and a privileged position imposed by government over the entire banking system.

  The Fed’s other main purpose is to help the US government borrow. They have been very successful at this, as the government debt-to-GDP (gross domestic product) ratio has more than tripled in the past forty years to over 120 percent.

  The Fed Succeeds in Lowering Living Standards

  Two of the main negative consequences of Fed money creation are inflation and the boom-and-bust business cycle, both of which lower living standards significantly. Inflation raises living costs and erodes savings, while the business cycle wastes scarce resources by encouraging their allocation to bad investments.

  Since the Fed’s founding in 1913, the US dollar has lost 97 percent of its purchasing power. Furthermore, Fed policies helped engineer the Great Depression of the 1930s and the Great Recession of 2008–09.

  Austrian business cycle theory explains how the business cycle is caused by banks creating money out of thin air, which leads to an unsustainable boom that eventually turns into a bust. The bust happens because the newly created money does not generate the scarce resources (land, labor, and capital) needed to complete all the projects businesses have undertaken with the newly created money.

  As Ludwig von Mises explained:

  The wavelike movement affecting the economic system, the recurrence of periods of boom which are followed by periods of depression is the unavoidable outcome of the attempts, repeated again and again, to lower the gross market rate of interest by means of credit expansion.

  Fed Predictions

  After reviewing the Fed’s failures, let’s see how successful Fed leaders have been at predicting the economy.

  Alan Greenspan was Fed chairman from 1987 to 2006. He presided over the 1987 stock market crash, the S&L (savings and loan) crisis, the early 1990s recession, the late 1990s tech bubble, the early 2000s recession, and the early to mid-2000s housing bubble. Naturally, the press called him “maestro” for his work at the Fed.

  Near the peak of the tech bubble in January 2000, Greenspan bragged about engineering a long economic expansion that he saw no signs of ending. As he said shortly before the NASDAQ stock index collapsed 80 percent and the early 2000s recession started: “There remain few evident signs of geriatric strain that typically presage an imminent economic downturn.”

  In response to the recession he did not see coming, Greenspan slashed the federal funds rate from 6.50 percent in 2000 to 1.00 percent in 2003, which helped fuel the housing bubble. Then Greenspan encouraged homeowners to take out adjustable-rate mortgages in early 2004, just before he raised the fed funds rate to 5.25 percent over the next two years, which triggered the housing bust.

  In 2007, Greenspan said this about banks lending to subprime borrowers: “While I was aware a lot of these practices were going on, I had no notion of how significant they had become until very late … I really didn’t get it until very late in 2005 and 2006.”

  At least Greenspan has been honest about the Fed’s inability to forecast the economy:

  “People don’t realize that we cannot forecast the future. The number of mistakes I have made are just awesome.”

  Greenspan also admitted that the market is much larger and more powerful than the Fed:

  “The market value of global long-term securities is approaching $100 trillion [so these markets] now swamp the resources of central banks.”

  Ben Bernanke was Fed chairman from 2006 to 2014, so he presided over the Great Recession, the worst economic downturn since the 1930s up to that time.

  In 2002, in a speech titled “Deflation: Making Sure ‘It’ Doesn’t Happen Here,” Bernanke bragged that the Fed’s legal right to create money out of thin air would prevent deflation: “The US government has a technology, called a printing press, that allows it to produce as many dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost … under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and, hence, positive inflation.” Naturally, given the Fed’s ability to control the economy, “it” did happen in 2009, with prices falling 2 percent in the wake of the Great Recession.

  In 2006, Bernanke dismissed the inverted yield curve, which is known by virtually all economists to be one of the best predictors of a recession: “I would not interpret the currently very flat yield curve as indicating a significant economic slowdown to come.” In June 2008, seven months into the Great Recession, Bernanke said: “The risk that the economy has entered a substantial downturn appears to have diminished over the past month or so.”

  Janet Yellen was Fed chair from 2014 to 2018, so she had less time to cause major damage. But true to form, she stated she had no idea the housing bust would lead to a major recession: “I didn’t see any of that coming until it happened.”

  Jerome “Jay” Powell has been Fed chairman since 2018. He helped invert the yield curve in 2019 and has presided over the covid crash and recession, as well as the highest inflation rates in forty years.

  In early November 2021, when inflation was over 6.0 percent, Powell and the Fed were still calling inflation “transitory” and caused by covid and not the 40 percent increase in the money supply. By March 2022, with inflation rising 7.9 percent, Powell finally raised the fed funds rate by 0.25 percent, with plans to raise rates up to 2.75 percent by the end of 2023. Ominously, given his forecasting track record, Powell thinks he can raise rates that aggressively and achieve the elusive “soft landing” of slowing inflation without driving the economy into a recession, despite the already flattening yield curve.

  Conclusion

  The Federal Reserve cannot control the economy or even the money supply and interest rates. And Fed leaders clearly cannot predict the economy, even though the media and Wall Street hang on their every word. But the Fed can lower living standards by destroying the value of the dollar and causing the boom and bust cycle. Economic theory and economic history have proven that government central planning does not work in creating stability or prosperity. That includes centrally planned monetary policy.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 17:30

• The Commodity-Currency Revolution Begins…
  The Commodity-Currency Revolution Begins…

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  We will look back at current events and realise that they marked the change from a dollar-based global economy underwritten by financial assets to commodity-backed currencies. We face a change from collateral being purely financial in nature to becoming commodity based. It is collateral that underwrites the whole financial system.

  The ending of the financially based system is being hastened by geopolitical developments. The West is desperately trying to sanction Russia into economic submission, but is only succeeding in driving up energy, commodity, and food prices against itself. Central banks will have no option but to inflate their currencies to pay for it all. Russia is linking the rouble to commodity prices through a moving gold peg instead, and China has already demonstrated an understanding of the West’s inflationary game by having stockpiled commodities and essential grains for the last two years and allowed her currency to rise against the dollar.

  China and Russia are not going down the path of the West’s inflating currencies. Instead, they are moving towards a sounder money strategy with the prospect of stable interest rates and prices while the West accelerates in the opposite direction.

  The Credit Suisse analyst, Zoltan Pozsar, calls it Bretton Woods III. This article looks at how it is likely to play out, concluding that the dollar and Western currencies, not the rouble, will have the greatest difficulty dealing with the end of fifty years of economic financialisation.

  

  Pure finance is being replaced with commodity finance

  It hasn’t hit the main-stream media yet, which is still reporting yesterday’s battle. But in March, the US Administration passed a death sentence on its own hegemony in a last desperate throw of the dollar dice. Not only did it misread the Russian situation with respect to its economy, but America mistakenly believed in its own power by sanctioning Russia and Putin’s oligarchs.

  It may have achieved a partial blockade on Russia’s export volumes, but compensation has come from higher unit prices, benefiting Russia, and costing the Western alliance.

  The consequence is a final battle in the financial war which has been brewing for decades. You do not sanction the world’s most important source of energy exports and the marginal supplier of a wide range of commodities and raw materials, including grains and fertilisers, without damaging everyone but the intended target. Worse still, the intended target has in China an extremely powerful friend, with which Russia is a partner in the world’s largest economic bloc — the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation — commanding a developing market of over 40% of the world’s population. That is the future, not the past: the past is Western wokery, punitive taxation, economies dominated by the state and its bureaucracy, anti-capitalistic socialism, and magic money trees to help pay for it all.

  Despite this enormous hole in the sanctions net, the West has given itself no political option but to attempt to tighten sanctions even more. But Russia’s response is devastating for the western financial system. In two simple announcements, tying the rouble to gold for domestic credit institutions and insisting that payments for energy will only be accepted in roubles, it is calling an end to the fiat dollar era that has ruled the world from the suspension of Bretton Woods in 1971 to today.

  Just over five decades ago, the dollar took over the role for itself as the global reserve asset from gold. After the seventies, which was a decade of currency, interest rate, and financial asset volatility, we all settled down into a world of increasing financialisation. London’s big bang in the early 1980s paved the way for regulated derivatives and the 1990s saw the rise of hedge funds and dotcoms. That was followed by an explosion in over-the-counter unregulated derivatives into the hundreds of trillions and securitisations which hit the speed-bump of the Lehman failure. Since then, the expansion of global credit for purely financial activities has been remarkable creating a financial asset bubble to rival anything seen in the history of financial excesses. And together with statistical suppression of the effect on consumer prices the switch of economic resources from Main Street to Wall Street has hidden the inflationary evidence of credit expansion from the public’s gaze.

  All that is coming to an end with a new commoditisation — what respected flows analyst Zoltan Pozsar at Credit Suisse calls Bretton Woods III. In his enumeration the first was suspended by President Nixon in 1971, and the second ran from then until now when the dollar has ruled indisputably. That brings us to Bretton Woods III.

  Russia’s insistence that importers of its energy pay in roubles and not in dollars or euros is a significant development, a direct challenge to the dollar’s role. There are no options for Russia’s “unfriendlies”, Russia’s description for the alliance united against it. The EU, which is the largest importer of Russian natural gas, either bites the bullet or scrambles for insufficient alternatives. The option is to buy natural gas and oil at reasonable rouble prices or drive prices up in euros and still not get enough to keep their economies going and the citizens warm and mobile. Either way, it seems Russia wins, and one way the EU loses.

  As to Pozsar’s belief that we are on the verge of Bretton Woods III, one can see the logic of his argument. The highly inflated financial bubble marks the end of an era, fifty years in the making. Negative interest rates in the EU and Japan are not just an anomaly, but the last throw of the dice for the yen and the euro. The ECB and the Bank of Japan have bond portfolios which have wiped out their equity, and then some. All Western central banks which have indulged in QE have the same problem. Contrastingly, the Russian central bank and the Peoples Bank of China have not conducted any QE and have clean balance sheets. Rising interest rates in Western currencies are made more certain and their height even greater by Russia’s aggressive response to Western sanctions. It hastens the bankruptcy of the entire Western banking system and by bursting the highly inflated financial bubble will leave little more than hollowed-out economies.

  Putin has taken as his model the 1973 Nixon/Kissinger agreement with the Saudis to only accept US dollars in payment for oil, and to use its dominant role in OPEC to force other members to follow suit. As the World’s largest energy exporter Russia now says she will only accept roubles, repeating for the rouble the petrodollar strategy. And even Saudi Arabia is now bending with the wind and accepting China’s renminbi for its oil, calling symbolic time on the Nixon/Kissinger petrodollar agreement.

  The West, by which we mean America, the EU, Britain, Japan, South Korea, and a few others have set themselves up to be the fall guys. That statement barely describes the strategic stupidity — an Ignoble Award is closer to the truth. By phasing out fossil fuels before they could be replaced entirely with green energy sources, an enormous shortfall in energy supplies has arisen. With an almost religious zeal, Germany has been cutting out nuclear generation. And even as recently as last month it still ruled out extending the lifespan of its nuclear facilities. The entire G7 membership were not only unprepared for Russia turning the tables on its members, but so far, they have yet to come up with an adequate response.

  Russia has effectively commoditised its currency, particularly for energy, gold, and food. It is following China down a similar path. In doing so it has undermined the dollar’s hegemony, perhaps fatally. As the driving force behind currency values, commodities will be the collateral replacing financial assets. It is interesting to observe the strength in the Mexican peso against the dollar (up 9.7% since November 2021) and the Brazilian real (up 21% over a year) And even the South African rand has risen by 11% in the last five months. That these flaky currencies are rising tells us that resource backing for currencies has its attractions beyond the rouble and renminbi.

  But having turned their backs on gold, the Americans and their Western epigones lack an adequate response. If anything, they are likely to continue the fight for dollar hegemony rather than accept reality. And the more America struggles to assert its authority, the greater the likelihood of a split in the Western partnership. Europe needs Russian energy desperately, and America does not. Europe cannot afford to support American policy unconditionally.

  That, of course, is Russia’s bet.

  Russia’s point of view

  For the second time in eight years, Russia has seen its currency undermined by Western action over Ukraine. Having experienced it in 2014, this time the Russian central bank was better prepared. It had diversified out of dollars adding official gold reserves. The commercial banking system was overhauled, and the Governor of the RCB, Elvira Nabiullina, by following classical monetary policies instead of the Keynesianism of her Western contempories, has contained the fall-out from the war in Ukraine. As Figure 1 shows, the rouble halved against the dollar in a knee-jerk reaction before recovering to pre-war levels.

  

  The link to commodities is gold, and the RCB announced that until end-June it stands ready to buy gold from Russian banks at 5,000 roubles per gramme. The stated purpose was to allow banks to lend against mine production, given that Russian-sourced gold is included in the sanctions. But the move has encouraged speculation that the rouble is going on a quasi- gold standard; never mind that a gold standard works the other way round with users of the currency able to exchange it for gold.

  Besides being with silver the international legal definition of money (the rest being currency and credit), gold is a good proxy for commodities, as shown in Figure 2 below. Priced in goldgrams, crude oil today is 30% below where it was in the 1950, long before Nixon suspended the Bretton Woods Agreement. Meanwhile, measured in depreciating fiat currencies the price has soared and been extremely volatile along the way.

  

  It is a similar story for other commodity prices, whereby maximum stability is to be found in prices measured in goldgrams. Taking up Pozsar’s point about currencies being increasingly linked to commodities in Bretton Woods III, it appears that Russia intends to use gold as proxy for commodities to stabilise the rouble. Instead of a fixed gold exchange rate, the RCB has wisely left itself the option to periodically revise the price it will pay for gold after 1 July.

  Table 1 shows how the RCB’s current fixed rouble gold exchange rate translates into US dollars.

  

  While non-Russian credit institutions do not have access to the facility, it appears that there is nothing to stop a Russian bank buying gold in another centre, such as Dubai, to sell to the Russian central bank for roubles. All that is needed is for the dollar/rouble rate to be favourable for the arbitrage and the ability to settle in a non-sanctioned currency, such as renminbi, or to have access to Eurodollars which it can exchange for Euroroubles (see below) from a bank outside the “unfriendlies” jurisdictions.

  The dollar/rouble rate can now easily be controlled by the RCB, because how demand for roubles in short supply is handled becomes a matter of policy. Gazprom’s payment arm (Gazprombank) is currently excused the West’s sanctions and EU gas and oil payments will be channelled through it.

  Broadly, there are four ways in which a Western consumer can acquire roubles:

  • By buying roubles on the foreign exchanges.

  • By depositing euros, dollars, or sterling with Gazprombank and have them do the conversion as agents.

  • By Gazprombank increasing its balance sheet to provide credit, but collateral which is not sanctioned would be required.

  • By foreign banks creating rouble credits which can be paid to Gazprombank against delivery of energy supplies.

  The last of these four is certainly possible, because that is the basis of Eurodollars, which circulate outside New York’s monetary system and have become central to international liquidity. To understand the creation of Eurodollars, and therefore the possibility of a developing Eurorouble market we must delve into the world of credit creation.

  There are two ways in which foreigners can hold dollar balances. The way commonly understood is through the correspondent banking system. Your bank, say in Europe, will run deposit accounts with their correspondent banks in New York (JPMorgan, Citi etc.). So, if you make a deposit in dollars, the credit to your account will reconcile with the change in your bank’s correspondent account in New York.

  Now let us assume that you approach your European bank for a dollar loan. If the loan is agreed, it appears as a dollar asset on your bank’s balance sheet, which through double-entry bookkeeping is matched by a dollar liability in favour of you, the borrower. It cannot be otherwise and is the basis of all bank credit creation. But note that in the creation of these balances the American banking system is not involved in any way, which is how and why Eurodollars circulate, being fungible with but separate in origin from dollars in the US.

  By the same method, we could see the birth and rapid expansion of a Eurorouble market. All that’s required is for a bank to create a loan in roubles, matched under double-entry bookkeeping with a deposit which can be used for payments. It doesn’t matter which currency the bank runs its balance sheet in, only that it has balance sheet space, access to rouble liquidity and is a credible counterparty.

  This suggests that Eurozone and Japanese banks can only have limited participation because they are already very highly leveraged. The banks best able to run Eurorouble balances are the Americans and Chinese because they have more conservative asset to equity ratios. Furthermore, the large Chinese banks are majority state-owned, and already have business and currency interests with Russia giving them a head start with respect to rouble liquidity.

  We have noticed that the large American banks are not shy of dealing with the Chinese despite the politics, so presumably would like the opportunity to participate in Euroroubles. But only this week, the US Government prohibited them from paying holders of Russia’s sovereign debt more than $600 million. So, we should assume the US banks cannot participate which leaves the field open to the Chinese mega-banks. And any attempt to increase sanctions on Russia, perhaps by adding Gazprombank to the sanctioned list, achieves nothing, definitely cuts out American banks from the action, and enhances the financial integration between Russia and China. The gulf between commodity-backed currencies and yesteryear’s financial fiat simply widens.

  For now, further sanctions are a matter for speculation. But Gazprombank with the assistance of the Russian central bank will have a key role in providing the international market for roubles with wholesale liquidity, at least until the market acquires depth in liquidity. In return, Gazprombank can act as a recycler of dollars and euros gained through trade surpluses without them entering the official reserves. Dollars, euros yen and sterling are the unfriendlies’ currencies, so the only retentions are likely to be renminbi and gold.

  In this manner we might expect roubles, gold and commodities to tend to rise in tandem. We can see the process by which, as Zoltan Pozsar put it, Bretton Woods III, a global currency regime based on commodities, can take over from Bretton Woods II, which has been characterised by the financialisation of currencies. And it’s not just Russia and her roubles. It’s a direction of travel shared by China.

  The economic effects of a strong currency backed by commodities defy monetary and economic beliefs prevalent in the West. But the consequences that flow from a stronger currency are desirable: falling interest rates, wealth remaining in the private sector and an escape route from the inevitable failure of Western currencies and their capital markets. The arguments in favour of decoupling from the dollar-dominated monetary system have suddenly become compelling.

  The consequences for the West

  Most Western commentary is gung-ho for further sanctions against Russia. Relatively few independent commentators have pointed out that by sanctioning Russia and freezing her foreign exchange reserves, America is destroying her own hegemony. The benefits of gold reserves have also been pointedly made to those that have them. Furthermore, central banks leaving their gold reserves vaulted at Western central banks exposes them to sanctions, should a nation fall foul of America. Doubtless, the issue is being discussed around the world and some requests for repatriation of bullion are bound to follow.

  There is also the problem of gold leases and swaps, vital for providing liquidity in bullion markets, but leads to false counting of reserves. This is because under the IMF’s accounting procedures, leased and swapped gold balances are recorded as if they were still under a central bank’s ownership and control, despite bullion being transferred to another party in unallocated accounts.

  No one knows the extent of swaps and leases, but it is likely to be significant, given the evidence of gold price interventions over the last fifty years. Countries which have been happy to earn fees and interest to cover storage costs and turn gold bullion storage into a profitable activity (measured in fiat) are at the margin now likely to not renew swap and lease agreements and demand reallocation of bullion into earmarked accounts, which would drain liquidity from bullion markets. A rising gold price will then be bound to ensue.

  Ever since the suspension of Bretton Woods in 1971, the US Government has tried to suppress gold relative to the dollar, encouraging the growth of gold derivatives to absorb demand. That gold has moved from $35 to $1920 today demonstrates the futility of these policies. But emotionally at least, the US establishment is still virulently anti-gold.

  As Figure 2 above clearly shows, the link between commodity prices and gold has endured through it all. It is this factor that completely escapes popular analysis with every commodity analyst assuming in their calculations a constant objective value for the dollar and other currencies, with price subjectivity confined to the commodity alone. The use of charts and other methods of forecasting commodity prices assume as an iron rule that price changes in transactions come only from fluctuations in commodity values.

  The truth behind prices measured in unbacked currencies is demonstrated by the cost of oil priced in gold having declined about 30% since the 1960s. That is reasonable given new extraction technologies and is consistent with prices tending to ease over time under a gold standard. It is only in fiat currencies that prices have soared. Clearly, gold is considerably more objective for transaction purposes than fiat currencies, which are definitely not.

  Therefore, if, as the chart in the tweet below suggests, the dollar price of oil doubles from here, it will only be because at the margin people prefer oil to dollars — not because they want oil beyond their immediate needs, but because they want dollars less.

  

  China recognised these dynamics following the Fed’s monetary policies of March 2020, when it reduced its funds rate to the zero bound and instituted QE at $120bn every month. The signal concerning the dollar’s future debasement was clear, and China began to stockpile oil, commodities, and food — just to get rid of dollars. This contributed to the rise in dollar commodity prices, which commenced from that moment, despite falling demand due to covid and supply chain problems. The effect of dollar debasement is reflected in Figure 3, which is of a popular commodity tracking ETF.

  

  A better understanding would be to regard the increase in the value of this commodity basket not as a near doubling since March 2020, but as a near halving of the dollar’s purchasing power with respect to it.

  Furthermore, the Chinese have been prescient enough to accumulate stocks of grains. The result is that 20% of the world’s population has access to 70% of the word’s maize stocks, 60% of rice, 50% of wheat and 35% of soybeans. The other 80% of the world’s population will almost certainly face acute shortages this year as exports of grain and fertiliser from Ukraine/Russia effectively cease.

  China’s actions show that she has to a degree already tied her currency to commodities, recognising the dollar would lose purchasing power. And this is partially reflected in the yuan’s exchange rate against the US dollar, which since May 2020 has gained over 11%.

  Implications for the dollar, euro and yen

  In this article the close relationship between gold, oil, and wider commodities has been shown. It appears that Russia has found a way of tying her currency not to the dollar, but to commodities through gold, and that China has effectively been doing the same thing for two years without the gold link. The logic is to escape the consequences of currency and credit expansion for the dollar and other Western currencies as their purchasing power is undermined. And the use of a gold peg is an interesting development in this context.

  We should bear in mind that according to the US Treasury TIC system foreigners own $33.24 trillion of financial securities and short-term assets including bank deposits. That is in addition to a few trillion, perhaps, in Eurodollars not recorded in the TIC statistics. These funds are only there in such quantities because of the financialisation of Western currencies, a situation we now expect to end. A change in the world’s currency order towards Pozsar’s Bretton Woods III can be expected to a substantial impact on these funds.

  To prevent foreign selling of the $6.97 trillion of short-term securities and cash, interest rates would have to be raised not just to tackle rising consumer prices (a Keynesian misunderstanding about the economic role of interest rates, disproved by Gibson’s paradox) but to protect the currency on the foreign exchanges, particularly relative to the rouble and the yuan. Unfortunately, sufficiently high interest rates to encourage short-term money and deposits to stay would destabilise the values of the foreign owned $26.27 trillion in long-term securities — bonds and equities.

  As the manager of US dollar interest rates, the dilemma for the Fed is made more acute by sanctions against Russia exposing the weakness of the dollar’s position. The fall in its purchasing power is magnified by soaring dollar prices for commodities, and the rise in consumer prices will be greater and sooner as a result. It is becoming possible to argue convincingly that interest rates for one-year dollar deposits should soon be in double figures, rather than the three per cent or so argued by monetary policy hawks. Whatever the numbers turn out to be, the consequences are bound to be catastrophic for financial assets and for the future of financially oriented currencies where financial assets are the principal form of collateral.

  It appears that Bretton Woods II is indeed over. That being the case, America will find it virtually impossible to retain the international capital flows which have allowed it to finance the twin deficits — the budget and trade gaps. And as securities’ values fall with rising interest rates, unless the US Government takes a very sharp knife to its spending at a time of stagnating or falling economic activity, the Fed will have to step up with enhanced QE.

  The excuse that QE stimulates the economy will have been worn out and exposed for what it is: the debasement of the currency as a means of hidden taxation. And the foreign capital that manages to escape from a dollar crisis is likely to seek a home elsewhere. But the other two major currencies in the dollar’s camp, the euro and yen, start from an even worse position. These are shown in Figure 4. With their purchasing power visibly collapsing the ECB and the Bank of Japan still have negative interest rates, seemingly trapped under the zero bound. Policy makers find themselves torn between the Scylla of consumer price inflation and the Charybdis of declining economic activity. A further problem is that these central banks have become substantial investors in government and other bonds (the BOJ even has equity ETFs on board) and rising bond yields are playing havoc with their balance sheets, wiping out their equity requiring a systemic recapitalisation.

  

  Not only are the ECB and BOJ technically bankrupt without massive capital injections, but their commercial banking networks are hugely overleveraged with their global systemically important banks — their G-SIBs — having assets relative to equity averaging over twenty times. And unlike the Brazilian real, the Mexican peso and even the South African rand, the yen and the euro are sliding against the dollar.

  The response from the BOJ is one of desperately hanging on to current policies. It is rigging the market by capping the yield on the 10-year JGB at 0.25%, which is where it is now.

  These currency developments are indicative of great upheavals and an approaching crisis. Financial bubbles are undoubtedly about to burst sinking fiat financial values and all that sail with them. Government bonds will be yesterday’s story because neither China nor Russia, whose currencies can be expected to survive the transition from financial to commodity orientation, run large budget deficits. That, indeed, will be part of their strength.

  The financial war, so long predicted and described in my essays for Goldmoney, appears to be reaching its climax. At the end it has boiled down to who understands money and currencies best. Led by America, the West has ignored the legal definition of money, substituting fiat dollars for it instead. Monetary policy lost its anchor in realism, drifting on a sea of crackpot inflationary beliefs instead.

  But Russia and China have not made the same mistake. China played along with the Keynesian game while it suited them. Consequently, while Russia may be struggling militarily, unless a miracle occurs the West seems bound to lose the financial war and we are, indeed, transiting into Pozsar’s Bretton Woods III.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 17:25

• More Than 100 Russian Jets Stranded In Dubai After Being Flown There To Escape Sanctions
  More Than 100 Russian Jets Stranded In Dubai After Being Flown There To Escape Sanctions

  Now that Switzerland has violated its centuries-old status as a neutral power to take sides against Russia in Europe’s ‘first war since WWII’ (or at least the first since NATO bombed the bejesus out of Belgrade back in the 1990s), Dubai and a handful of other eastern locales have been jockeying to supplant the alpine nation to become the ‘Switzerland of the East’.

  Chief among these, as we recently reported, is Dubai, which has attracted so many Russians as of late that its grocery stores have even started stocking Russian ice cream.

  

  But as a few members of the Russian uber-rich have recently learned, even Dubai isn’t safe from the grasping hands of Western sanctions – be they European, American or British.

  The WSJ reports that roughly 100 Russian planes have been stuck in Dubai, effectively prevented from moving due to Western sanctions that bar them from all other airspace.

  According to WINGX, a website that tracks aerospace, the Russia-UAE connection is 3x busier than pre-pandemic levels during the first 3 weeks of March (as the chart below shows).

  Satellite images shot by Earth-imaging company Planet Labs also show an accumulation of private jets from mid-February to the start of April.

  

  Source: WingX

  As we mentioned above, many Russian oligarchs and billionaires had some of their most luxurious assets seized as a result of the sanctions. Last month, for instance, Gibraltar seized a $75 million superyacht owned by Russian billionaire Dmitry Pumpyansky. Many of these seized yachts have created serious headaches…but not for their owner, for the marinas where they have been stranded.

  But there might be a bright side for the Russians: if they can’t fly the jet, they can always sell them and use the proceeds to invest in the booming UAE property market.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 17:00

• Robert Malone Says He Will Sue New York Times Unless It Corrects 'Defamatory' Article
  Robert Malone Says He Will Sue New York Times Unless It Corrects ‘Defamatory’ Article

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

  The New York Times will face a lawsuit unless it corrects an article claiming Dr. Robert Malone has spread “unfounded claims about the [COVID-19] vaccines and the virus” and misrepresents his role in creating messenger RNA technology, the doctor and his lawyer say.

  

  The New York Times recently published a piece calling Malone the “latest COVID misinformation star,” written by a reporter who the paper hired to cover “disinformation,” or the purposeful spread of false information.

  Davey Alba, the reporter, acknowledges Malone performed some of the earliest experiments on messenger RNA (mRNA) technology, which was used to build the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. But the article questions Malone’s assertion that he invented the mRNA vaccines.

  In addition, Malone is accused of “spreading misinformation about the virus and vaccines on conservative programs,” with examples of the alleged actions including how Malone “questions the severity of the coronavirus” and has championed the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, two drugs that U.S. regulators say should not be used to treat COVID-19.

  Steven Biss, representing Malone, gave notice to the New York Times on April 6, informing lawyers for the paper that the article contains “false and defamatory statements of fact of or concerning Dr. Malone,” including the thinly supported headline.

  Biss and Malone say Alba, who now works for Bloomberg, declined an offer from Malone to show her evidence regarding his research and invention of the mRNA technology.

  “She refused to view the information that we offered to provide to her,” Malone told The Epoch Times.

  A review of the New York Times article found no mention of the patents on which Malone is named. Instead, it says Malone alleges to have invented the technology because he performed experiments on human cells at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in San Diego, and links to a study Malone co-authored about injecting RNA into mouse skeletal muscle.

  One of the study’s co-authors, Dr. Gyula Acsadi, chief of pediatric Neurology at Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, was quoted as saying it was a “totally false claim” for Malone to say he invented mRNA vaccines. Malone says on his websites that he is “the inventor of mRNA vaccines” and “the original inventor of mRNA vaccination as a technology” but also says he did not invent the COVID-19 vaccines. “In fact, I have very actively distanced myself from them,” he wrote in a blog post.

  “The facts are that I am a named inventor on the original nine issued U.S. patents, which describe the mRNA vaccine platform technology,” Malone told The Epoch Times.

  The patents cover delivery mechanisms used in mRNA vaccines, among other things.

  “Those patents were used aggressively to keep other companies from entering the technology area until they expired,” Malone said.

  While Acsadi co-authored the paper, he is not listed on any of the patents.

  

  Dr. Jon Wolff, named in the paper and the patents, is deceased. Dr. Philip Felgner, also named in the paper and the patents, didn’t respond to a request for comment.

  Alba, the reporter, is also accused of searching for sources to quote on Twitter, as two of the three critics had previously criticized Malone on the social media website.

  Dr. Angela Rasmussen, for instance, called Malone in August 2021 a “grifter” and “just another scammer.”

  She was quoted in the New York Times article as saying guidance from health agencies changes over time because the guidance is “only as reliable as the evidence behind it, and thus it should change when new evidence is obtained.”

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), among other health agencies, has repeatedly changed guidance during the pandemic, drawing growing distrust from Americans, according to surveys.

  Some leading health officials have admitted to misleading Americans on key pandemic-related matters. Dr. Anthony Fauci, for instance, has acknowledged he lied about the effectiveness of masks early in the pandemic because of concerns there would be a mask shortage if he was truthful.

  Malone has criticized Fauci and the CDC, telling The Epoch Times earlier this year, for instance, that the CDC’s withholding of data on COVID-19 was an example of “scientific fraud.”

  “Robert Malone is exploiting the fact that data-driven course correction is inherent to the scientific process to peddle disinformation,” Rasmussen told the New York Times, referring to how Malone makes money from his blog. “It’s extraordinarily dishonest and morally bankrupt.”

  Dr. Alastair McAlpine, another source critical of Malone, promoted the article on Twitter, alleging he “and many others,” presented with the “false claim” that Malone “‘invented mRNA technology,” had “debunk[ed]” the idea.

  Alba “appears to have sought her sources by looking through Twitter to find detractors, which suggests intent to defame because she was biasing her sources to individuals that she knew were already defaming,” Malone told The Epoch Times.

  The New York Times was told to publicly retract the statements alleged to be false and defamatory, issue a written apology, and provide compensation for the “presumed and actual damages” Malone has suffered.

  If the requested actions are not taken within 30 days within receipt of the notice, or if actions are taken but are deemed insufficient, Malone intends to take legal action, Biss told the paper.

  Alba did not respond to requests for comment. She has shielded her Twitter page from view from all users except for those who follow her.

  A spokesperson for the New York Times told The Epoch Times in an email that the story “was thoroughly researched and edited, and we are confident in the diligence of our reporting.”

  The paper’s legal department is reviewing the legal notice “and will respond to counsel after that review,” the spokesperson added.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 16:30

• Canada Will Soon Be Offering Doctor-Assisted Death For People Who Are Mentally Ill
  Canada Will Soon Be Offering Doctor-Assisted Death For People Who Are Mentally Ill

  Canada is working to determine who, if anyone, should be offered doctor-assisted death as a result of mental illness. In other words, it’s doctor assisted suicide. 

  Doctor assisted death is mostly prominent in people who have terminal illnesses like cancer, The National Post reported last week. Moving into doctor assisted death for mental illness raises a whole new host of questions. 

  Dutch psychiatrist Dr. Sisco van Veen notes that with cancer, something inside the body can be seen, but “in psychiatry, really all you have is the patient’s story, and what you see with your eyes and what you hear and what the family tells you.”

  Mental disorders lack “prognostic predictability”, which can make determining suffering near impossible. 

  As Canada moves closer to legalizing doctor-assisted deaths for people with mental illness whose psychological pain has become unbearable to them, “difficult conversations” are ahead, Veen told the National Post. 

  In March 2023, Canada will become one of just a few nations that allow medical aid in dying, or MAID, for mental illness like depression, bipolar disorder, personality disorders, schizophrenia, PTSD.

  

  Dr. Grainne Neilson, past president of the Canadian Psychiatric Association and a Halifax forensic psychiatrist said: “I think there’s going to be lots of uncertainty about how to apply this in March 2023. My hope is that psychiatrists will move cautiously and carefully to make sure MAID is not being used as something instead of equitable access to good care.”

  The argument developing over MAID for mental illness is robust. Many in the mental health field think that mental illness is never irremediable and there’s always hope for a cure. Others say “there still exists a profound lack of understanding about, and fear of, mental illness, and that the resistance reflects a long history of paternalism and unwillingness to accept that the suffering that can come from mental illness can be as equally tormenting as the suffering from physical pain.”

  The Canadian Parliament has moved past whether MAID should be offered to those who are eligible, and is now studying how it should be assessed. 

  The National Post described how the idea has made its way through Parliament:

  That decision formed the impetus for Canada’s MAID law, Bill C-14, which allowed for assisted dying in cases where natural death was “reasonably foreseeable.”

  In 2019, a Quebec Superior Court justice ruled the reasonably foreseeable death restriction unconstitutional, and that people who were intolerably suffering but not imminently dying still had a constitutional right to be eligible for euthanasia.

  In March 2021, Bill C-7 was passed that made changes to the eligibility criteria. Gone is the “reasonably foreseeable” criterion and, as of March 17, 2023, when a two-year sunset clause expires, MAID will be expanded to competent adults whose sole underlying condition is a mental illness.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/10/2022 – 16:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• NATO To Engage In Asia-Pacifc To Counter China
  NATO To Engage In Asia-Pacifc To Counter China

  Authored by Victoria Kelly-Clark via The Epoch Times,

  The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has announced that it will begin engaging in the Asia-Pacific region both practically and politically in light of Beijing’s growing influence and coercion and its unwillingness to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

  

  Speaking following the meetings of NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs on April 7, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the global implications of the Ukrainian conflict had propelled the organisation to step up its engagement with Asia-Pacific partners for the first time.

  “We have seen that China is unwilling to condemn Russia’s aggression. And Beijing has joined Moscow in questioning the right of nations to choose their own path,” Stoltenberg said.

  “This is a serious challenge to us all. And it makes it even more important that we stand together to protect our values.”

  NATO and its Asia-Pacific partners—Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea—met in Brussels to discuss international support for Ukraine.

  Stoltenberg said the gathered foreign ministers agreed that NATO’s next Strategic Concept briefing, expected to be finalised for the Madrid Summit in June, must deliver a response on how they relate to Russia in the future and how, for the first time, they take into account that their security is affected by China’s growing influence and coercive policies.

  “NATO and our Asia-Pacific partners have now agreed to step up our practical and political cooperation in several areas, including cyber, new technology, and countering disinformation,” he said.

  “We will also work more closely together in other areas such as maritime security, climate change, and resilience. Because global challenges demand global solutions.”

  

  NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg holds a news conference during a NATO summit to discuss Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in Brussels, Belgium, on March 24, 2022. (Gonzalo Fuentes/Reuters)

  Australia Announces NATO Cooperation

  The news of the Pacific engagement comes as Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne announced that Australia will be cooperating with NATO to help the organisation better counter hybrid threats and disinformation and reinforce Australia’s support for NATO.

  Payne said on April 7 that Australia would partner with the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (SCCE) to deepen Australia’s insights into the strategic communications and security challenges facing NATO, NATO Allies, and partners.

  “The importance of improving strategic communications has been underscored by Russia’s use of disinformation and propaganda during its illegal and unprovoked war against Ukraine,” Payne said.

  “We will offer the Centre a clear-eyed view of the geostrategic dynamics in the Indo-Pacific and its implications for NATO.”

  The SCCE, which is located in Riga, Latvia, is an international military organisation that has been accredited by NATO but is separate from the NATO Command Structure. Its focus is to contribute to enhancing the strategic communications capabilities between the member states of the NATO Alliance and other allied nations

  Australia is an Enhanced Opportunities Partner of NATO, which means they work to enhance interoperability, take part in NATO military training and exercise programs, and share information on issues of mutual interest.

  According to Payne, the cooperation will be kicked off by the secondment of one Australian official to the SCCE, from which Australia will then work to combat disinformation and other hybrid threats.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 23:30

• How Automaker Logos Have Evolved Over The Past Century
  How Automaker Logos Have Evolved Over The Past Century

  Can you picture Ford’s blue oval, or Mercedes’ three-pointed star? These are some of the most recognizable logos in the world, thanks to a number of reasons.

  For starters, automakers are some of the world’s biggest advertisers. In 2020, the automotive industry spent $33 billion on advertising in the U.S. alone.

  Automakers also maintain a strong physical presence by placing their logo on every car they produce. This form of self-promotion is an automotive tradition, and because of it, car logos are designed to be eye-catching and memorable.

  To learn more, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu and Zack Aboulam have illustrated the histories of six brands of interest.

  

  Editor’s note: There are obviously many automotive brands with strong histories, but for this visualization we selected brands that we thought had the most interesting stories and graphical decisions behind their emblems. In the future, we may add more or create a follow-up post if readers express interest.

  A Closer Look at Car Logos

  Automakers often pack hidden meanings and details into their logos.

  For example, Mazda’s current logo, introduced in 1997 and updated in 2015, depicts a pair of wings that represent the brand’s desire to “drive powerful, continuous growth.” The concept of flight is believed to embody the company’s pursuit of ongoing improvement. Of course, the wings also resemble a capital “M” for Mazda, similar to Honda’s “H” logo.

  An interesting design choice of the Mazda lettering is that all of the letters except “D” are in lowercase. This was done because Mazda wanted to express precision, and a lower case “d” would have protruded above the upper line of the other letters.

  Another logo with deeper meaning is Mercedes-Benz’s 3-pointed star, adopted in 1909. This symbol was based off a postcard that Paul and Adolf Daimler, sons of the company founder, got from their father in which the location of their home was marked by a 3-pointed star.

  Today, the three points are believed to represent the strength of Mercedes’ engines across land, sea, and air.

  Going Minimal

  Over the past decade, many brands have taken their logos in a more minimalist direction. Many recently redesigned car logos are devoid of any 3D effects or color.

  Audi is one of the most prominent examples of this trend. In 2016, it removed the chrome effect on its “four rings” and opted for a flat black version instead. This clean and modern emblem is better suited for digital media and appears more bold. Furthermore, the name “Audi” is no longer included at the bottom—a statement of the four rings’ strength.

  BMW took a similar approach with its logo in 2020, stripping away the black outer ring and 3D effect. This minimalist and transparent logo is for “brand communication” only, meaning the logos on its cars will remain unchanged.

  Finally, there’s Cadillac, which unveiled its own minimalist logo in 2021. This logo is being used to represent the brand’s full-electric future, and features a monochromatic version of the classic Cadillac Crest.

  An Opportunity to Reinvent

  The race for EV dominance has provided automakers with the chance to update or reinvent their brands. In addition to the companies mentioned previously, Volkswagen and General Motors (GM) have also rolled out recent updates.

  

  You may have already noticed Volkswagen’s new branding, which was updated in 2019. On trend with the rest of the industry, the company now uses a 2D logo which offers “outstanding flexibility in digital media”.

  More importantly, the company’s branding is intended to feel much more colorful and natural, symbolizing a fresh start from Volkswagen’s 2015 diesel-gate scandal.

  Shortly after, GM revealed a new logo as part of a campaign to promote its future electric vehicles. Unlike its minimalist competitors, GM’s new logo features a gradient of light blues that evokes “the clean skies of a zero-emissions future”.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 23:00

• The Anatomy Of Big Pharma's Political Reach
  The Anatomy Of Big Pharma’s Political Reach

  Authored by Rebecca Strong via Medium.com,

  They keep telling us to “trust the science.” But who paid for it?

  

  After graduating from Columbia University with a chemical engineering degree, my grandfather went on to work for Pfizer for almost two decades, culminating his career as the company’s Global Director of New Products. I was rather proud of this fact growing up — it felt as if this father figure, who raised me for several years during my childhood, had somehow played a role in saving lives. But in recent years, my perspective on Pfizer — and other companies in its class — has shifted. Blame it on the insidious big pharma corruption laid bare by whistleblowers in recent years. Blame it on the endless string of big pharma lawsuits revealing fraud, deception, and cover-ups. Blame it on the fact that I witnessed some of their most profitable drugs ruin the lives of those I love most. All I know is, that pride I once felt has been overshadowed by a sticky skepticism I just can’t seem to shake.

  In 1973, my grandpa and his colleagues celebrated as Pfizer crossed a milestone: the one-billion-dollar sales mark. These days, Pfizer rakes in $81 billion a year, making it the 28th most valuable company in the world. Johnson & Johnson ranks 15th, with $93.77 billion. To put things into perspective, that makes said companies wealthier than most countries in the world. And thanks to those astronomical profit margins, the Pharmaceuticals and Health Products industry is able to spend more on lobbying than any other industry in America.

  While big pharma lobbying can take several different forms, these companies tend to target their contributions to senior legislators in Congress — you know, the ones they need to keep in their corner, because they have the power to draft healthcare laws. Pfizer has outspent its peers in six of the last eight election cycles, coughing up almost $9.7 million. During the 2016 election, pharmaceutical companies gave more than $7 million to 97 senators at an average of $75,000 per member. They also contributed $6.3 million to president Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign. The question is: what did big pharma get in return?

  When you’ve got 1,500 Big Pharma lobbyists on Capitol Hill for 535 members of Congress, it’s not too hard to figure out why prescription drug prices in this country are, on average, 256% HIGHER than in other major countries.

  — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 3, 2022

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

  ALEC’s Off-the-Record Sway

  To truly grasp big pharma’s power, you need to understand how The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) works. ALEC, which was founded in 1973 by conservative activists working on Ronald Reagan’s campaign, is a super secretive pay-to-play operation where corporate lobbyists — including in the pharma sector — hold confidential meetings about “model” bills. A large portion of these bills is eventually approved and become law.

  A rundown of ALEC’s greatest hits will tell you everything you need to know about the council’s motives and priorities. In 1995, ALEC promoted a bill that restricts consumers’ rights to sue for damages resulting from taking a particular medication. They also endorsed the Statute of Limitation Reduction Act, which put a time limit on when someone could sue after a medication-induced injury or death. Over the years, ALEC has promoted many other pharma-friendly bills that would: weaken FDA oversight of new drugs and therapies, limit FDA authority over drug advertising, and oppose regulations on financial incentives for doctors to prescribe specific drugs. But what makes these ALEC collaborations feel particularly problematic is that there’s little transparency — all of this happens behind closed doors. Congressional leaders and other committee members involved in ALEC aren’t required to publish any records of their meetings and other communications with pharma lobbyists, and the roster of ALEC members is completely confidential. All we know is that in 2020, more than two-thirds of Congress — 72 senators and 302 House of Representatives members — cashed a campaign check from a pharma company.

  Big Pharma Funding Research

  The public typically relies on an endorsement from government agencies to help them decide whether or not a new drug, vaccine, or medical device is safe and effective. And those agencies, like the FDA, count on clinical research. As already established, big pharma is notorious for getting its hooks into influential government officials. Here’s another sobering truth: The majority of scientific research is paid for by — wait for it — the pharmaceutical companies.

  When the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) published 73 studies of new drugs over the course of a single year, they found that a staggering 82% of them had been funded by the pharmaceutical company selling the product, 68% had authors who were employees of that company, and 50% had lead researchers who accepted money from a drug company. According to 2013 research conducted at the University of Arizona College of Law, even when pharma companies aren’t directly funding the research, company stockholders, consultants, directors, and officers are almost always involved in conducting them. A 2017 report by the peer-reviewed journal The BMJ also showed that about half of medical journal editors receive payments from drug companies, with the average payment per editor hovering around $28,000. But these statistics are only accurate if researchers and editors are transparent about payments from pharma. And a 2022 investigative analysis of two of the most influential medical journals found that 81% of study authors failed to disclose millions in payments from drug companies, as they’re required to do.

  Unfortunately, this trend shows no sign of slowing down. The number of clinical trials funded by the pharmaceutical industry has been climbing every year since 2006, according to a John Hopkins University report, while independent studies have been harder to find. And there are some serious consequences to these conflicts of interest. Take Avandia, for instance, a diabetes drug produced by GlaxoSmithCline (GSK). Avandia was eventually linked to a dramatically increased risk of heart attacks and heart failure. And a BMJ report revealed that almost 90% of scientists who initially wrote glowing articles about Avandia had financial ties to GSK.

  But here’s the unnerving part: if the pharmaceutical industry is successfully biasing the science, then that means the physicians who rely on the science are biased in their prescribing decisions.

  

  Photo credit: UN Women Europe & Central Asia

  Where the lines get really blurry is with “ghostwriting.” Big pharma execs know citizens are way more likely to trust a report written by a board-certified doctor than one of their representatives. That’s why they pay physicians to list their names as authors — even though the MDs had little to no involvement in the research, and the report was actually written by the drug company. This practice started in the ’50s and ’60s when tobacco execs were clamoring to prove that cigarettes didn’t cause cancer (spoiler alert: they do!), so they commissioned doctors to slap their name on papers undermining the risks of smoking.

  It’s still a pretty common tactic today: more than one in 10 articles published in the NEJM was co-written by a ghostwriter. While a very small percentage of medical journals have clear policies against ghostwriting, it’s still technically legal —despite the fact that the consequences can be deadly.

  Case in point: in the late ’90s and early 2000s, Merck paid for 73 ghostwritten articles to play up the benefits of its arthritis drug Vioxx. It was later revealed that Merck failed to report all of the heart attacks experienced by trial participants. In fact, a study published in the NEJM revealed that an estimated 160,000 Americans experienced heart attacks or strokes from taking Vioxx. That research was conducted by Dr. David Graham, Associate Director of the FDA’s Office of Drug Safety, who understandably concluded the drug was not safe. But the FDA’s Office of New Drugs, which not only was responsible for initially approving Vioxx but also regulating it, tried to sweep his findings under the rug.

  “I was pressured to change my conclusions and recommendations, and basically threatened that if I did not change them, I would not be permitted to present the paper at the conference,” he wrote in his 2004 U.S. Senate testimony on Vioxx. “One Drug Safety manager recommended that I should be barred from presenting the poster at the meeting.”

  Eventually, the FDA issued a public health advisory about Vioxx and Merck withdrew this product. But it was a little late for repercussions — 38,000 of those Vioxx-takers who suffered heart attacks had already died. Graham called this a “profound regulatory failure,” adding that scientific standards the FDA apply to drug safety “guarantee that unsafe and deadly drugs will remain on the U.S. market.”

  This should come as no surprise, but research has also repeatedly shown that a paper written by a pharmaceutical company is more likely to emphasize the benefits of a drug, vaccine, or device while downplaying the dangers. (If you want to understand more about this practice, a former ghostwriter outlines all the ethical reasons why she quit this job in a PLOS Medicine report.) While adverse drug effects appear in 95% of clinical research, only 46% of published reports disclose them. Of course, all of this often ends up misleading doctors into thinking a drug is safer than it actually is.

  Big Pharma Influence On Doctors

  Pharmaceutical companies aren’t just paying medical journal editors and authors to make their products look good, either. There’s a long, sordid history of pharmaceutical companies incentivizing doctors to prescribe their products through financial rewards. For instance, Pfizer and AstraZeneca doled out a combined $100 million to doctors in 2018, with some earning anywhere from $6 million to $29 million in a year. And research has shown this strategy works: when doctors accept these gifts and payments, they’re significantly more likely to prescribe those companies’ drugs. Novartis comes to mind — the company famously spent over $100 million paying for doctors’ extravagant meals, golf outings, and more, all while also providing a generous kickback program that made them richer every time they prescribed certain blood pressure and diabetes meds.

  Side note: the Open Payments portal contains a nifty little database where you can find out if any of your own doctors received money from drug companies. Knowing that my mother was put on a laundry list of meds after a near-fatal car accident, I was curious — so I did a quick search for her providers. While her PCP only banked a modest amount from Pfizer and AstraZeneca, her previous psychiatrist — who prescribed a cocktail of contraindicated medications without treating her in person — collected quadruple-digit payments from pharmaceutical companies. And her pain care specialist, who prescribed her jaw-dropping doses of opioid pain medication for more than 20 years (far longer than the 5-day safety guideline), was raking in thousands from Purdue Pharma, AKA the opioid crisis’ kingpin.

  Purdue is now infamous for its wildly aggressive OxyContin campaign in the ’90s. At the time, the company billed it as a non-addictive wonder drug for pain sufferers. Internal emails show Pursue sales representatives were instructed to “sell, sell, sell” OxyContin, and the more they were able to push, the more they were rewarded with promotions and bonuses. With the stakes so high, these reps stopped at nothing to get doctors on board — even going so far as to send boxes of doughnuts spelling out “OxyContin” to unconvinced physicians. Purdue had stumbled upon the perfect system for generating tons of profit — off of other people’s pain.

  Documentation later proved that not only was Purdue aware it was highly addictive and that many people were abusing it, but that they also encouraged doctors to continue prescribing increasingly higher doses of it (and sent them on lavish luxury vacations for some motivation). In testimony to Congress, Purdue exec Paul Goldenheim played dumb about OxyContin addiction and overdose rates, but emails that were later exposed showed that he requested his colleagues remove all mentions of addiction from their correspondence about the drug. Even after it was proven in court that Purdue fraudulently marketed OxyContin while concealing its addictive nature, no one from the company spent a single day behind bars. Instead, the company got a slap on the wrist and a $600 million fine for a misdemeanor, the equivalent of a speeding ticket compared to the $9 billion they made off OxyContin up until 2006. Meanwhile, thanks to Purdue’s recklessness, more than 247,000 people died from prescription opioid overdoses between 1999 and 2009. And that’s not even factoring in all the people who died of heroin overdoses once OxyContin was no longer attainable to them. The NIH reports that 80% of people who use heroin started by misusing prescription opioids.

  Former sales rep Carol Panara told me in an interview that when she looks back on her time at Purdue, it all feels like a “bad dream.” Panara started working for Purdue in 2008, one year after the company pled guilty to “misbranding” charges for OxyContin. At this point, Purdue was “regrouping and expanding,” says Panara, and to that end, had developed a clever new approach for making money off OxyContin: sales reps were now targeting general practitioners and family doctors, rather than just pain management specialists. On top of that, Purdue soon introduced three new strengths for OxyContin: 15, 30, and 60 milligrams, creating smaller increments Panara believes were aimed at making doctors feel more comfortable increasing their patients’ dosages. According to Panara, there were internal company rankings for sales reps based on the number of prescriptions for each OxyContin dosing strength in their territory.

  “They were sneaky about it,” she said.

  “Their plan was to go in and sell these doctors on the idea of starting with 10 milligrams, which is very low, knowing full well that once they get started down that path — that’s all they need. Because eventually, they’re going to build a tolerance and need a higher dose.”

  Occasionally, doctors expressed concerns about a patient becoming addicted, but Purdue had already developed a way around that. Sales reps like Panara were taught to reassure those doctors that someone in pain might experience addiction-like symptoms called “pseudoaddiction,” but that didn’t mean they were truly addicted. There is no scientific evidence whatsoever to support that this concept is legit, of course. But the most disturbing part? Reps were trained to tell doctors that “pseudoaddiction” signaled the patient’s pain wasn’t being managed well enough, and the solution was simply to prescribe a higher dose of OxyContin.

  Panara finally quit Purdue in 2013. One of the breaking points was when two pharmacies in her territory were robbed at gunpoint specifically for OxyContin. In 2020, Purdue pled guilty to three criminal charges in an $8.3 billion deal, but the company is now under court protection after filing for bankruptcy. Despite all the damage that’s been done, the FDA’s policies for approving opioids remain essentially unchanged.

  

  Photo credit: Jennifer Durban

  Purdue probably wouldn’t have been able to pull this off if it weren’t for an FDA examiner named Curtis Wright, and his assistant Douglas Kramer. While Purdue was pursuing Wright’s stamp of approval on OxyContin, Wright took an outright sketchy approach to their application, instructing the company to mail documents to his home office rather than the FDA, and enlisting Purdue employees to help him review trials about the safety of the drug. The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requires that the FDA have access to at least two randomized controlled trials before deeming a drug as safe and effective, but in the case of OxyContin, it got approved with data from just one measly two-week study — in osteoarthritis patients, no less.

  When both Wright and Kramer left the FDA, they went on to work for none other than (drumroll, please) Purdue, with Wright earning three times his FDA salary. By the way — this is just one example of the FDA’s notoriously incestuous relationship with big pharma, often referred to as “the revolving door”. In fact, a 2018 Science report revealed that 11 out of 16 FDA reviewers ended up at the same companies they had been regulating products for.

  While doing an independent investigation, “Empire of Pain” author and New Yorker columnist Patrick Radden Keefe tried to gain access to documentation of Wright’s communications with Purdue during the OxyContin approval process.

  “The FDA came back and said, ‘Oh, it’s the weirdest thing, but we don’t have anything. It’s all either been lost or destroyed,’” Keefe told Fortune in an interview. “But it’s not just the FDA. It’s Congress, it’s the Department of Justice, it’s big parts of the medical establishment … the sheer amount of money involved, I think, has meant that a lot of the checks that should be in place in society to not just achieve justice, but also to protect us as consumers, were not there because they had been co-opted.”

  Big pharma may be to blame for creating the opioids that caused this public health catastrophe, but the FDA deserves just as much scrutiny — because its countless failures also played a part in enabling it. And many of those more recent fails happened under the supervision of Dr. Janet Woodcock. Woodcock was named FDA’s acting commissioner mere hours after Joe Biden was inaugurated as president. She would have been a logical choice, being an FDA vet of 35 years, but then again it’s impossible to forget that she played a starring role in the FDA’s perpetuating the opioid epidemic. She’s also known for overruling her own scientific advisors when they vote against approving a drug. Not only did Woodcock approve OxyContin for children as young as 11 years old, but she also gave the green light to several other highly controversial extended-release opioid pain drugs without sufficient evidence of safety or efficacy. One of those was Zohydro: in 2011, the FDA’s advisory committee voted 11:2 against approving it due to safety concerns about inappropriate use, but Woodcock went ahead and pushed it through, anyway. Under Woodcock’s supervision, the FDA also approved Opana, which is twice as powerful as OxyContin — only to then beg the drug maker to take it off the market 10 years later due to “abuse and manipulation.” And then there was Dsuvia, a potent painkiller 1,000 times stronger than morphine and 10 times more powerful than fentanyl. According to a head of one of the FDA’s advisory committees, the U.S. military had helped to develop this particular drug, and Woodcock said there was “pressure from the Pentagon” to push it through approvals. The FBI, members of congress, public health advocates, and patient safety experts alike called this decision into question, pointing out that with hundreds of opioids already on the market there’s no need for another — particularly one that comes with such high risks.

  Most recently, Woodcock served as the therapeutics lead for Operation Warp Speed, overseeing COVID-19 vaccine development.

  Big Pharma Lawsuits, Scandals, and Cover-Ups

  While the OxyContin craze is undoubtedly one of the highest-profile examples of big pharma’s deception, there are dozens of other stories like this. Here are a few standouts:

  In the 1980s, Bayer continued selling blood clotting products to third-world countries even though they were fully aware those products had been contaminated with HIV. The reason? The “financial investment in the product was considered too high to destroy the inventory.” Predictably, about 20,000 of the hemophiliacs who were infused with these tainted products then tested positive for HIV and eventually developed AIDS, and many later died of it.

  In 2004, Johnson & Johnson was slapped with a series of lawsuits for illegally promoting off-label use of their heartburn drug Propulsid for children despite internal company emails confirming major safety concerns (as in, deaths during the drug trials). Documentation from the lawsuits showed that dozens of studies sponsored by Johnson & Johnson highlighting the risks of this drug were never published.

  The FDA estimates that GSK’s Avandia caused 83,000 heart attacks between 1999 and 2007. Internal documents from GSK prove that when they began studying the effects of the drug as early as 1999, they discovered it caused a higher risk of heart attacks than a similar drug it was meant to replace. Rather than publish these findings, they spent a decade illegally concealing them (and meanwhile, banking $3.2 billion annually for this drug by 2006). Finally, a 2007 New England Journal of Medicine study linked Avandia to a 43% increased risk of heart attacks, and a 64% increased risk of death from heart disease. Avandia is still FDA approved and available in the U.S.

  In 2009, Pfizer was forced to pay $2.3 billion, the largest healthcare fraud settlement in history at that time, for paying illegal kickbacks to doctors and promoting off-label uses of its drugs. Specifically, a former employee revealed that Pfizer reps were encouraged and incentivized to sell Bextra and 12 other drugs for conditions they were never FDA approved for, and at doses up to eight times what’s recommended. “I was expected to increase profits at all costs, even when sales meant endangering lives,” the whistleblower said.

  When it was discovered that AstraZeneca was promoting the antipsychotic medication Seroquel for uses that were not approved by the FDA as safe and effective, the company was hit with a $520 million fine in 2010. For years, AstraZeneca had been encouraging psychiatrists and other physicians to prescribe Seroquel for a vast range of seemingly unrelated off-label conditions, including Alzheimer’s disease, anger management, ADHD, dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and sleeplessness. AstraZeneca also violated the federal Anti-Kickback Statute by paying doctors to spread the word about these unapproved uses of Seroquel via promotional lectures and while traveling to resort locations.

  In 2012, GSK paid a $3 billion fine for bribing doctors by flying them and their spouses to five-star resorts, and for illegally promoting drugs for off-label uses. What’s worse — GSK withheld clinical trial results that showed its antidepressant Paxil not only doesn’t work for adolescents and children but more alarmingly, that it can increase the likelihood of suicidal thoughts in this group. A 1998 GSK internal memo revealed that the company intentionally concealed this data to minimize any “potential negative commercial impact.”

  In 2021, an ex-AstraZeneca sales rep sued her former employer, claiming they fired her for refusing to promote drugs for uses that weren’t FDA-approved. The employee alleges that on multiple occasions, she expressed concerns to her boss about “misleading” information that didn’t have enough support from medical research, and off-label promotions of certain drugs. Her supervisor reportedly not only ignored these concerns but pressured her to approve statements she didn’t agree with and threatened to remove her from regional and national positions if she didn’t comply. According to the plaintiff, she missed out on a raise and a bonus because she refused to break the law.

  At the top of 2022, a panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals reinstated a lawsuit against Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Roche, and GE Healthcare, which claims they helped finance terrorist attacks against U.S. service members and other Americans in Iraq. The suit alleges that from 2005–2011, these companies regularly offered bribes (including free drugs and medical devices) totaling millions of dollars annually to Iraq’s Ministry of Health in order to secure drug contracts. These corrupt payments then allegedly funded weapons and training for the Mahdi Army, which until 2008, was largely considered one of the most dangerous groups in Iraq.

  Another especially worrisome factor is that pharmaceutical companies are conducting an ever-increasing number of clinical trials in third-world countries, where people may be less educated, and there are also far fewer safety regulations. Pfizer’s 1996 experimental trials with Trovan on Nigerian children with meningitis — without informed consent — is just one nauseating example. When a former medical director in Pfizer’s central research division warned the company both before and after the study that their methods in this trial were “improper and unsafe,” he was promptly fired. Families of the Nigerian children who died or were left blind, brain damaged, or paralyzed after the study sued Pfizer, and the company ultimately settled out of court. In 1998, the FDA approved Trovan only for adults. The drug was later banned from European markets due to reports of fatal liver disease and restricted to strictly emergency care in the U.S. Pfizer still denies any wrongdoing.

  

  “Nurse prepares to vaccinate children” by World Bank Photo Collection is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

  But all that is just the tip of the iceberg. If you’d like to dive a little further down the rabbit hole — and I’ll warn you, it’s a deep one — a quick Google search for “big pharma lawsuits” will reveal the industry’s dark track record of bribery, dishonesty, and fraud.

  In fact, big pharma happens to be the biggest defrauder of the federal government when it comes to the False Claims Act, otherwise known as the “Lincoln Law.” During our interview, Panara told me she has friends still working for big pharma who would be willing to speak out about crooked activity they’ve observed, but are too afraid of being blacklisted by the industry. A newly proposed update to the False Claims Act would help to protect and support whistleblowers in their efforts to hold pharmaceutical companies liable, by helping to prevent that kind of retaliation and making it harder for the companies charged to dismiss these cases. It should come as no surprise that Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Merck, and a flock of other big pharma firms are currently lobbying to block the update. Naturally, they wouldn’t want to make it any easier for ex-employees to expose their wrongdoings, potentially costing them billions more in fines.

  Something to keep in mind: these are the same people who produced, marketed, and are profiting from the COVID-19 vaccines. The same people who manipulate research, pay off decision-makers to push their drugs, cover up negative research results to avoid financial losses, and knowingly put innocent citizens in harm’s way. The same people who told America: “Take as much OxyContin as you want around the clock! It’s very safe and not addictive!” (while laughing all the way to the bank).

  So, ask yourself this: if a partner, friend, or family member repeatedly lied to you — and not just little white lies, but big ones that put your health and safety at risk — would you continue to trust them?

  Backing the Big Four: Big Pharma and the FDA, WHO, NIH, CDC

  I know what you’re thinking. Big pharma is amoral and the FDA’s devastating slips are a dime a dozen — old news. But what about agencies and organizations like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), World Health Organization (WHO), and Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)? Don’t they have an obligation to provide unbiased guidance to protect citizens? Don’t worry, I’m getting there.

  The WHO’s guidance is undeniably influential across the globe. For most of this organization’s history, dating back to 1948, it could not receive donations from pharmaceutical companies — only member states. But that changed in 2005 when the WHO updated its financial policy to permit private money into its system. Since then, the WHO has accepted many financial contributions from big pharma. In fact, it’s only 20% financed by member states today, with a whopping 80% of financing coming from private donors. For instance, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) is now one of its main contributors, providing up to 13% of its funds — about $250–300 million a year. Nowadays, the BMGF provides more donations to the WHO than the entire United States.

  Dr. Arata Kochi, former head of WHO’s malaria program, expressed concerns to director-general Dr. Margaret Chan in 2007 that taking the BMGF’s money could have “far-reaching, largely unintended consequences” including “stifling a diversity of views among scientists.”

  “The big concerns are that the Gates Foundation isn’t fully transparent and accountable,” Lawrence Gostin, director of WHO’s Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law, told Devex in an interview.

  “By wielding such influence, it could steer WHO priorities … It would enable a single rich philanthropist to set the global health agenda.”

  

  Photo credit: National Institutes of Health

  Take a peek at the WHO’s list of donors and you’ll find a few other familiar names like AstraZeneca, Bayer, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck.

  The NIH has the same problem, it seems. Science journalist Paul Thacker, who previously examined financial links between physicians and pharma companies as a lead investigator of the United States Senate Committee, wrote in The Washington Post that this agency “often ignored” very “obvious” conflicts of interest. He also claimed that “its industry ties go back decades.” In 2018, it was discovered that a $100 million alcohol consumption study run by NIH scientists was funded mostly by beer and liquor companies. Emails proved that NIH researchers were in frequent contact with those companies while designing the study — which, here’s a shocker — were aimed at highlighting the benefits and not the risks of moderate drinking. So, the NIH ultimately had to squash the trial.

  And then there’s the CDC. It used to be that this agency couldn’t take contributions from pharmaceutical companies, but in 1992 they found a loophole: new legislation passed by Congress allowed them to accept private funding through a nonprofit called the CDC Foundation. From 2014 through 2018 alone, the CDC Foundation received $79.6 million from corporations like Pfizer, Biogen, and Merck.

  Of course, if a pharmaceutical company wants to get a drug, vaccine, or other product approved, they really need to cozy up to the FDA. That explains why in 2017, pharma companies paid for a whopping 75% of the FDA’s scientific review budgets, up from 27% in 1993. It wasn’t always like this. But in 1992, an act of Congress changed the FDA’s funding stream, enlisting pharma companies to pay “user fees,” which help the FDA speed up the approval process for their drugs.

  A 2018 Science investigation found that 40 out of 107 physician advisors on the FDA’s committees received more than $10,000 from big pharma companies trying to get their drugs approved, with some banking up to $1 million or more. The FDA claims it has a well-functioning system to identify and prevent these possible conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, their system only works for spotting payments before advisory panels meet, and the Science investigation showed many FDA panel members get their payments after the fact. It’s a little like “you scratch my back now, and I’ll scratch your back once I get what I want” — drug companies promise FDA employees a future bonus contingent on whether things go their way.

  Here’s why this dynamic proves problematic: a 2000 investigation revealed that when the FDA approved the rotavirus vaccine in 1998, it didn’t exactly do its due diligence. That probably had something to do with the fact that committee members had financial ties to the manufacturer, Merck — many owned tens of thousands of dollars of stock in the company, or even held patents on the vaccine itself. Later, the Adverse Event Reporting System revealed that the vaccine was causing serious bowel obstructions in some children, and it was finally pulled from the U.S. market in October 1999.

  Then, in June of 2021, the FDA overruled concerns raised by its very own scientific advisory committee to approve Biogen’s Alzheimer’s drug Aduhelm — a move widely criticized by physicians. The drug not only showed very little efficacy but also potentially serious side effects like brain bleeding and swelling, in clinical trials. Dr. Aaron Kesselheim, a Harvard Medical School professor who was on the FDA’s scientific advisory committee, called it the “worst drug approval” in recent history, and noted that meetings between the FDA and Biogen had a “strange dynamic” suggesting an unusually close relationship. Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, told CNN that he believes the FDA started working in “inappropriately close collaboration with Biogen” back in 2019. “They were not objective, unbiased regulators,” he added in the CNN interview. “It seems as if the decision was preordained.”

  That brings me to perhaps the biggest conflict of interest yet: Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID is just one of many institutes that comprises the NIH — and the NIH owns half the patent for the Moderna vaccine — as well as thousands more pharma patents to boot. The NIAID is poised to earn millions of dollars from Moderna’s vaccine revenue, with individual officials also receiving up to $150,000 annually.

  Operation Warp Speed

  In December of 2020, Pfizer became the first company to receive an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the FDA for a COVID-19 vaccine. EUAs — which allow the distribution of an unapproved drug or other product during a declared public health emergency — are actually a pretty new thing: the first one was issued in 2005 so military personnel could get an anthrax vaccine. To get a full FDA approval, there needs to be substantial evidence that the product is safe and effective. But for an EUA, the FDA just needs to determine that it may be effective. Since EUAs are granted so quickly, the FDA doesn’t have enough time to gather all the information they’d usually need to approve a drug or vaccine.

  

  “Operation Warp Speed Vaccine Event” by The White House is licensed under CC PDM 1.0

  Pfizer CEO and chairman Albert Bourla has said his company was “operating at the speed of science” to bring a vaccine to market. However, a 2021 report in The BMJ revealed that this speed might have come at the expense of “data integrity and patient safety.” Brook Jackson, regional director for the Ventavia Research Group, which carried out these trials, told The BMJ that her former company “falsified data, unblinded patients, and employed inadequately trained vaccinators” in Pfizer’s pivotal phase 3 trial. Just some of the other concerning events witnessed included: adverse events not being reported correctly or at all, lack of reporting on protocol deviations, informed consent errors, and mislabeling of lab specimens. An audio recording of Ventavia employees from September 2020 revealed that they were so overwhelmed by issues arising during the study that they became unable to “quantify the types and number of errors” when assessing quality control. One Ventavia employee told The BMJ she’d never once seen a research environment as disorderly as Ventavia’s Pfizer vaccine trial, while another called it a “crazy mess.”

  Over the course of her two-decades-long career, Jackson has worked on hundreds of clinical trials, and two of her areas of expertise happen to be immunology and infectious diseases. She told me that from her first day on the Pfizer trial in September of 2020, she discovered “such egregious misconduct” that she recommended they stop enrolling participants into the study to do an internal audit.

  “To my complete shock and horror, Ventavia agreed to pause enrollment but then devised a plan to conceal what I found and to keep ICON and Pfizer in the dark,” Jackson said during our interview.

  “The site was in full clean-up mode. When missing data points were discovered the information was fabricated, including forged signatures on the informed consent forms.”

  A screenshot Jackson shared with me shows she was invited to a meeting titled “COVID 1001 Clean up Call” on Sept. 21, 2020. She refused to participate in the call.

  Jackson repeatedly warned her superiors about patient safety concerns and data integrity issues.

  “I knew that the entire world was counting on clinical researchers to develop a safe and effective vaccine and I did not want to be a part of that failure by not reporting what I saw,” she told me.

  When her employer failed to act, Jackson filed a complaint with the FDA on Sept. 25, and Ventavia fired her hours later that same day under the pretense that she was “not a good fit.” After reviewing her concerns over the phone, she claims the FDA never followed up or inspected the Ventavia site. Ten weeks later, the FDA authorized the EUA for the vaccine. Meanwhile, Pfizer hired Ventavia to handle the research for four more vaccine clinical trials, including one involving children and young adults, one for pregnant women, and another for the booster. Not only that, but Ventavia handled the clinical trials for Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and Novavax. Jackson is currently pursuing a False Claims Act lawsuit against Pfizer and Ventavia Research Group.

  Last year, Pfizer banked nearly $37 billion from its COVID vaccine, making it one of the most lucrative products in global history. Its overall revenues doubled in 2021 to reach $81.3 billion, and it’s slated to reach a record-breaking $98-$102 billion this year.

  “Corporations like Pfizer should never have been put in charge of a global vaccination rollout, because it was inevitable they would make life-and-death decisions based on what’s in the short-term interest of their shareholders,” writes Nick Dearden, director of Global Justice Now.

  As previously mentioned, it’s super common for pharmaceutical companies to fund the research on their own products. Here’s why that’s scary. One 1999 meta-analysis showed that industry-funded research is eight times less likely to achieve unfavorable results compared to independent trials. In other words, if a pharmaceutical company wants to prove that a medication, supplement, vaccine, or device is safe and effective, they’ll find a way.

  With that in mind, I recently examined the 2020 study on Pfizer’s COVID vaccine to see if there were any conflicts of interest. Lo and behold, the lengthy attached disclosure form shows that of the 29 authors, 18 are employees of Pfizer and hold stock in the company, one received a research grant from Pfizer during the study, and two reported being paid “personal fees” by Pfizer. In another 2021 study on the Pfizer vaccine, seven of the 15 authors are employees of and hold stock in Pfizer. The other eight authors received financial support from Pfizer during the study.

  

  Photo credit: Prasesh Shiwakoti (Lomash) via Unsplash

  As of the day I’m writing this, about 64% of Americans are fully vaccinated, and 76% have gotten at least one dose. The FDA has repeatedly promised “full transparency” when it comes to these vaccines. Yet in December of 2021, the FDA asked for permission to wait 75 years before releasing information pertaining to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, including safety data, effectiveness data, and adverse reaction reports. That means no one would see this information until the year 2096 — conveniently, after many of us have departed this crazy world. To recap: the FDA only needed 10 weeks to review the 329,000 pages worth of data before approving the EUA for the vaccine — but apparently, they need three-quarters of a century to publicize it.

  In response to the FDA’s ludicrous request, PHMPT — a group of over 200 medical and public health experts from Harvard, Yale, Brown, UCLA, and other institutions — filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act demanding that the FDA produce this data sooner. And their efforts paid off: U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman issued an order for the FDA to produce 12,000 pages by Jan. 31, and then at least 55,000 pages per month thereafter. In his statement to the FDA, Pittman quoted the late John F. Kennedy: “A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”

  As for why the FDA wanted to keep this data hidden, the first batch of documentation revealed that there were more than 1,200 vaccine-related deaths in just the first 90 days after the Pfizer vaccine was introduced. Of 32 pregnancies with a known outcome, 28 resulted in fetal death. The CDC also recently unveiled data showing a total of 1,088,560 reports of adverse events from COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 28, 2022. That data included 23,149 reports of deaths and 183,311 reports of serious injuries. There were 4,993 reported adverse events in pregnant women after getting vaccinated, including 1,597 reports of miscarriage or premature birth. A 2022 study published in JAMA, meanwhile, revealed that there have been more than 1,900 reported cases of myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle — mostly in people 30 and under, within 7 days of getting the vaccine. In those cases, 96% of people were hospitalized.

  “It is understandable that the FDA does not want independent scientists to review the documents it relied upon to license Pfizer’s vaccine given that it is not as effective as the FDA originally claimed, does not prevent transmission, does not prevent against certain emerging variants, can cause serious heart inflammation in younger individuals, and has numerous other undisputed safety issues,” writes Aaron Siri, the attorney representing PHMPT in its lawsuit against the FDA.

  Siri told me in an email that his office phone has been ringing off the hook in recent months.

  “We are overwhelmed by inquiries from individuals calling about an injury from a COVID-19 vaccine,” he said.

  By the way — it’s worth noting that adverse effects caused by COVID-19 vaccinations are still not covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Companies like Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson are protected under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which grants them total immunity from liability with their vaccines. And no matter what happens to you, you can’t sue the FDA for authorizing the EUA, or your employer for requiring you to get it, either. Billions of taxpayer dollars went to fund the research and development of these vaccines, and in Moderna’s case, licensing its vaccine was made possible entirely by public funds. But apparently, that still warrants citizens no insurance. Should something go wrong, you’re basically on your own.

  Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine business model: government gives them billions, gives them immunity for any injuries or if doesn’t work, promotes their products for free, and mandates their products. Sounds crazy? Yes, but it is our current reality.

  — Aaron Siri (@AaronSiriSG) February 2, 2022

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

  The Hypocrisy of “Misinformation”

  I find it interesting that “misinformation” has become such a pervasive term lately, but more alarmingly, that it’s become an excuse for blatant censorship on social media and in journalism. It’s impossible not to wonder what’s driving this movement to control the narrative. In a world where we still very clearly don’t have all the answers, why shouldn’t we be open to exploring all the possibilities? And while we’re on the subject, what about all of the COVID-related untruths that have been spread by our leaders and officials? Why should they get a free pass?

  

  Photo credit: @upgradeur_life, www.instagram.com/upgradeur_life

  Fauci, President Biden, and the CDC’s Rochelle Walensky all promised us with total confidence the vaccine would prevent us from getting or spreading COVID, something we now know is a myth. (In fact, the CDC recently had to change its very definition of “vaccine ” to promise “protection” from a disease rather than “immunity”— an important distinction). At one point, the New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH) and former Governor Andrew Cuomo prepared a social media campaign with misleading messaging that the vaccine was “approved by the FDA” and “went through the same rigorous approval process that all vaccines go through,” when in reality the FDA only authorized the vaccines under an EUA, and the vaccines were still undergoing clinical trials. While the NYS DOH eventually responded to pressures to remove these false claims, a few weeks later the Department posted on Facebook that “no serious side effects related to the vaccines have been reported,” when in actuality, roughly 16,000 reports of adverse events and over 3,000 reports of serious adverse events related to a COVID-19 vaccination had been reported in the first two months of use.

  One would think we’d hold the people in power to the same level of accountability — if not more — than an average citizen. So, in the interest of avoiding hypocrisy, should we “cancel” all these experts and leaders for their “misinformation,” too?

  Vaccine-hesitant people have been fired from their jobs, refused from restaurants, denied the right to travel and see their families, banned from social media channels, and blatantly shamed and villainized in the media. Some have even lost custody of their children. These people are frequently labeled “anti-vax,” which is misleading given that many (like the NBA’s Jonathan Isaac) have made it repeatedly clear they are not against all vaccines, but simply making a personal choice not to get this one. (As such, I’ll suggest switching to a more accurate label: “pro-choice.”) Fauci has repeatedly said federally mandating the vaccine would not be “appropriate” or “enforceable” and doing so would be “encroaching upon a person’s freedom to make their own choice.” So it’s remarkable that still, some individual employers and U.S. states, like my beloved Massachusetts, have taken it upon themselves to enforce some of these mandates, anyway. Meanwhile, a Feb. 7 bulletin posted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security indicates that if you spread information that undermines public trust in a government institution (like the CDC or FDA), you could be considered a terrorist. In case you were wondering about the current state of free speech.

  The definition of institutional oppression is “the systematic mistreatment of people within a social identity group, supported and enforced by the society and its institutions, solely based on the person’s membership in the social identity group.” It is defined as occurring when established laws and practices “systematically reflect and produce inequities based on one’s membership in targeted social identity groups.” Sound familiar?

  As you continue to watch the persecution of the unvaccinated unfold, remember this. Historically, when society has oppressed a particular group of people whether due to their gender, race, social class, religious beliefs, or sexuality, it’s always been because they pose some kind of threat to the status quo. The same is true for today’s unvaccinated. Since we know the vaccine doesn’t prevent the spread of COVID, however, this much is clear: the unvaccinated don’t pose a threat to the health and safety of their fellow citizens — but rather, to the bottom line of powerful pharmaceutical giants and the many global organizations they finance. And with more than $100 billion on the line in 2021 alone, I can understand the motivation to silence them.

  The unvaccinated have been called selfish. Stupid. Fauci has said it’s “almost inexplicable” that they are still resisting. But is it? What if these people aren’t crazy or uncaring, but rather have — unsurprisingly so — lost their faith in the agencies that are supposed to protect them? Can you blame them?

  Citizens are being bullied into getting a vaccine that was created, evaluated, and authorized in under a year, with no access to the bulk of the safety data for said vaccine, and no rights whatsoever to pursue legal action if they experience adverse effects from it. What these people need right now is to know they can depend on their fellow citizens to respect their choices, not fuel the segregation by launching a full-fledged witch hunt. Instead, for some inexplicable reason I imagine stems from fear, many continue rallying around big pharma rather than each other. A 2022 Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports survey of Democratic voters found that 59% of respondents support a government policy requiring unvaccinated individuals to remain confined in their home at all times, 55% support handing a fine to anyone who won’t get the vaccine, and 48% think the government should flat out imprison people who publicly question the efficacy of the vaccines on social media, TV, or online in digital publications. Even Orwell couldn’t make this stuff up.

  

  Photo credit: DJ Paine on Unsplash

  Let me be very clear. While there are a lot of bad actors out there — there are also a lot of well-meaning people in the science and medical industries, too. I’m lucky enough to know some of them. There are doctors who fend off pharma reps’ influence and take an extremely cautious approach to prescribing. Medical journal authors who fiercely pursue transparency and truth — as is evident in “The Influence of Money on Medical Science,” a report by the first female editor of JAMA. Pharmacists, like Dan Schneider, who refuse to fill prescriptions they deem risky or irresponsible. Whistleblowers, like Graham and Jackson, who tenaciously call attention to safety issues for pharma products in the approval pipeline. And I’m certain there are many people in the pharmaceutical industry, like Panara and my grandfather, who pursued this field with the goal of helping others, not just earning a six- or seven-figure salary. We need more of these people. Sadly, it seems they are outliers who exist in a corrupt, deep-rooted system of quid-pro-quo relationships. They can only do so much.

  I’m not here to tell you whether or not you should get the vaccine or booster doses. What you put in your body is not for me — or anyone else — to decide. It’s not a simple choice, but rather one that may depend on your physical condition, medical history, age, religious beliefs, and level of risk tolerance. My grandfather passed away in 2008, and lately, I find myself missing him more than ever, wishing I could talk to him about the pandemic and hear what he makes of all this madness. I don’t really know how he’d feel about the COVID vaccine, or whether he would have gotten it or encouraged me to. What I do know is that he’d listen to my concerns, and he’d carefully consider them. He would remind me my feelings are valid. His eyes would light up and he’d grin with amusement as I fervidly expressed my frustration. He’d tell me to keep pushing forward, digging deeper, asking questions. In his endearing Bronx accent, he used to always say: “go get ‘em, kid.” If I stop typing for a moment and listen hard enough, I can almost hear him saying it now.

  People keep saying “trust the science.” But when trust is broken, it must be earned back. And as long as our legislative system, public health agencies, physicians, and research journals keep accepting pharmaceutical money (with strings attached) — and our justice system keeps letting these companies off the hook when their negligence causes harm, there’s no reason for big pharma to change. They’re holding the bag, and money is power.

  I have a dream that one day, we’ll live in a world where we are armed with all the thorough, unbiased data necessary to make informed decisions about our health. Alas, we’re not even close. What that means is that it’s up to you to educate yourself as much as possible, and remain ever-vigilant in evaluating information before forming an opinion. You can start by reading clinical trials yourself, rather than relying on the media to translate them for you. Scroll to the bottom of every single study to the “conflicts of interest” section and find out who funded it. Look at how many subjects were involved. Confirm whether or not blinding was used to eliminate bias. You may also choose to follow Public Citizen’s Health Research Group’s rule whenever possible: that means avoiding a new drug until five years after an FDA approval (not an EUA, an actual approval) — when there’s enough data on the long-term safety and effectiveness to establish that the benefits outweigh the risks. When it comes to the news, you can seek out independent, nonprofit outlets, which are less likely to be biased due to pharma funding. And most importantly, when it appears an organization is making concerted efforts to conceal information from you — like the FDA recently did with the COVID vaccine — it’s time to ask yourself: why? What are they trying to hide?

  In the 2019 film “Dark Waters” — which is based on the true story of one of the greatest corporate cover-ups in American history — Mark Ruffalo as attorney Rob Bilott says: “The system is rigged. They want us to think it’ll protect us, but that’s a lie. We protect us. We do. Nobody else. Not the companies. Not the scientists. Not the government. Us.”

  Words to live by.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 22:30

• Russia Urges BRICS Nations To Create Own 'SWIFT' System, Warns 'Sanctions Are Destroying International Order'
  Russia Urges BRICS Nations To Create Own ‘SWIFT’ System, Warns ‘Sanctions Are Destroying International Order’

  The dollar reserve system is facing its greatest threat yet.

  Russian Finance Minister Anatoly Siluanov said on Saturday that the five BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa  – could mitigate the backlash of Western sanctions against Russia on their economies by pooling their efforts and using a range of financial instruments at their disposal.

  “The current crisis is man-made and BRICS countries have all the instruments necessary to mitigate its consequences for the national and global economies,” Siluanov was cited as saying by the Russian Finance Ministry.

  

  The minister blamed economic sanctions on Russia for “destroying the foundation of the existing international monetary and financial system based on the US dollar” and urged BRICS to rely more on their national currencies in foreign trade, integrate payment systems and create an alternative to the SWIFT payment messaging platform.

  Siluanov on Friday told a ministerial meeting with BRICS that the global economic situation had worsened substantially due to the sanctions, a statement from his ministry said on Friday.

  “This pushes us to the need to speed up work in the following areas: the use of national currencies for export-import operations, the integration of payment systems and cards, our own financial messaging system and the creation of an independent BRICS rating agency,” Siluanov said.

  

  As The Statesman reports, central banks of the BRICS countries have already agreed to conduct the fifth test of a banking mechanism that will allow them to jointly pool “alternative currency” reserves to shield their economies from outside shocks, the ministry said.

  Siluanov’s comments echoed Dmitry Medvedev’s comments on Telegram.

  The Deputy Head of Russia’s Security Council warned of the geopolitical consequences of Western sanctions and the weaponization of the US dollar reserve system:

  “Their result will be a destroyed international order and extremely difficult consequences for the world economy and the life of individual countries,” adding that:

  “It will be clear to everyone that the supposed effectiveness of sanctions is an absolute lie.”

  

  Perhaps even more ominously, Medvedev believes that anti-Russian sanctions can be regarded as an act of aggression:

  “The whole combination of the legal and political circumstances prompts the conclusion that sanctions in the current situation can be qualified as an act of aggression against Russia and a form of hybrid war,” Medvedev wrote, adding:

  “In the first place, when they are aimed at undermining economic independence, and, consequently, state sovereignty, which endangers the very existence of the state. As a matter of fact, as our opponents say, it is a declaration of economic war.”

  If this all sounds like the rantings of a biased politician under the control of Russia’s propaganda arm, that maybe so… but it is also clear to many that the ‘weaponization’ of the dollar (payment system) could well have serious unintended consequences.

  For instance, First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) told The Financial Times, that the recent financial sanctions imposed on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine are threatening to weaken the dominance of the U.S. petrodollar as the world currency,

  Russia had been planning for years to reduce its dependence on the petrodollar since the United States imposed sanctions in retaliation for its annexation of Crimea in 2014.

  The current crisis in Ukraine has only accelerated those plans… and it now seems the entire BRICS group may be ready to cross the chasm as Bretton Woods III begins to form.

  The implications, needless to say, are staggering (and, worse, while ZoltanPoszar does not explicitly state it, he clearly believes that world war is coming):

  Empires fall and rise. Currencies fall and rise. Wars have winners and losers.

  When Wellington beat Napoleon, the trade was to buy gilts. I am no expert on geopolitics, but I am an interest rate strategist and I think the level of inflation and interest rates and the size of the Fed’s balance sheet will depend on the steady state that emerges after this conflict is over. Three is a magic number:

  The four prices of money are managed via Basel III and central banks as DoLR.

  The four pillars of commodity trading are shaped by war, hopefully not WWIII.

  The new world order will bring a new monetary system – Bretton Woods III.

  A BRICS-based payment system would be the ultimate challenge to the dollar-hegemon-based system in place today. Even if this is nothing but talk, it underscores the fact that the dollar is on shaky ground. US policymakers would be wise to consider future dollar weaponization carefully.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 22:00

• China Insiders Steal Billions From US Investors
  China Insiders Steal Billions From US Investors

  Op-Ed authored by Anders Corr via The Epoch Times,

  China’s corporate insiders are cheating small American investors of billions of dollars through advance information that enables lucrative trades just before the stock price falls.

  

  The total losses that insiders of Chinese companies listed on American exchanges have avoided by selling prior to price drops are at least $10 billion between 2016 and the middle of 2021, according to a new study of their security filings.

  Chinese company shares fell an average of 21 percent a year after the Chinese company insiders sold large quantities of stock, compared to a 2 percent rise after insiders from American companies sold. Given inflation, that American number zeros out.

  The Alibaba Case

  The Wall Street Journal covered the study and used Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. as an example. In October 2020, “Alibaba’s payments affiliate, Ant Group Co., was preparing for its initial public offering, a move that would have likely increased the value of Alibaba’s one-third stake,” according to the Journal.

  But Alibaba’s founder and CEO, Jack Ma, publicly criticized China’s financial regulators, who canceled the listing. Instead of rising, which the market predicted, Alibaba shares fell 8 percent on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).

  One day prior to Ma’s announcement, Sky Scraper Enterprises Ltd. sold approximately $150 million worth of Alibaba stock. An Alibaba insider controls Sky Scraper, but nobody knows his or her identity.

  Whoever controls Sky Scraper, according to the Journal, which cited the Financial Times, “was one of the company’s best-paid executives in recent years and had been granted huge swaths of stock as compensation.”

  This unknown Alibaba executive avoided losses totaling hundreds of millions of dollars through what appears to be insider trading. American and other investors who got caught on their back feet—because they couldn’t know the inside information no matter how much research they did—apparently got cheated.

  The SEC, Big Banks, and China Collude Against Small Investors

  The researchers—Robert Jackson, Bradford Lynch, and Daniel Taylor—point out that U.S. securities law actually advantages and enables China’s insiders relative to those in the United States.

  “Executives and other major shareholders at American companies have to disclose their trades within two days in a filing that is posted on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website and freely available to investors,” according to the Journal.

  That deters bad behavior because American insiders do not want to appear to have acted on inside information. They don’t want to signal other market participants to sell the stock and, thus, decrease its value.

  

  China’s insiders don’t have the same problem because U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulators treat them with kid gloves. To encourage China’s companies to list on NYSE and other U.S. exchanges in the early 1990s, regulators gave China’s companies several key preferences relative to U.S. companies.

  For example, unlike American insiders, China’s insiders don’t have to report their trades in a timely and highly public manner electronically but instead can mail paper disclosures. The paper reporting may, by law, be thrown out after three months.

  That preference gives China’s insiders weeks before their trades are discovered and a window of just three months for investors with a lot of time on their hands to visit the SEC offices and discover the trades. Traders typically don’t have that time, so China’s insider trades are rarely discovered and seldom signal the market in the timely manner required to shield American investors from unfair losses.

  As Western institutional investors increasingly invested in China stocks since the 1990s, however, they acquired an interest in lobbying U.S. regulators to continue providing China’s companies with regulatory advantages, which kept up their Chinese stock prices.

  That sordid party is ending, but addicted institutional investors are scheming an afterparty and trying to smuggle out their drugs, which are the tanking Chinese assets.

  SEC Loopholes for Chinese Firms Should Be Closed Immediately

  The three researchers want the insider trading loophole closed, but, as usual, the SEC is dragging its feet and continues to give China’s companies a major advantage that likely bilks small American investors of billions of dollars.

  There are other SEC loopholes for China’s publicly-listed companies as well. The SEC does not require the same auditing standards of Chinese companies listed on U.S. exchanges that are required of U.S. companies.

  Some of these auditing loopholes are being closed through legislation rather than quick executive action, which should be the rule. The executive branch is more beholden to big bank lobbying on China than is Congress.

  But even this legislation is taking years to effect. Audits are only extracted from China’s companies through the too-gradual threat of delisting, with a three-year warning. And new loopholes are being negotiated with China by the Biden administration at this very moment.

  Due to the threat of delisting, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) is proposing that it jointly investigate with U.S. and other authorities, which would give it influence on decisions and a patina of respectability that it does not deserve as a democratically unaccountable authority. It would also provide plenty of opportunities for Beijing officials to attempt to corrupt American SEC officials who are supposed to be laser-focused on integrity.

  

  There is a more significant political reason for the proposal as well. “China doesn’t want to be seen as making concessions just to the U.S.,” a China financial analyst told the Wall Street Journal. Thus, China’s regulators are negotiating face-saving measures for Beijing and advantages for Chinese companies that they don’t deserve, given their lack of transparency.

  The CSRC should be told in no uncertain terms to pound sand. U.S. authorities should investigate China’s companies listed on U.S. exchanges.

  Yet the Biden administration is showing weakness. China’s companies could hire Western auditors that subcontract key work to Chinese auditors without checking the work closely. This auditing chain that relies on auditors in China—who are beholden to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and unreachable by American and other democratic authorities—will be unreliable and should be forbidden by the SEC.

  As usual, the devil is in the details.

  All of these loopholes and bargaining by the Biden administration give as much time and space as possible to U.S. banks to unravel their positions, even as their research departments publicly claim that China assets are underpriced. Small American investors, who do not have the time to do the research, have paid the price.

  Last month, according to Institute of International Finance (IIF) data, $11.2 billion flowed out of China bonds, and $6.3 billion flowed out of China stocks. It is an “unprecedented dynamic that suggests a market rotation” away from China, according to the IIF.

  Compare that to emerging markets ex-China, which saw $10.8 billion flow into debt and an outflow of less than $400 million from stocks, according to the IIF data. Emerging markets ex-China means emerging markets except for China.

  Stronger US Government Action Needed

  U.S. loopholes that give China’s companies and insiders advantages are an obvious mistake of current and past administrations since the early 1990s—none of which fixed the problem, despite years of China’s economic and military growth into an existential threat to both the United States and democracy more generally.

  The political influence of the big banks, all of which are deeply invested in China, is mainly to blame. So the researchers are right—inside trading loopholes for China’s companies should be closed immediately.

  But much more is needed.

  Even if the SEC closes all loopholes and preferences that favor China, China’s insiders could continue to trade on inside information and escape legal consequences if they are far from American law enforcement. That China’s insiders are beyond American law—and the law of other democracies—needs to be corrected.

  Anyone caught insider trading anywhere in the world, if outside the reach of law enforcement in democracies, should at minimum be subject to individualized economic and visa sanctions by democratic governments. This is absolutely necessary for democratic accountability, the rule of law, fair treatment of small investors, and the smooth functioning of international markets.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 21:30

• American Airlines To Offer Bus Service In Place Of Connecting Flights Due To Soaring Gas Prices, Pilot Shortage
  American Airlines To Offer Bus Service In Place Of Connecting Flights Due To Soaring Gas Prices, Pilot Shortage

  As gas prices continue to rise into the peak driving (and flying season), expect to see more bizarre twists in conventional behavior… like airlines offering bus service in place of connecting flights.

  Take American Airlines, which according to the Associated Press is “expanding” its network into and out of Philadelphia with a new bus service that will connect the carrier’s hub with two other airports in the region. Starting in June, the company will begin offering buses as connecting flights to and from Philadelphia International Airport with both Lehigh Valley International Airport and Atlantic City International Airport.

  

  Passengers traveling to or from Philly, Allentown or Atlantic City will be able to book connecting itineraries through American, according to The Points Guy: travelers whose trips begin in Allentown or Atlantic City will check their bags and go through security as if they were taking a normal flight. However, passengers will board a bus rather than a flight to Philly, where they will be dropped off at their terminals without having to go through security again. Bags will be automatically transferred to their connecting flights. Similarly, travelers landing in Philly will head to a dedicated gate from where the bus will pick up. Bags will be automatically transferred to the bus.

  The buses will consist of 35 leather seats, complimentary Wi-Fi, streaming options and power outlets.

  American’s connecting bus service will operate three round-trips per day between Atlantic City and Philly and two daily runs to and from Allentown. Tickets will go on sale Monday, with trips scheduled to begin June 3.

  According to Philly Voice, American said that the forthcoming bus service will be an “easier way” for passengers to travel between the airports, which of course is laughable propaganda. In reality, the airline’s “expansion” into busing is driven by pilot shortages and higher gas prices, Airline Weekly reported, forcing carriers like American to explore more cost-effective travel options for passengers.

  Staffing shortages have already forced American to suspend dozens of routes flown by regional affiliates across its network this spring and summer. American’s regional affiliate, American Eagle, services flights from Allentown to Chicago and Charlotte.

  The airline previously operated flights between Philly and Allentown until the route was suspended in May 2020. The two airports are separated by only 73 miles.

  Atlantic City International Airport is a new addition to American’s map. Before merging with American in 2015, U.S. Airways served Atlantic City nonstop from Philly on and off again until 2003. The two airports are separated by only 56 miles.

  Next: as part of a more aggressive cost-saving plan American (which has much stock to repurchase) will generously offer its transatlantic passengers the far more convenient option of jumping on a Gloucester fishing trawler to arrive in Dover two delightful weeks later.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 21:00

• JPMorgan Predicts That Global Commodities Prices May Rise By 40%… Or More
  JPMorgan Predicts That Global Commodities Prices May Rise By 40%… Or More

  Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times,

  Commodities prices could rise by 40 percent and will likely continue to go higher, according to a note from JPMorgan Chase from April 7, as raw materials hit a record high last month following Western sanctions on Russia due to its invasion of Ukraine.

  

  Russia is a main supplier for up to 10 percent of global energy production and about 20 percent of global wheat production.

  The commodities affected include oil, which is already up 33 percent from the same month the previous year, while natural gas has gone up by 65 percent since the invasion roiled the markets.

  Metals excluding gold, such as copper, are up by 7 percent from 2021, while wheat has surged upward by 33 percent.

  The bank said it was reviewing the long-term positioning in commodities by global investors, and compared that to allocations in cash, stocks, and bonds.

  “In dollar terms, the total open interest of commodity futures ex gold stands at around $1.4 trillion, which, although high by historical standards, looks much lower compared to the stock of equities, bonds, and cash in the world,” said the bank.

  JPMorgan said that while investors’ implied commodity allocation of 0.72 percent is higher than the average seen after the Lehman Brothers crash, it is still well below the record highs of 2008 and 2011.

  “In the current juncture, where the need for inflation hedges is more elevated, it is conceivable to see longer-term commodity allocations eventually rising above 1 percent of total financial assets globally, surpassing the previous highs seen during 2008 or 2011,” said the JPMorgan note.

  Commodities in those categories could see another 30 to 40 percent upside from current levels, according to the bank’s experts, who said that while investors have increased their allocation to commodity assets over the past year above historical averages, they have plenty of room to overweigh them in their portfolios.

  The current numbers suggest further scope for gains in raw materials, according to the note, as commodities are far into record territory and that there is “room for further increases in investors’ allocation to commodities,” in a period of rising inflation, according to the bank.

  The spike in commodities is being fueled by increased demand from consumers who are spending more in a post-pandemic world, but the Western sanctions on Russia have worsened the global supply of those resources.

  Already high inflation rates are being worsened by the conflict, spurring tougher measures from the Federal Reserve this year and prompting investors to assess reshuffling the weighting of assets between stocks, bonds, and raw materials in their portfolios.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 20:30

• 7 In 10 Americans See Russia As An Enemy
  7 In 10 Americans See Russia As An Enemy

  Americans’ views of Russia have soured since the invasion of Ukraine, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck details below, a significant 70 percent of U.S. respondents now say that they would consider Russia as an enemy, up from 41 percent in January.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  It’s an issue that appears to have created some consent across the aisle, with 72 percent of Democrats and 69 percent of Republicans now calling Russia an enemy. The two parties have seen divides deepen throughout the Trump era – including on the issue of Russia – but seem to be finding common ground over views on the rival superpower in light of the war in Ukraine.

  At the same time, only 6 percent of Americans say they have confidence in Russian President Vladimir Putin. This is in stark contrast to the 72 percent of people who have expressed confidence in his Ukrainian counterpart, President Volodymyr Zelensky.

  According to Gallup, U.S. perceptions of Russia have been rocky throughout Putin’s era. While they started off favorable in 2006, with 73 percent of Americans calling Russia a friend or ally, they have seen a downward trend ever since 2013, following the war with Georgia and then the annexation of Crimea.

  

  While sentiments seemed to warm somewhat under the Trump administration, and Pew polls even indicated that 49 percent of Americans considered the country as merely a competitor at the beginning of this year, the first chart above shows that number has sunk once more.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 20:00

• Psaki Calls Abbott's Plan To Bus Illegal Aliens To DC A "Publicity Stunt"
  Psaki Calls Abbott’s Plan To Bus Illegal Aliens To DC A “Publicity Stunt”

  Authored by Nick Ciolino via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  White House press secretary Jen Psaki is calling Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s plan to bus illegal aliens who have crossed the border to Washington a “publicity stunt.”

  

  Abbott on Wednesday said that his government will provide charter buses or flights from Texas to Washington to transport illegal aliens released from federal custody into his state on the southern border.

  Abbott says Texas has been “overwhelmed by hordes of illegal immigrants who are being dropped off by the Biden administration” and that the state will send illegal aliens to Washington “where the Biden administration will be able to more immediately address the needs of the people that they are allowing to come across our border.”

  Psaki responded to the Texas Republican Thursday saying that Abbott does not have the authority to “compel anyone to get on a bus.”

  “I think it’s pretty clear this is a publicity stunt,” Psaki said. “[Abbott’s] own office admits that a migrant would need to voluntarily be transported and that he can’t compel them to.  Because again, enforcement of our country’s immigration laws lies with the federal government, not a state.”

  Doocy: “The Texas Governor is saying that he’s going to start busing border crossers to Washington D.C., when they get here are you guys going to help them find a place to stay and something for them to do?”

  Psaki: “I think it’s pretty clear this is a publicity stunt.”

  Watch: pic.twitter.com/9cSFMOm7CL

  — El American (@ElAmerican_) April 7, 2022

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

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, another Republican, also vowed this week to send illegal aliens from his state to Delaware, which is President Joe Biden’s home state.

  This back and forth between red states and Washington comes days after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced plans to end its Title 42 health provision on May 23—the rule first invoked in March of 2020 to minimize the spread of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus by ensuring that only essential travel occurred at U.S. borders.

  The rule put into place under former President Donald Trump directed that illegal aliens could be quickly expelled back into Mexico as a pandemic precaution, rather than be processed under Title 8 immigration law, which is a much more protracted process inside the United States.

  When asked Thursday what the federal government plans for the estimated 18,000 migrants a day expected at the southern border when Title 42 ends, Psaki said the federal government is “taking steps to convey this is not the time to come” to the United States.

  “Individuals who come to the border—this is what would happen: CBP (Customs and Border Protection) and ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) would work together to ensure that anyone who enters the country without authorization is put into immigration proceedings as quickly as possible,” said Psaki.

  Psaki revealed Wednesday that illegal aliens that are allowed into the United States as part of an Alternative to Detention (ATD) program, are given cellphones and ankle monitors meant to track the individuals who crossed the border to ensure they show up for scheduled court dates.

  She repeated Thursday that nearly 80 percent of non-citizens waiting in the interior under prosecutorial discretion have either received a notice to appear or are still within their 60-day window to report.

  Isabel van Brugen and Jack Phillips contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 19:30

• "Unique Atmospheric Sight" Over Alaska Ignites Wild Social Media Speculation 
  “Unique Atmospheric Sight” Over Alaska Ignites Wild Social Media Speculation 

  v Thursday morning, footage of a bizarre cloud formation over Alaska’s Lazy Mountain sparked a tweetstorm as people searched for answers. 

  “The Russians?” Aliens?!” “Plane crash?” People were stunned by the vortex-like cloud posted on Twitter and across all social media platforms. 

  

  The mysterious cloud went viral, forcing the Alaska State Troopers and the Alaska Rescue Coordination Center to release a public advisory statement: 

  “There have been no reports of overdue aircraft or ELT activations indicating an aircraft crash. 

  “A rescue team on a helicopter flew a mission around the Lazy Mountain area this morning and located nothing suspicious and there were no signs of crashed aircraft,” Alaska State Troopers said. 

  Others posted similar photos and speculated it could’ve been a rocket launch, a meteor, or even a volcano. 

  

  After Alaska State Troopers flew a reconnaissance mission in the area, they found nothing. Officials eventually revealed the bizarre cloud was a contrail for a commercial jet. 

  “Further investigation revealed that a large commercial jet was flying in that area around the time that the photos and video were taken. The aircraft was contacted and reported normal flight operations on its way to JFK airport in New York. Troopers believe that the photos and videos showed a contrail from the commercial jet combined with the rising sun which together caused the unique atmospheric sight,” the statement read. 

  Even though officials offered their explanation, some on social media are skeptical that the crazy vortex cloud could’ve been something else. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 19:00

• Biden Signs Bill Downgrading Russia's Trade Status, Paving Way For Tariffs
  Biden Signs Bill Downgrading Russia’s Trade Status, Paving Way For Tariffs

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  On Friday, President Biden signed into law a bill that suspends normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus. He also signed legislation codifying an executive order he signed last month banning the import of Russian oil, gas, and coal.

  The Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act strips the two nations of their “most favored nation trade status,” which paves the way for tariffs and other trade restrictions. The bill blasted through the Senate in a vote of 100-0 and overwhelmingly passed the House with only three Republican Reps. voting against it.

  

  The votes demonstrate the bipartisan support for the US-led Western sanctions campaign against Russia. Also on Friday, the EU imposed new sanctions on Moscow that include a ban on Russian coal and other products. It’s estimated the new measures will slash 10% of the EU’s total imports from Russia.

  Under the coal ban, the EU plans to wind down imports over the next four months. The sanctions are significant as the EU relies on Russia for about 45% of its coal imports, and the ban is expected to impact about $8.7 billion of Russian exports.

  Responding to the ban, Kremlin spokesman  Dmitry Peskov said Russian coal would be sent to other markets. “Shipments of coal, as Europe refuses [its] consumption … will be redirected to alternative markets,” Peskov said, according to Tass. “Of course, coal is still a very popular commodity.”

  Meanwhile, hawks in the West are eyeing ratcheting anti-Russian measures further as the inter-EU debate continues over whether to halt Russian energy into Europe…

  Time for democratic countries buying this Russia energy to start taxing these imports. Revenues from new tariffs could be used to subsidize energy consumption of the poorest in these countries and to provide funds for a Ukrainian reconstruction fund. https://t.co/xujWyfJb1G

  — Michael McFaul (@McFaul) April 7, 2022

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

  So far, the sanctions campaign has done nothing to stop the fighting in Ukraine. While Russia’s economy is taking a serious hit, Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to be unphased. In March, his approval rating reached 83%, up from 69% in January.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 18:30

• Calm Before The Storm? Transpacific Sea-Freight Rates Fall Amid China COVID Lockdowns 
  Calm Before The Storm? Transpacific Sea-Freight Rates Fall Amid China COVID Lockdowns 

  Top Chinese manufacturers have shuttered operations as expanding COVID-19 lockdowns choke off logistical networks from factories to ports and simultaneously alleviate congested transpacific shipping lanes. Though, once factories in China reopen, another wave of supply chain chaos will slam US West Coast ports. 

  Stringent government measures to mitigate the spread of COVID have resulted in widespread lockdowns in Shanghai. Tens of millions of people are locked down in the industrial metro area. Factories, such as Tesla’s and component makers for Apple, have restricted output or closed altogether. 

  Disruptions to factories, trucking, warehouses, and port operations in Shanghai have depressed shipping rates because the flow of goods to the US has come to a crawl. 

  A 40-foot container from Shanghai to Los Angeles slumped 3.2%, from $9,112 a week ago to $8,824 this week. The benchmark transpacific route is down more than 30% from the September peak of $12,424 but still five times higher than in April 2019. 

  

  The market for ocean freight is cooling because of the disruptions in China. Ahead of the lockdowns, we described demand would sink for container ships. We outlined once factories reopened, another shipping crisis would materialize: 

  This may lead to depressed shipping rates on an intermediate basis because of the lack of demand. However, long term, shipping rates should rebound due to a backlog of products that would need to be shipped once factories reopen.  

  Michael Every of Rabobank agrees with our view that China’s Zero COVID policies to stop the spread will ease US port backlogs. He said, “it also means far fewer people will be getting their orders from China at all,” adding that “this disruption might be structural if it is going to be China’s policy response to a virus.” 

  What comes next is a giant backlog of Chinese products that will need to be shipped to the US. Once China reopens, US importers will be racing to secure containers, which will drive shipping rates higher. That should result in a tsunami of freight that will clog up US West Coast ports and may induce even more supply chain-related inflation. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 18:00

• German Defense Minister: No More Bundeswehr Weapons For Ukraine
  German Defense Minister: No More Bundeswehr Weapons For Ukraine

  Since the start of Russia’s military incursion into Ukraine, the West has been all too eager to supply the Ukrainians with weapons, from javelin anti-aircraft missiles to Soviet-era T-72M tanks. But as the European powers contemplate their own security needs in the face of the growing ‘threat’ from the East, it looks like that generosity has reached its limits – despite Volodymyr Zelensky’s claims that the West has blood on its hands.

  

  In an interview with Die Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung published on Saturday, Germany’s Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht told a German paper that while “we all have an obligation to support Ukraine in its courageous fight” with “supplies from the Bundeswehr’s stockpiles” Germany has “reached [its] limit,” and that the German military must be “able to ensure” the country’s defense.

  To be sure, “…that doesn’t mean we can’t do more for Ukraine,” Lambrecht added, suggesting that Kiev could directly buy equipment it needed from German manufacturers directly. The minister pointed out that the German government “was constantly coordinating” with the authorities in Kiev to facilitate such purchases.

  When asked exactly what kind of weaponry was being considered for delivery to Ukraine, Lambrecht demurred, refusing to go into detail. “There are good reasons why we have classified precisely this information as secret,” she said.

  She also claimed that it was Ukraine that “emphatically” asked Germany not to divulge specifics.

  “One must always bear in mind: The moment the deliveries are published in detail, Russia would also have this information. And that alone would have military strategic implications,” she said.

  But the most important reason for cutting off military support for the Ukrainians? Fear of provoking the Russian bear, which is already playing havoc with the German economy with its weapons.

  Lambrecht admitted there’s a concern in Germany that weapons supplies could trigger a reaction by Moscow and “war may expand to other areas.” That’s why, she said, it is important “that we act very prudently and with a cool head in these difficult and horrific times.”

  We can’t help but wonder: is this a model that the rest of Europe will follow, for fear that Vladimir Putin just might launch WWIII?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 17:00

• Rickards: "They've Secretly Raised Your Taxes"
  Rickards: “They’ve Secretly Raised Your Taxes”

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  Inflation is not a guessing game anymore; it’s here. Every time you buy gas at the pump or groceries at the supermarket or book a plane ticket, the price increases are staring you in the face.

  The problem is that inflation cannot be isolated. It’s not limited to what you pay to fill up your car, for example. Truckers have to pay the same higher prices for diesel fuel, which add to transportation costs and to the final prices of delivered goods.

  It’s a clear example of the ripple effect.

  That much is clear. What is less clear are the thousands of ways that inflation hurts you that are invisible. The most important of these is that inflation is a tax.

  

  The government borrows dollars, and you earn dollars. Taxation is one way that governments take money from citizens to pay off government debt. But taxes are unpopular and hard to get approved by Congress.

  Inflation works much better.

  It reduces your real income since the dollars you earn are worth less. And it reduces the government debt because the money the government owes is easier to repay for the same reason – the dollars are worth less.

  So inflation works the same as a tax increase except that you can’t see it and Congress doesn’t have to lift a finger.

  Nice, right?

  Sleight of Hand

  Another damaging effect of inflation has to do with the difference between nominal income and real income. Nominal income is the amount of money you make measured in dollars. Real income is the amount those dollars are actually worth when adjusted for inflation.

  For example, your wages might have gone up 5% (that’s the latest annualized wage increase as of April 1, according to the Labor Department). That’s a nice gain, but with inflation of 7.9% (also the latest data we have), your real wages actually went down 2.9% (5.0 – 7.9 = -2.9).

  You got a raise in nominal terms, but you took a pay cut in real terms. Many people are not familiar with this simple formula for converting nominal gains to real gains. But everyone is familiar with how long their paycheck lasts.

  More and more Americans are finding that by the time they pay the rent or mortgage, put gas in the car, buy groceries and pay some medical bills, they’re out of money. They’re waiting for the next paycheck. There’s nothing left over for a dinner out, a new pair of shoes or a visit with family members.

  The economic consequences of this decline in real incomes are huge. If you buy coffee at the grocery store instead of going to Starbucks or go jogging instead of paying a visit to the gym, then service and retail industries all around the country start to suffer.

  This can be followed by layoffs at some of those outlets and even more cuts in discretionary spending as the laid-off workers tighten their belts.

  China Locks Down 26 Million in Shanghai

  A lot of the inflation today comes from the supply side, not the demand side. It has to do with supply chain disruptions and the cascade of consequences from the economic sanctions because of the war in Ukraine. None of these situations will show any improvement in the short run.

  They may actually get worse, as the situation in China suggests…

  China is currently experiencing a severe outbreak of COVID. The reason for this is China’s badly flawed and ineffective zero COVID policy. When a case does emerge, they immediately shut down the surrounding area, quarantine everyone, test everyone, trace any contacts and send the infected to isolation camps for two weeks or longer.

  When an outbreak spreads, they will lock down entire cities and ban all transportation to or from that city. This is happening in Shanghai now. The entire city of 26 million has been shut down. Citizens are being ordered to stay inside. Visits outside for food and water are severely limited.

  Shanghai is one of the largest cities in the world and is adjacent to Ningbo, one of the largest container cargo ports in the world. With the latest lockdown, you can expect further supply chain disruptions. China’s policies are a drag on global growth and represent another disruption to global supply chains.

  There’s nothing the Fed can do to stop the inflation because it’s coming from the supply side, which the Fed has no control over. Higher interest rates won’t increase the supply of oil. The Fed has no mandate to drill for oil or discover natural gas resources.

  The Fed is essentially helpless.

  A Drop (of Oil) in the Bucket

  To help lower gas prices, Biden plans to release 1 million barrels of oil per day from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. But that will accomplish nothing at all. Here’s why…

  The U.S. uses about 20 million barrels of oil per day. So the 1 million barrel release from the reserve only adds about 5% to the supply. But it doesn’t really add anything to the supply because importers will simply reduce imports or domestic drillers will reduce output to equilibrate for the new oil.

  There never was an oil shortage in the U.S., so adding a new source of oil doesn’t alleviate a shortage that never existed. It simply causes some oil to be redirected to other buyers.

  Oil is a global market. The price is set mainly on futures exchanges in London and New York. Those markets focus on a wide variety of market variables of which the release from the reserve is only one.

  In fact, global output is about 92 million barrels per day, so the U.S. reserve addition is only 1.08% of total output. That’s hardly enough to affect the world price one way or the other.

  A Cheap Political Stunt

  It’s also the case that U.S. refineries are not geared to process the type of oil in the reserve without significant modifications that take time. In short, the oil from the reserve does not convert easily to refined product and will have minimal impact on retail gas prices.

  Finally, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is meant to be strategic. It’s not a short-term price manipulation tool; it’s meant to give the U.S. a cushion in the event of a war or natural disaster that directly affects the U.S. itself.

  Biden’s release will reduce the cushion and leave the U.S. more vulnerable to a true disaster. Biden’s release from the reserve will not affect the price at the pump, not affect the world price and reduce U.S. readiness.

  It’s a cheap and dangerous publicity stunt.

  The bottom line is there is practically only one way for the Fed to stop the inflation. That’s by raising rates until they cause a recession. It’s a fair question whether the cure (recession) is worse than the disease (inflation).

  Since this is the incompetent Fed we’re talking about, we may even get both inflation and recession.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 16:30

• Elon Musk Suggests Tesla May Eventually Wind Up Mining For Its Own Lithium
  Elon Musk Suggests Tesla May Eventually Wind Up Mining For Its Own Lithium

  Having already apparently secured his company’s nickel needs well in advance of this year’s chaos in the nickel markets, Tesla looks to now be focused on securing its lithium needs – by suggesting that it may need to go into lithium mining.

  The company’s “plans” have only made it as far as an Elon Musk tweet, which admittedly is where many ideas have gone to die off. But the suggestion garnered significant media attention when Musk Tweeted this week:

  “Tesla might actually have to get into the mining & refining directly at scale, unless costs improve.”

  He continued: “Price of lithium has gone to insane levels. There is no shortage of the element itself, as lithium is almost everywhere on Earth, but pace of extraction/refinement is slow.”

  Musk was responding to a Tweet that showed the skyrocketing price of lithium, from $4,450 in 2012 to $78,032 (per tonne) in 2022. 

  Price of lithium has gone to insane levels! Tesla might actually have to get into the mining & refining directly at scale, unless costs improve.

  There is no shortage of the element itself, as lithium is almost everywhere on Earth, but pace of extraction/refinement is slow.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 8, 2022

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

  As CNBC noted, there are numerous deposits of lithium all over the U.S., citing information from the U.S. Geological Survey, a division of the U.S. Department of Interior.

  Lithium is crucial in the EV space because of its use in EV batteries. “batteries made with lithium have a high power-to-weight ratio, which is important when dealing with transportation,” CNBC reported. 

  Recall just days ago we wrote how Tesla sidestepped the spike in nickel prices through a “secret deal” with Vale. A multiyear supply deal for nickel has been in place and covers nickel from Canada, we wrote. “Unlike most of its peer automakers, Tesla has spent years focusing on how to secure its own nickel supplies,” a report from Bloomberg said last week. 

  Gene Munster of Loup Ventures said: “What Tesla has done with nickel is a hidden competitive advantage. Tesla continues to be a couple of steps ahead of the rest.”

  And Munster is right, in that Musk has “repeatedly” flagged nickel as a concern for the company amidst broader sector demand that is expected to more than triple by 2030. 

  So while many of Musk’s “ventures” that have started as Tweets haven’t panned out, maybe Tesla will wind up mining lithium after all…

   

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 16:00

• US Now Appears Willing To Overlook Turkey’s S-400 Transgression With F-16 Sale
  US Now Appears Willing To Overlook Turkey’s S-400 Transgression With F-16 Sale

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone & Will Porter via The Libertarian Institute,

  A potential sale of F-16 fighter jets to Turkey would be consistent with US policy objectives, the State Department told lawmakers in a letter, months after Ankara asked to purchase dozens of warplanes and upgrade kits. Dated March 17, the letter to Congress stopped short of endorsing the F-16 sale outright, but said Turkey is “an important deterrent to malign influence in the region” and suggested it may be willing to go through with the deal.

  Turkey’s Daily Sabah points out that “Considering U.S. Congress’ opposition to Ankara purchasing arms due to several lingering issues, it was thought that it would be difficult to win approval for the deal, however, reports have said that the new U.S. administration supports it.”

  

  While Turkey is a NATO member and owns a fleet of F-16s, its defense ties with the United States have deteriorated since Ankara bought the S-400 air defense system from Russia in 2017. The Donald Trump administration insisted the missile platform is incompatible with other NATO defense infrastructure and could even compromise US weapons systems, ultimately expelling Turkey from the F-35 fighter jet program and imposing sanctions on several officials in retaliation.

  Despite the controversy, Ankara asked to buy 40 new F-16s and 80 F-16 modernization kits last October, having abandoned hopes to ever see the newer F-35 in its arsenal. It has so far received no public response from the White House. 

  With a new president in the Oval Office and in light of Russia’s attack on Ukraine, however, Washington now appears willing to overlook Turkey’s S-400 transgression and resume weapons sales after all..

  “The administration believes that there are nonetheless compelling long-term NATO alliance unity and capability interests, as well as US national security, economic and commercial interests that are supported by appropriate US defense trade ties with Turkey,” the State Department letter said, adding that Turkey had already paid “a significant price” for its decision to buy the Russian system. 

  .@StateDept’s letter to members of Congress on potential F16 sale to Turkey pic.twitter.com/o8gzQTOPWf

  — Lena Argiri (@lenaargiri) April 6, 2022

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

  Before finalizing any deal, the State Department will have to formally notify Congress, but some lawmakers remain vocally opposed to the sale. The letter from Foggy Bottom came in response to a previous missive from more than 50 reps in both parties who “strongly” urged Biden to reject the transfer, citing “vast human rights abuses” in Turkey.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 15:30

• Palm Springs Moves Forward With Measure To Provide Universal Basic Income To Low-Income Trans, Nonbinary Residents
  Palm Springs Moves Forward With Measure To Provide Universal Basic Income To Low-Income Trans, Nonbinary Residents

  It looks like universal basic income could soon become a reality for some Americans.

  And those Americans are transgendered people living in Palm Springs, California. 

  The city’s town council voted to allocate $200,000 to Queer Works and DAP Health, two non-profits, to develop a pilot program that would provide cash support to transgender, nonbinary and intersex residents in the form of cash payments. 

  The city council considered the measure for “an hour and a half” last Thursday, before unanimously voting to support it. The Washington Post said the proposal could be “the first guaranteed basic income program specifically for low-income transgender and nonbinary people to be implemented in the country.”

  Christy Holstege, a Palm Springs City Council member, commented: “We are a beacon in the country and in the world, a place where LGBTQ people have fled for decades to seek sanctuary and safety and their own community. And so I think it’s really important for Palm Springs to be on the front lines of supporting the trans community … especially when they’re under attack throughout the country.”

  

  She has noted that there is an “undercurrent of poverty” in the city. 

  The mayor of Palm Springs is a transgender woman and the city has a history of funding queer and trans organizations in the community. 

  The city has also suffered from “worsening income inequality” and skyrocketing housing prices that have disproportionately affected transgender and nonbinary people, the report says. 

  Jacob Rostovsky, who helped push the measure, said that for people with low incomes “regular, unrestricted cash payments” are a “huge benefit”. 

  “Most of my community is trying to decide if they should eat that night, have somewhere safe to sleep, be able to afford their hormone care of therapy. They’re making decisions constantly, daily, that many cisgender individuals don’t even think about, and that includes homeless or housing unstable cisgender individuals,” he concluded. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 15:00

• Major Row In Greek Parliament After Zelensky Features Neo-Nazi Azov Fighters In Address
  Major Row In Greek Parliament After Zelensky Features Neo-Nazi Azov Fighters In Address

  Authored By Joe Lauria via Consortium News,

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been making a virtual world tour with video hookups to parliaments around the globe, as well as to the Grammy Awards and the U.N. Security Council, sometimes with troublesome results.  

  On Thursday a major row erupted when Zelensky brought along a Ukrainian soldier of Greek heritage from the city of Mariupol, who just happened to be a member of the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment. Greece was under Nazi occupation during World War II and fought a bitter partisan war against Nazism (later to be betrayed by Britain and the United States.)

  

  With Zelensky in the screen, the man, who gave only his first name, told Parliament: “I speak to you as a man of Greek descent. My name is Michail. My grandfather fought against the Nazis in the Second World War. I am born in Mariupol and I am now also fighting to defend my city from the Russian nazis.”  

  Alexis Tsipras, leader of the main opposition party, SYRIZA-Progressive Alliance, blasted the appearance of the Azov fighter before parliament.  

  “Solidarity with the Ukrainian people is a given. But nazis cannot be allowed to speak in parliament,” Tsipras said on social media. “The speech was a provocation.”  He said Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis “bears full responsibility. … He talked about a historic day but it is a historical shame.”  

  Former Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras called the video being played in parliament a “big mistake”. And former Foreign Affairs Minister Nikos Kotzias said: “The Greek government irresponsibly undermined the struggle of the Ukrainian people, by giving the floor to a Nazi. The responsibilities are heavy. The government should publish a detailed report of preparation and contacts for the event.”

  Former Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis’  MeRA25 party said the event turned into a “Nazi fiesta. The Greek Reporter said a government spokesman admitted the mistake but then used it to smear SYRIZA as Russian apologists:

  “The socialist KINAL party issued a statement asking why Greek lawmakers had not been informed about the video intervention of an Azov Battalion member and called on the president of the Greek Parliament to bear responsibility.

  Government spokesperson Giannis Oikonomou said the inclusion of the Azov Battalion message was ‘incorrect and inappropriate.’ However, he did not say who should be held responsible for this.

  Oikonomou, nevertheless, slammed SYRIZA for allegedly ‘using that mistake… to justify the Russian invasion. … It is time for a clear answer: are they on the side of the Ukrainians, who are fighting for their freedom, or [on the side of] Putin’s invaders?’ he said.”

  Group of Syriza MPs walk out of Zelenskyy speech after man identifying himself as member of Azov Battalion speaks in recorded portion of message. #Greece #Ukraine pic.twitter.com/2dXmD6VZVV

  — Derek Gatopoulos (@dgatopoulos) April 7, 2022

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

  Zelensky’s Spotty Sense of History

  In his speech, Zelensky said:

  “I have been waking up every day for more than a month thinking about Mariupol, which is being destroyed by Russian troops. There are still 100,000 people on the border with Mariupol. There is no building left. Mariupol has been destroyed …

  Ukraine is one of the Orthodox countries that was Christianised by the Greeks. In Ukrainian culture and history it will be seen that we will lose a big part of history if we lose the culture brought by Greek culture.

  Freedom or Death was what your revolutionaries were saying. We are shouting the same today.” [a reference to a slogan of the Greek Revolution of 1821.]

  Ignoring Greece’s suffering under German Nazism was a slight made worse by bringing a Nazi along to address Greek lawmakers. Zelensky has gotten into trouble before by referring to a nation’s history in his addresses to parliaments. He caused outrage in Israel for comparing what Ukraine is going through today to the Holocaust while completely ignoring the role Ukrainian fascists played in that Holocaust.

  In his address to the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday Zelensky said Russia had committed the worst war crimes since World War II, ignoring the much bigger crime of aggression by the United States against Iraq built totally on lies.

  Just as Western governments and corporate media are doing, the Ukrainian embassy in Athens denied Azov is a Neo-Nazi regiment, despite sporting the Waffen-SS Wolfsangel on their uniforms and their open political alignment with Nazism. The embassy instead tried to turn the tables. 

  “For many years Russia tried to ‘plant’ into Greek minds the myth that ‘Azov’ Regiment is a paramilitary independent unit operating in Mariupol,” the embassy said in a statement. “The video … has nothing to do to those Nazi deeds, Russians commit on our land and against our people.” 

  Indeed, Western media have largely ignored the story. Neither The New York Times nor The Washington Post wrote anything about what happened at the Greek parliament and The Wall Street Journal only ran a photo story that didn’t mention the controversy. 

  Here is the full video of Zelensky’s address (in Greek):

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 14:30

• "We Are On A Fast Track To Disaster" – Green Radicals Claim Humanity Has Only 3 Years Left To Stop 'Climate Apocalypse'
  “We Are On A Fast Track To Disaster” – Green Radicals Claim Humanity Has Only 3 Years Left To Stop ‘Climate Apocalypse’

  Earlier this week, Democrats in the House dragged the CEOs of America’s largest oil companies before a Congressional subcommittee where they were subjected to an aggressive interrogation (intended, of course, to glean clips to be used for the onslaught of political ads expected to be released this fall), where members accused them of deliberately driving prices higher to boost their companies profits.

  

  But as they carefully explained in their testimony, individual American oil companies have little control over the price of oil and gas. Rather, entities like OPEC+, and international demand dynamics have a much greater impact. The real hypocrisy, however, is the fact that Democrats’ own energy policies – including a key metric called the “social cost of carbon” which Biden hiked from $7 under Trump to $51 under Biden – are responsible for suppressing domestic production.

  And as millions of Americans struggle to make ends meet during a period of soaring inflation, climate activists, seemingly unsympathetic to their plight, are doing everything in their power to drive oil and gas production in the US even lower.

  Using the release of the IPCC’s latest report on climate change as their rallying, climate activists like the members of “Scientist Rebellion” (an offshoot of the UK’s “Extinction Rebellion”) are now claiming that the world has only three years to prevent the climate apocalypse. This despite last year’s admission from the UN that its most dire projections are now “extremely unlikely”.

  But ignore all that, because as one climate scientist-turned-activist wrote in the Guardian this week, climate radicals are chaining themselves to JP Morgan’s offices in protest of the bank’s work financing the oil and gas industry.

  I’m a climate scientist and a desperate father. How can I plead any harder? What will it take? What can my colleagues and I do to stop this catastrophe unfolding now all around us with such excruciating clarity?

  On Wednesday, I was arrested for locking myself to an entrance to the JP Morgan Chase building in downtown Los Angeles with colleagues and supporters. Our action in LA is part of an international campaign organized by a loosely knit group of concerned scientists called Scientist Rebellion, involving more than 1,200 scientists in 26 countries and supported by local climate groups.

  Our day of action follows the IPCC Working Group 3 report released Monday, which details the harrowing gap between where society is heading and where we need to go. Our movement is growing fast.

  The new report is called the “Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change”. It’s the third and final installment of the IPCC’s Sixth Climate Assessment. And contributors to the report have been telling any liberal media outlet that will listen that humanity now has only three years to prevent the climate catastrophy.

  Here’s a summary of the report, courtesy of Buzzfeed:

  Global average emissions measured roughly 59 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2019, about 12% higher than levels in 2010 and 54% higher than in 1990, per the new report. This is a staggering increase.

  But the blame for rising emissions does not fall on everyone equally.

  “The 10% of households with the highest per capita emissions contribute a disproportionately large share of global [greenhouse gas] emissions,” according to a summary of the new report. For example, in 2019, Small Island Developing States are estimated to have released 0.6% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

  The only way to prevent widespread climate damage is to immediately stop this trend. To keep the 1.5 degree Celsius future alive, per the report, people worldwide must collectively peak their emissions by 2025 and then reduce emissions 43% by 2030. Crucially, this involves cutting emissions of the potent greenhouse gas methane by 34% by 2030.

  Finally, by 2050, people must achieve net zero emissions, which is when they are releasing into the atmosphere the same levels of emissions they are pulling out of it.

  UN Secretary-General further contributed to the hysteria by declaring that humanity is on “the fast track to climate disaster”.

  “We are on a fast track to climate disaster,” United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said on Monday while announcing the new report by the United Nation’s preeminent climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

  “This is not fiction or exaggeration,” he added. “It is what science tells us will result from our current energy policies. We are on a pathway to global warming of more than double 1.5 degrees.”

  One of the author’s of the report added that humanity must act now, or accept the worst-case scenario that climate activists have long described.

  “It’s now or never, if we want to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit),” Imperial College London’s Jim Skea, one of the report co-authors, said in a statement. “Without immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors, it will be impossible.”

  So, according to the climate radicals, the world has seen the timeline for the climate apocalypse move from roughly a decade to just three years, even as the growth of emissions has been slowing this entire time.

  Is it just us, or does something not add up here?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/09/2022 – 14:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• McMaken: The "Rules-Based International Order" Is Dead… Washington Killed It
  McMaken: The “Rules-Based International Order” Is Dead… Washington Killed It

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  The lack of self-awareness among the many American officials who are striking a moralistic pose in opposition to the Russian invasion of Ukraine is striking.

  

  For example, Foreign Policy has published a column by Col. Yevgeny Vindman, asking how the world can tolerate a country like Russia on the United Nations Security Council. His specific point was that any country that invades another country must not be allowed veto power in the United Nations. Responding to Vindman, however, Stephen Wertheim pointed out what should be obvious to everyone: that’s a “fair question” and one “that applies to 2003, too.”

  

  In other words, the view that the current Russian invasion is somehow unique in its aggressiveness requires a complete rewriting of history and a willingness to ignore the reality of the US’s invasion of Iraq in 2003. If an aggressive power’s veto in the UN was perfectly fine in 2003, why is it suddenly not acceptable now? The reality, of course, is that the United States is powerful enough to invade whatever country it wants and still get away with it. A second-rate power like Russia can’t do the same, even when it basically mimics the acts of the United States.

  Nonetheless, Washington continues to have the audacity to portray itself as a white knight that stands for a “rules-based” international order—an order supposedly built around respect for national sovereignty and multilateral enforcement of international law. But, it has become abundantly clear that these alleged rules mean nothing at all when the United States wishes to invade countries in preemptive and elective wars. For those who don’t wear the American selective-memory goggles, it is not clear that the US should be in a leadership position in a rules-based order that it is so obviously willing to flout.

  There are implications here well beyond simply pointing out hypocrisy, and they extend to global trade, international law, and the prospects for a new Cold War. Multilateralism means nothing to the US when the notion gets in the way of the next US regime change scheme, and as a result, it is likely no coincidence that the US’s latest demand for a multilateral moral crusade has yielded little cooperation from the rest of the world. As has already become clear, few regimes outside of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have been willing to go along with the US’s demands that the world’s regimes impoverish their citizens by cutting themselves off from Russian oil and wheat—and everything else. Much of the world, it seems—from Asia to Africa to Latin America—is no longer willing to get lessons in morality from Washington, and even less willing to make their populations go hungry in order to please Washington politicians.

  This is likely to become an increasing issue for the global economy and for global international institutions moving forward.

  Iraq 2003 versus Ukraine 2022

  In 2003, the United States invaded a sovereign state in an elective and “preemptive” war. As a result, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis—most of them civilians—were killed. Portrayals of Iraq as a threat to the US and its neighbors were exposed as lies.

  In 2022, Russia invaded a sovereign state in an elective and “preemptive” war. Military and civilian casualties may someday rival those of Iraq, but given that Ukraine’s population is now twice as large as Iraq’s was in 2003, totals will need to grow considerably to be comparable to the carnage in Iraq.

  Yet, the way the US regime, the US media, and US public treat these two invasions is truly a sight to behold. A few minutes on Twitter make it clear that Americans are still making excuses for the US’s blood-drenched Iraq invasion. Some claim that the deaths of Iraqi women and children should be ignored because the Iraqi regime wasn’t “democratic.”

  

  Others portray the hundreds of thousands of deaths in Iraq—a lowball figure being two hundred thousand out of a population of twenty-three million—as a negligible matter of a few “stray drones.”

  

  Forgotten by these apologists are the times US troops opened fire on children and the US mercenaries who fired machine guns into crowds of unarmed Iraqis. Moreover, the US shelled and completely destroyed both Fallujah and Mosul. The bloodshed was remarkable, indeed. The US media, on the other hand, now hints the Russians are uniquely barbaric for using cluster bombs—but the US used these in Iraq. The US also purposely fomented a civil war through its needless de-Ba’athification policy, which rendered millions of Iraqis unemployed and abolished the nation’s few institutions designed to maintain local order.

  Those caught up in the current anti-Russian frenzy denounce anyone who mentions these historical facts because they don’t fit Washington’s present narrative. But for most of the world, which isn’t as emotionally invested in the idea that the United States is the beacon of moral foreign policy, the last twenty-five years of US foreign policy make it clear that talk about a rules-based order is nothing more than talk.

  Will the World Isolate Russia on Moral Grounds?

  Even in the wake of the alleged massacres in and around Bucha, we’re hearing almost nothing at all from regimes outside the US’s inner circle of NATO and near-NATO allies. For example, in Fox’s piece on “world leaders” reacting to the alleged massacre, we quickly find that “the world” means a handful of countries like Japan, New Zealand, and NATO members. All the same regimes keep showing up in every piece about “the world’s” reaction.

  Even within NATO, Turkey continues to engage in efforts to facilitate peace talks with Russia. There is still no sign that Latin America desires to throw its economies into recession by signing on to the US’s sanctions regime. No Latin American countries have yet been added to Russia’s list of “unfriendly countries.” As Mexico’s president has already made clear, Mexico’s interest is in maintaining friendly relations with all nations. India and China, of course, continue to trade with the Russians. In fact, the US-NATO axis only makes up one-third of global GDP (gross domestic product). The US is going to have to convince the rest of the world to cut themselves off from critical commodities in the name of joining the US’s rules-based order. But the US in no moral position to do so. 

  Will the United Nations Eject Moscow?

  One more key plank of the US strategy is now coming into focus. Within days of Vindman’s article in Foreign Policy calling for the removal of Russia from the UN Security Council, Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky demanded the same, claiming that no country that invades another country can continue on the Security Council. Short of expelling Russia, Zelensky maintains, the council should dissolve itself. Needless to say, no similar demands were made when the US invaded Iraq, or when NATO devastated Libya. 

  Zelensky, however, may have stumbled across a good idea. Now may be a good time to abolish the UN. The United States has spent the last thirty years turning the United Nations into a US-dominated institution designed to rubber stamp US military interventions, make excuses for US allies, and wag its finger at US enemies. This has long provided a patina of a rules-based international order, one that can also be ignored when it suits Washington. Thus, when the US failed to get its rubber stamp from the UN prior to the Iraq invasion, Washington denounced its opponents in the Security Council and instead embraced its eastern European partners like Poland and Ukraine, which apparently had no problem with invading and occupying countries unprovoked. (Ukraine sent at least 5,000 troops to help occupy Iraq.)

  Prior to this, of course, the Security Council was deadlocked most of the time because the US and the Soviet Union would simply veto each other. Although both Washington and Moscow invaded other sovereign states during this time, neither was delusional enough to think other states in the Security Council could be ejected for such acts. That was then. 

  Biden’s New World Order

  This all continues to highlight how the world is descending into a post-globalization world of at least two blocs: the anti-Russian one and the neutral one. Biden has already claimed that Washington will lead the ”free world” in this “new world order.” But this “free world” is increasingly looking like the US, Europe, and a handful of other allies versus everyone else. Enlarging this bloc would depend on expanding soft power based at least in part on moral leadership, especially as the US continues to become a smaller and smaller part of the global economy. Thanks to the US’s blatant disregard for a rules-based order in recent decades, this looks increasingly unlikely.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 23:40

• These Are The American Cities With The Highest (And Lowest) Rents
  These Are The American Cities With The Highest (And Lowest) Rents

  While the real-estate market has calmed down from the insanity of 2021 (as mortgage rates have soared to their highest levels in years) the cost of housing remains higher than it was three or four years ago. And while American workers have seen their wages climb in recent months, buoyed by a labor shortage and decidedly “non-transitory” inflation…

  

  …the fact remains that housing is unaffordable for many. And since housing costs (rent, or mortgage) is typically the largest component of a consumer’s fixed monthly costs, fluctuations can have an outsize impact on social cohesion – even more so than rising gas prices.

  While the pandemic-inspired savings glut that in turn helped spur demand has slackened, the lack of housing supply has continued to ensure that home prices remain elevated and the market for homes remains tight enough to price out first-time buyers.

  

  And after rents plunged during the early days of the pandemic as workers fled cities (and millennials moved back into their parents’ suburban basements en masse), data show that while rent increases didn’t exactly move in tandem with home prices, landlords are finally starting to hike rents as they demand a greater return on their investments.

  

  But rents aren’t rising uniformly everywhere. A recent report from Stessa found that the states with the most unaffordable rents are typically coastal states like Hawaii, California, Massachusetts, and New York.

  

  In these expensive locations, median rents can approach or top $2,000 a month, while a studio apartment can cost more than a typical 3- or 4-bedroom house in other parts of the country.

  On the other end of the spectrum, Arkansas is the most affordable state for renters at $881 per month, approximately one-third of the median rent cost in the most expensive state, Hawaii ($2,537).

  Using an analysis of data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Census Bureau, the organization broke down the most affordable small and medium-size metro areas.

  

  Finally, here’s a breakdown of the 15 most expensive large metros, ranked from least to most expensive, courtesy of Stessa’s data.

  15. Austin.

  14. Orlando

  13. Portland

  12. Miami-Fort Lauderdale

  11. Denver

  10. Sacramento

  9. Riverside

  8. Washington DC

  7. NYC

  6. Seattle

  5. San Diego

  4. LA

  3. Boston

  2. San Francisco

  1. San Jose

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 23:20

• Biden Moves Toward Expanding Obamacare To Eliminate The 'Family Glitch' In The Plan
  Biden Moves Toward Expanding Obamacare To Eliminate The ‘Family Glitch’ In The Plan

  Authored by Nick Ciolino via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  President Joe Biden is taking steps meant to expand the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare.

  

  Alongside the government health plan’s chief architect, former President Barack Obama, at the White House Tuesday, Biden announced plans to fix the “family glitch” in the ACA and signed an executive order that will “protect and strengthen Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act.”

  Should Biden’s family glitch rule be finalized, it would allow non-employee family members with private insurance from an employer that costs in excess of 10 percent of the household income to qualify for coverage under the ACA. The administration estimates that 200,000 uninsured people would gain coverage, and nearly 1 million Americans would see their coverage become more affordable.

  A senior administration official on a call with reporters ahead of the announcement conceded not all of the roughly 5 million families who qualify for the change may want to switch coverage if the rule is approved, saying that some might “find it more convenient to have their whole family in a single health plan.”

  The ACA has seen its premiums skyrocket over its 12-year existence.

  The administration has not offered details as to how much the new rule would cost taxpayers but has said that if approved it would take effect at the start of next year.

  Biden’s executive order he signed on camera Tuesday continues an order he signed at the start of last year directing agencies to “[make] coverage more affordable and accessible for American families.”

  In a speech, Biden scolded repeated Republican efforts to repeal the ACA since its inception.

  “I got a better idea: Instead of destroying the Affordable Care Act, let’s keep building on it,” said Biden. “Let’s extend it.”

  Biden also made calls to “close the Medicaid coverage gap” in states that have chosen not to expand Medicaid. He also called for a change in law to allow Medicare to negotiate prices for drugs that are on the market.

  The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed into law in 2017 by former President Donald Trump gutted the ACA by removing penalties for those who violate the plan’s individual mandate rule requiring all Americans to pay for health insurance.

  In March of last year, Biden signed into law the American Rescue Plan that included boosts to the ACA, including enhanced subsidies and incentives for states to expand the program.

  This past winter, the administration ran what it calls “the most successful open enrollment period under the ACA ever” with 14.5 million sign-ups, plus another 1 million that signed up for a related program called the “Basic Health Plan.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 23:00

• Objects Of Desire: Record-Breaking Auction Sales In 2021
  Objects Of Desire: Record-Breaking Auction Sales In 2021

  2021 may have been the year of the NFT, but, as Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu and Rosey Eason detail below, wealthy collectors still dropped plenty of cash on physical objects. This included the usual items like paintings and cars, as well as some more obscure ones like meteorites.

  To gain insight into the world of rare collectibles, this infographic summarizes the biggest auction sales of 2021, spread across 12 different item categories.

  The Numbers

  The key details of these sales are listed below in tabular format. Some broke all-time records, while others set the record for 2021 specifically.

  

  The Details

  Here are some interesting facts and details about these rare collectibles, starting with:

  Pablo Picasso’s Femme assise près d’une fenêtre (Marie-Thérèse)

  This 1932 painting is a depiction of Picasso’s lover, Marie-Thérèse Walter (1909-1977). Walter is believed to have had a significant impact on Picasso’s work, and the pair had a child out-of-wedlock in 1935.

  He loved the blondeness of her hair, her luminous complexion, her sculptural body.

  – BRASSAÏ

  Sold by Christie’s in New York, this was the first painting to auction for over $100 million in nearly two years. The all-time record holder is Leonardo da Vinci’s Salvator Mundi, which sold for $450 million in 2016 to Mohammed Bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

  1995 McLaren F1

  Produced between 1992 and 1998, the McLaren F1 is widely regarded as one of the most desirable supercars in the world. It features many innovations that are still rare in modern road cars, including a carbon fiber monocoque (the main structure of the car), active aerodynamics on the underbody, and a centered driving position.

  The F1’s legacy is cemented by the fact that only 106 were ever produced, many of which have been owned by celebrities. That includes Elon Musk, who famously crashed his F1 in 2000 without insurance.

  The specific car highlighted above was sold by Gooding & Company, a classic car auction company. It has just 242 miles (390 km) on the clock, which translates to an average of 9.3 miles (15 km) being driven on the road per year.

  1933 Double Eagle Coin

  The 1933 Double Eagle is one of the last $20 gold coins ever produced in the United States. It dates back to an era when the U.S. dollar’s value was tied to gold, which is a system known as the gold standard. The coins were melted down when the U.S. transitioned to fiat money, and only 13 examples are known to exist today.

  After selling for $18.9 million, this Double Eagle holds the title as the most valuable rare coin in the world.

  The Revolver Used to Kill Billy the Kid

  The Colt single-action revolver that was used to kill Billy the Kid is now the most expensive firearm ever sold at an auction. It belonged to Sheriff Pat Garrett, who killed Billy in 1881.

  Billy is one of the most notorious figures from America’s wild west era and was responsible for the deaths of eight men, including two sheriff’s deputies during an escape from jail.

  Because of Billy’s legacy, this revolver is lauded as one of the most desirable Western firearms in existence. Surprisingly, it was the gun’s first appearance in a public auction.

  Final Text of the United States Constitution

  This first-edition copy of the U.S. constitution is an incredibly rare and historically significant artifact. The story of how it sold is equally as impressive.

  Bidding came down to two parties, one of which was Ken Griffin, billionaire CEO of Citadel. If you’re an investor, that name may sound familiar—Citadel was a hedge fund involved in the r/wallstreetbets saga of 2021.

  The other party was ConstitutionDAO, a group of 17,000+ crypto investors who pooled together $47 million worth of Ethereum. The term “DAO” refers to a decentralized autonomous organization, which is an online entity that’s collectively owned by its members without centralized leadership—and that takes action based on transparent rules set on a public blockchain.

  In the end, the copy was sold to Griffin for a total of $43.2 million. Organizers of ConstitutionDAO could not place a higher bid because they wouldn’t have had enough money to insure, store, and transport the document.

  About Those NFTs…

  NFTs only exist in the digital realm, but they’ve quickly become some of the world’s most valuable collectibles. How valuable, you may ask?

  For starters, consider the $7.6 million sale of CryptoPunk #3100, a profile picture (PFP) NFT that depicts a blue zombie. Then there’s The Merge, a digital artwork comprised of 312,686 pieces. In December 2021, it was sold to a collective of 28,983 buyers who, altogether, paid $91.8 million.

  All of this hype has led some of the world’s oldest auction houses to begin selling NFTs through online events. This includes Christie’s (founded in 1766), which surpassed $100 million in NFT auction sales in less than a year.

  Whether this momentum can carry forward is questionable. Interest in NFTs has plummeted, and crypto markets remain incredibly volatile.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 22:40

• Media Vilifies Polymer80 In Preparation For Biden's "Ghost Gun" Rule Change
  Media Vilifies Polymer80 In Preparation For Biden’s “Ghost Gun” Rule Change

  Submitted by The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN).,

  While we in the firearms industry brace for the Biden DOJ to release their new “ghost gun” regulation, the corporate media has been hard at work spinning up their propaganda machines to defame companies that enable citizens to make their own firearms at home.

  Their latest target? Polymer80.

  

  For those unfamiliar with Polymer80, they are a company that produces unfinished polymer frames for firearms. With these kits, people can build firearms in the comfort of their homes 100% legally. Unless you have a criminal record, you’d be breaking the law. Remember that point because we’ll be revisiting that.

  The ATF has previously determined that Polymer80’s kits do not meet the legal definition of a firearm. They even have a determination letter from the ATF to prove it.  

  The Biden DOJ announced in 2021 that they would be pursuing a rule change to regulate 80% kits as firearms themselves. This is a dangerous precedent yet seems to be where the Biden DOJ and ATF are headed.

  So, to prepare for this move, the corporate media has started its propaganda campaign. If you keep an eye on the news cycle, you’ll begin to see many more articles about the “ghost gun problem in America.” Check out this graph showing the increase in the use of the term ghost gun.

  

  This media campaign is just the groundwork being laid so that Biden can step out later this month and announce that he’s “won the war on ghost guns” with his new rule change.

  While the DOJ and ATF point to an increase in the use of these privately made firearms in gun crimes, it is worth noting that if these so-called “ghost guns” suddenly disappeared off the face of the earth, criminals would continue to use stolen or straw-purchased firearms to commit crimes. 

  For those unfamiliar with home manufacturing, it’s completely legal under current US law to build a firearm at home for personal use. For those who own CNC machines or 3D printers, it’s an easy process. For those who don’t, it’s much more complicated.

  Companies like polymer80 seek to make this home build process easier by selling what amounts to an unfinished Glock frame. Private citizens can finish these frames at home, and because of the extensive aftermarket for Glock pistols, home builders can buy most other components like slides and barrels online.

  Also, regulating things that are not legally considered firearms as firearms themselves is an insane precedent that stands to endanger law-abiding citizens. We saw an example of this play out in real-time earlier this year when the ATF randomly decided to mass deny form 1 kits for solvent traps. This, in a way, mirrors the current proposed rulemaking as many in the firearms world saw solvent traps as 80% kits for home suppressor building, which is also 100% legal.

  Those who tried to follow the legal process to build a suppressor were then told that what constituted a “silencer” in the eyes of the ATF was the intent. What they had in their possession didn’t much matter, whether it was oil filters, solvent traps, or a six-inch section of metal pipe.

  Now, the Biden DOJ stands to do the same with 80% frames.

  The real question is how far this line of thinking will go. Will the ATF regulate PLA plastic and blocks of aluminum? Will Home Depot be required to hold an FFL to do business? This may sound like a ridiculous argument, but when all the government needs to prosecute you is to determine your “intent,” the law becomes a tool for them to strip you of your rights instead of something that protects citizens from bad actors.

  Keep in mind that gun control is like red meat for the base in Biden’s eyes. Much of this legislation is useless at best at stopping actual gun crime yet is pushed to better Biden’s poll numbers with his neoliberal base. Right now, with low poll numbers and headed into the midterms, Biden needs all the victories he can get. So, it’s no surprise that his allies in the corporate legacy media are drumming up a “problem” for him to “solve.”

  Watch: TMGN’s Steph breaks down what’s happening in the firearms industry and what’s about to be announced by the Biden administration. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 22:20

• Tesla Recalls 127,785 Vehicles In China Due To Possible Inverter Failure
  Tesla Recalls 127,785 Vehicles In China Due To Possible Inverter Failure

  The tsunami of Tesla recalls that started months ago shows no signs of stopping. The most recent recall was announced this morning, when it was reported that 34,207 imported and 93,578 China-made vehicles were being recalled.

  The recall is due to a possible inverter failure, according to Bloomberg, who cited a statement from State Administration for Market Regulation.

  The vehicles in question were produced between January 11, 2019 and January 25, 2022. 

  Gordon Johnson of GLJ Research said in a Thursday morning note to clients: “This does not sound like an over-the-air update (i.e., these cars will likely have to be fixed, manually), and seems (very) important/critical (i.e., losing power while moving)…”

  It is the latest in a flurry of recalls by Tesla. More than one million Teslas have been recalled in recent months. 

  • Tesla Recalls More Than 475,000 US Vehicles Due To Quality Issues
  • Tesla Recalls Tens Of Thousands Of Vehicles On “Rolling Stop” Function, NHTSA Says
  • Tesla Recalls More Than 800,000 Vehicles Over Seat Belt Chime Malfunction

  

  … and the recalls could increase as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced in February that it’s reviewing complaints about Tesla vehicles suddenly braking at high speeds. 

  “This process includes discussions with the manufacturer, as well as reviewing additional data sources, including Early Warning Reporting data. If the data show that a risk may exist, NHTSA will act immediately,” according to a statement from the agency. 

  NHTSA reviewed complaints from drivers about ‘phantom braking’ on highways resulting in near-collisions. 

  One unidentified 2021 Tesla Model 3 driver in Madison, Wisconsin, complained about his unexpected braking incident on a major highway last month. “I was driving north on Wisconsin route 14 at about 60 mph in my Tesla model 3 using the cruise control,” the driver said, adding that the sudden braking almost sparked an accident. 

  Popular automotive magazine Car and Driver has been right: Tesla cars are “hampered by quality problems.” 

  We wrote in February that the number of new stories on the Bloomberg terminal covering the keyword “Tesla recall” has surged over the last three years.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 22:00

• Former Teacher Chooses Homeschool: "An Incredible Blessing for Our Family"
  Former Teacher Chooses Homeschool: “An Incredible Blessing for Our Family”

  Authored by Barbara Danza via The Epoch Times,

  As some parents decide whether to homeschool their children, a specific facet of the homeschooling population may offer some unique insight. Among homeschoolers you might be surprised to find a great many former public school teachers who said “no thank you” to the prescribed route and chose the path of homeschool for their own children.

  One such parent is Sarah Miller from Kalamazoo, Michigan. Sarah taught professionally for 10 years before choosing to homeschool her own children. She now blogs about her experience and helps other parents who are just getting started.

  

  I recently asked Sarah about her homeschooling journey. Here’s what she said.

  The Epoch Times: How old are your children, and how long have you been homeschooling?

  Sarah Miller: My son is 6 and in first grade. My daughter is 3 and starting preschool this year. We are starting our fourth year homeschooling, since we started when my son was in preschool.

  The Epoch Times: As a former teacher, what factors led to your decision to homeschool your children?

  Ms. Miller: Our decision to homeschool started when trying to choose a preschool for my son. He has a late birthday and would have started preschool just weeks after turning 3. We didn’t qualify to delay a year in our local public school, but my son was very young and very active. I wanted him to have another year at home to play, explore, and grow up before spending time in a classroom environment. We decided to homeschool for one year.

  By the end of the year, we knew that homeschooling was an incredible blessing for our family. I had watched my son thrive with the focused attention and customized lessons I could give him, and we both loved the quality time we got to spend together. I am so grateful that we found homeschooling. It’s a great solution for our family.

  The Epoch Times: Would you say your teacher training and experience helped you as a homeschooling parent?

  Ms. Miller: In some ways, my teacher training does help in our homeschool. I know how to plan a lesson and how to evaluate and choose a curriculum that will work well for us. I am familiar with a lot of research about how kids learn best that I am able to apply to our homeschool.

  But in some ways, being a trained teacher is a disadvantage too. I often have to challenge myself to think outside the box about what our school looks like. For many families who are successful at homeschooling, school looks very different than what the public schools offer. I am learning to challenge what I learned in school about how to teach and to adapt it to fit how my kids learn in a more natural way.

  The Epoch Times: Do you feel that homeschooling parents without teacher training are at a disadvantage?

  Ms. Miller: I don’t think that parents without teacher training are at a disadvantage. There is so much information available about how to homeschool, especially now that it is becoming more popular. All homeschool parents, whether or not they are trained teachers, will learn how to teach each of their individual children as they spend time teaching them.

  Parents have a unique advantage that more than makes up for any lack of teacher training they have. As parents, they are an expert on their own children. They know how their children think, what they are interested in, and what motivates them better than anyone else. They care about their children’s success more than any other person on Earth.

  The Epoch Times: What have you found to be the greatest challenges of homeschooling?

  Ms. Miller: Homeschooling is a big time commitment, so balancing the time it takes to homeschool well with my other life responsibilities is a challenge. It can also be hard not to take things personally when we have a hard day in our homeschool. I care so much about my kids’ learning and I want nothing more than for them to be successful. It’s hard when they are struggling with what they are learning or not feeling motivated to learn. I am learning to be patient and to prioritize my relationship with my kids first, my kids’ love of learning second, and then whatever I am trying to teach them that day third.

  The Epoch Times: What have you found to be the greatest benefits of homeschooling?

  Ms. Miller: Homeschooling allows us to spend a lot of quality time together as a family. Every day I have the opportunity to invest time intentionally into my relationships with my children. It is such a blessing to be the one who gets to see the light in their eyes when they understand something for the first time, or their excitement about new skills they are learning.

  My kids also have a close relationship with each other because they are homeschooled together. They are forming a strong sibling relationship now which I hope will be a lifelong blessing for them.

  The Epoch Times: What’s one thing you wish you knew about homeschooling when you were just getting started?

  Ms. Miller: Everyone’s homeschool is unique, because everyone’s kids are unique. As a homeschool parent, it is important not to compare what you are doing with what you see others doing. Instead, spend time observing your kids and how they learn. Try to create an experience for them that will help them love learning, and give them lots of opportunities to learn in the way that they learn best. Because every child is different, this will look different for every family. But that is a good thing!

  The Epoch Times: What advice would you give a parent today who is considering homeschooling their children?

  Ms. Miller: I would recommend taking some time to adjust. This is a big change in your family’s priorities. Start slow and take some time to get used to your new normal. It’s OK to lower your expectations and relax, and it’s OK not to get everything done at first. Learning how to homeschool takes time, both for you and for your child.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 21:40

• "It's Curtains For The US" – Billionaires Are Backing Bitcoin Over "Fiat Fraud"
  “It’s Curtains For The US” – Billionaires Are Backing Bitcoin Over “Fiat Fraud”

  Bitcoin 2022 has already established itself as one of the more memorable such conferences in recent memory not only because of the sheer number of bold-faced names on the speaker’s roster, but also because of what they have said. During his keynote speech, Peter Thiel denounced the “finance gerontocracy” (Dimon, Fink & Buffett) for their opposition to bitcoin, and declared the cryptocurrency as a critical alternative to fiat money – and, more importantly, equities.

  

  Interestingly enough, Thiel wasn’t the only billionaire to share a scathing criticism of the fiat money system during this year’s conference (something that bitcoin enthusiasts have been shouting from the rooftops for years). During a panel entitled “Billionaire Capital Allocators”, a host of other billionaires shared similar skepticism of the fiat system.

  They have a distinct advantage over most of their audience: while many crypto enthusiasts belong to the younger generation, millennials and Gen X, billionaires like Mexico’s third-richest man, Ricardo Salinas, have visceral memories of the failures of fiat – namely, hyper-inflation. And they shared this experience with his audience.

  “I have a big grudge against fiat, I call it the fiat fraud,” Salinas, the owner of Mexico’s Banco Azteca, said on Thursday.

  He then shared a story about how his salary as a young business school graduate in Mexico during the 1980s declined from around $2,000 a month to just $20 during a period of six years.

  “That’s hyperinflation,” he said.

  SEchoing Peter Thiel’s controversial comments, Salinas also spoke to the religiosity of its high priests in his keynote address.

  “This fiat religion has its high priests, and you can see them right there. And their religion is not tolerant,” Salinas explained.

  “They hate anyone who is a heretic. There’s a lot of heretics in this room right now.”

  Closing his thoughts, Salinas warned the crowd of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).

  “If the CBDC is issued these people will have full control over how you can spend your money,” he cautioned.

  Why does Salinas think they are so bad? Because you lose all sovereignty in the use of your funds.

  “They think it’s a bad idea, they close your capacity to spend your money,” Salinas predicted.

  That being said, Salinas noted that not all crypto is created equal:

  “Unfortunately, it’s curtains for the US. Sell your shitcoins, and buy bitcoin.”

  Salinas added that 60% of his investment portfolio is now in bitcoin or bitcoin-linked equities. According to Bitcoin Magazine, that’s up from 10% in 2020.

  Salinas also denounced bonds as toxic and a “terrible investment” that he wouldn’t “touch with a 10-foot pole.”

  Of course, he’s not the only high-profile investor to say as much about bonds in the era of inflation (short-dated Treasuries just endured one of the rockiest first quarters in modern history).

  I want to thank @TheBitcoinConf for giving me the opportunity to speak about “what’s next”, it was a pleasure to meet you all 😌.

  “Please… don’t put your future in government’s hands, you and I know how does that always ends, stay away from #FIAT money, invest in #btc” pic.twitter.com/sjVvbbZKcY

  — Ricardo Salinas Pliego (@RicardoBSalinas) April 7, 2022

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

  Another billionaire speaker, the Puerto Rican financier Orlando Bravo, the co-founder of private equity firm Thoma Bravo, told his audience that he’s been getting calls from sovereign wealth funds and pension funds (some of the largest pools of capital around), and they’re inquiring about getting into crypto. Even these firms are looking for ways to hedge the collapse of the dollar-based international financial system. And is there a better alternative than crypto?

  “You don’t have to be an economist to see what’s going on with inflation,” he said, pointing to the $2 trillion that was injected into the economy. “You can make all kinds of excuses on supply chains and all the geopolitical issues, but when you pump that much money into the economy, you’re going to grossly devalue that currency.”

  Finally, Marcelo Claure, the former SoftBank COO (who is famously battling it out with Masa Son over billions in compensation he clams he is owed) said he was increasing the crypto allocation of his personal holdings to 10%.    

  “We’re starting to see Bitcoin as one of the safest ways in order for us to maintain our wealth,” he said.

  While these comments are certainly encouraging for crypto bulls, and they represent a critical shift in crypto being accepted by a growing number of powerful figures who still see themselves as outsiders in the closely guarded world of Wall Street, we would be surprised if their comments didn’t elicit some kind of push back, not just from the “financial gerontocracy”, but from the central bankers who are the stewards of the fiat system. Just this past week, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned that crypto poses a risk that could disrupt the financial system.

  It’s a familiar strategy: the central banker cabal is skeptical of all crypto except central bank digital currencies – blockchain based cryptocurrencies that they can control, and use to strip society of the last vestiges of privacy and monetary freedom.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 21:20

• Pentagon Report Claims UFOs Left "Radiation Burns" & "Unaccounted-For Pregnancies" After Encounters
  Pentagon Report Claims UFOs Left “Radiation Burns” & “Unaccounted-For Pregnancies” After Encounters

  Authored by Elijah Cohen via TheMindUnleashed.com,

  According to a huge database of U.S. government records recently made public as a result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, encounters with UFOs have allegedly left Americans suffering from radiation burns, brain and nervous system damage, and even “unaccounted for pregnancy.”

  

  There are more than 1,500 pages of UFO-related information in the collection of records, which comes from the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), a clandestine United States Department of Defense program that operated from 2007 to 2012.

  The information was never classified as secret or top secret per say, but became more widely known about in 2017 after former program director Luis Elizondo resigned from the Pentagon and revealed to the world multiple now-infamous films of an unidentified aircraft moving in apparently inconceivable ways.

  Soon after it was disclosed that the AATIP was in existence, the American edition of the British tabloid The Sun filed a Freedom of Information Act inquiry for any and all records pertaining to the program. 

  Four years later, on April 5, 2022, the United States Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) complied with the request by providing The Sun with an additional 1,574 pages of information.

  Reports on UFO encounters and human biology are among the papers found in the trove, according to The Sun. Studies on advanced technology like invisibility cloaks are also among the records along with plans for deep space exploration and colonization. The AATIP informed The Sun that certain papers were “withheld in part” to protect privacy.

  The Sun FOIAd the DIA 😲

  “The report investigates injuries to “human observers by anomalous advanced aerospace systems”.
  And the report warns that such objects may be a “threat to United States interests”.”#ufo #uap #uaptwitter #ufotwitter @Akam1129https://t.co/w2QIo1Kkze

  — Baptiste Friscourt (@Baptiste_Fri) April 5, 2022

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

  Anomalous Acute and Subacute Field Effects on Human and Biological Tissues is one of the collection’s highlights. Anomalous sophisticated aerospace systems have allegedly injured “human observers,” posing a “threat to US interests,” the report claims.

  42 incidents from medical records and 300 “unpublished” cases in which people were injured following purported contacts with “anomalous vehicles,” which include UFOs, are described in the document.

  The research indicated some persons had burns or other illness caused by electromagnetic radiation, perhaps caused by “energy related propulsion systems.” 

  Unusual car incidents have been linked to brain and nerve damage.

  Between 1873 and 1994, the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON), a civilian non-profit entity that examines reported UFO sightings, collected a list of suspected biological impacts of UFO sightings on human observers.

  UFO sightings have been linked to “unaccounted pregnancy,” “apparent abduction,” paralysis, experiences of telepathy, teleportation, and levitation.

  

  More information may be found in The Sun’s original story on their Freedom of Information Act request.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 21:00

• Shanghai Reports 7th Day Of Record Cases As Viral Video Of Fatal Dog Beating Provokes Outrage
  Shanghai Reports 7th Day Of Record Cases As Viral Video Of Fatal Dog Beating Provokes Outrage

  The better part of a week has passed since local authorities announced on Monday that they would be extending the lockdown in Shanghai “indefinitely”. But despite authorities’ best efforts (or perhaps, because of them) COVID case numbers have continued to climb at a record pace, with Shanghai recording another 20K+ COVID cases on Thursday, topping the 20K mark for the second day in a row.

  Authorities reported 21,222 new cases in Shanghai alone on Thursday, marking a 7th straight daily record. For context, the city reported more cases on Thursday than the entire country saw earlier in the week.

  

  The number of symptomatic cases has also increased substantially. Shanghai, the new epicenter of China’s latest coronavirus outbreak, has recorded more than 131,000 cases since the flare-up started on March 1.

  According to the latest developments reported by the SCMP, the city has converted conference centers and public facilities into temporary quarantine and treatment facilities with tens of thousands of bunks, adding to the 77,000 hospital beds already set aside in the city of 25 million residents.

  Meanwhile, rumors have emerged on social media – sourced from unwittingly leaked military documents – that the military is taking over the city…

  Rumors that the military is taking over Shanghai are circulating on social media. State media debunked the rumors, but unverified surveillance footage showed troops are entering Shanghai by train. Netizens on Weibo confirmed that their community was already taken over. pic.twitter.com/Qyl7NPJvWr

  — Chu Yang (@ChuYang_Journ) April 7, 2022

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

  …and that the lockdown will persist at least until May.

  A suspected leaked document shows that the lockdown in Shanghai will last until May. pic.twitter.com/ah8jivG7Kd

  — Chu Yang (@ChuYang_Journ) April 7, 2022

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

  Should the lockdown persist for the entirety of April, China’s GDP could suffer a hit of more than one percentage point, as Goldman analysts determined that every four weeks of lockdown in the city would shave 1 percentage point off the country’s GDP, given Shanghai’s importance to the Chinese economy.

  The city has recorded more than 131,000 COVID cases since the flare-up began on March 1. Health authorities are taking no chances, even if the vast majority of the infections – daily symptomatic cases were in triple digits – showed no symptoms, and there had been no fatality in the current wave.

  “The battle against the outbreak is still very tough,” according to a Thursday speech by Vice-Premier Sun Chunlan, who had been overseeing the anti-pandemic work in Shanghai since last weekend. “Any sign of relaxation or complacency is unacceptable.”

  After sending some 40,000 military and medical personnel to the city, the CCP has issued a call to all discharged and available troops from the PLA in a search for volunteers to join the effort to provide food and other supplies – as well as testing and security – to the center.

  Beyond Shanghai, China added a total of 24,101 new cases on Friday, including 2,266 infections spotted in northeastern China’s Jilin province, the outbreak’s second epicenter.

  The city and its residents have already endured four rounds of tests involving every single resident between April 3 and April 7. And on Friday, the fifth round of mass testing began.

  In keeping with the CCP’s history of scapegoating local officials for lockdown failures, Shanghai removed three local officials in the Pudong New Area for failing to contain the virus, according to a statement from the CCP’s disciplinary committee.

  Finally, after suffering one public outrage after another, Shanghai residents were outraged on Friday after footage of a COVID worker beating a dog to death emerged on social media. The brutal remedy was applied after the dog’s owner tested positive for COVID, according to CNN. The beating took place at a residential compound in Pudong on Wednesday. 

  Footage of the beating, which is being heavily censored within China, can be found below:

  浦东新区曹路镇星海家园，主人阳性被带走，宠物狗狗追出来，被大白活活打死💔 pic.twitter.com/bV1FygCJng

  — iPaul🇨🇦🇺🇦 (@iPaulCanada) April 6, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 20:40

• Where Will The Food Riots Start?
  Where Will The Food Riots Start?

  Global food prices have never risen so fast and have never been so high, and as have detailed multiple times in recent months (as this is not simply a one-month, ‘blame it on Putin’ crisis), most recently here, the pieces are in place for some serious tears to form in the social fabric of many nations.

  While food prices may be generally seen as an emerging market problem, they will have an effect on developed markets too, something we will see in the upcoming French election.

  And as the following table from Bloomberg Economics shows, while Pakistan is already in the midst of a political crisis and Egypt is already coming under financial pressure (along with Peru and Sri Lanka), the surge in food prices is also adding to problems in the developed world.

  Nigeria, India, Colombia, Philippines, and Turkey all bear watching, along with Russia…

  

  In fact, as PeakProsperity’s Chris Martenson details below, the inflation riots have begun. Peru and Sri Lanka both are experiencing violence as inflation spirals the prices of basic necessities higher and higher.

  

  We’ve been here before, and recently.

  The Arab Spring was a period of social unrest and riots in 2010 and 2011 that was triggered, in part, by spiking food costs.

  As Alfred Henry Lewis said in 1906, “There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy.”

  But before pure anarchy comes, society experiences increasing unrest and the erosion of social bonds and niceties. That’s where we are now.

  Food prices today are higher than they were in 2010, so the protests are not at all surprising. We can and should expect more of them.

  Worse than that, however, is the prospect of actual famine and food shortages.

  I expect true famine to emerge by the end of this year, after the northern harvest fails to cover the basic needs of 8+ billion people.

  This is yet another reason why you should plant a garden. As if you needed one more, right?

  The reason for the glum outlook is not just the loss of Ukraine exports, and probable loss of the planting season for quite a large portion of the Ukraine, but because of the desperate global shortages of fertilizers which have become utterly essential to today’s crop yields.

  In this lesson, we learn that converting biologically active and supportive soil into barren dirt was a terrible idea.

  By 2030, it is projected that phosphate will reach peak output and then begin its long slow decline. What’s the world plan for this? There isn’t one. Again, this is why local, regenerative farming is so critical to undertake at this time.

  Watch the video:

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 20:20

• Trudeau Sets "Dangerous Precedent" With Tax Hikes On Canadian Banks And Insurers
  Trudeau Sets “Dangerous Precedent” With Tax Hikes On Canadian Banks And Insurers

  Canada’s banks and financial institutions were eager to do PM Justin Trudeau’s bidding when he called on them to financially excommunicate anybody caught supporting the “Freedom Convoy” of Canadian truckers.

  

  Now they’re being rewarded with some of the biggest tax hikes in recent memory.

  To wit, Bloomberg reports that Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland has imposed a “one-time windfall levy” on Canada’s biggest banks and insurance companies, while also permanently hiking their income-tax rate, in keeping with the Liberals’ campaign promises. The new taxes are expected to result in C$6.1 billion ($4.8 billion) in tax revenue over the past five years.

  The measures will force banks and insurance companies to pay an additional C$6.1 billion ($4.8 billion) in tax over five years, according to Freeland’s budget plan released Thursday. The new taxes are virtually certain to be implemented because Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has already secured the support of a left-leaning opposition party to pass the budget law.

  The government’s logic for justifying the tax hikes (much to the chagrin of the C-suite at these institutions) is that the banks benefited from the taxpayer-backed COVID bailout programs. Now, it’s time for them to pay it forward. The government said that massive, government-funded COVID support programs have helped the financial sector recover faster than other parts of the economy, and now it’s time to pay some back.

  Of course, Canada’s banks can at the very least look forward to some additional revenues as rising interest rates will help boost their net interest margin.

  But ultimately, it’s the borrowers who will suffer, as higher taxes will force the banks to demand even more interest on their loans, effectively creating a double-whammy that will raise the cost of everything from starting a business to buying a home.

  Investors who own shares of the big Canadian banks will likely also share some of the burden as their stocks are expected to take a hit, as RBC Capital Markets analyst Darko Mihelic.

  • The windfall tax may set a “dangerous precedent that long term investors will be hard-pressed not to notice”.
  • “Banks’ earnings move with the economic cycle. By ignoring the earnings downside during a recession and punishing banks when earnings recover, an expectation may build for future cycles, ultimately harming valuations over the longer term”.

  If there’s a silver lining, it’s that the even higher tax hikes that Trudeau had once threatened didn’t pan out.

  While the measures are in line with what Trudeau had signaled was coming, the tax may prompt a negative share reaction for the banks on Friday, as some investors may have either ignored the issue or hoped that a flurry of lobbying from the banks would work, said Barclays analyst John Aiken.

  “There was some concern, as imaginations started spiraling, that this was going to be absolutely awful,” Aiken said in an interview. “But it was within what had broadly been put out in the campaign promises.”

  The windfall tax will apply to all taxable income earned last year by the banks and insurers.

  The windfall tax of 15% applies to taxable income earned last year by banks and insurers in Canada over C$1 billion. That will force them to pay about C$4.1 billion, sliced into payments from 2022 to 2027, according to budget documents.

  But the government did not go quite as far in increasing the banks’ income tax rate as Trudeau had threatened to during last year’s campaign. The prime minister had pledged to increase the maximum federal income rate for financial institutions to 18% from 15%.

  Instead, Freeland is lifting it to 16.5% but lowering the threshold at which the new rate will apply to C$100 million from an original target of C$1 billion. That measure will mean about C$2 billion in additional taxes over five years, government estimates show.

  The big question now: how will these tax hikes affect foreign investment in Canada?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 20:00

• The "Doomsday Preppers" Were Right
  The “Doomsday Preppers” Were Right

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

  For years, there was a great debate about what the future of our society would look like. 

  The irrational optimists kept assuring us that we would never suffer any serious consequences for decades of incredibly foolish decisions, and they kept promising that a new golden age of peace and prosperity for humanity was just around the corner.  Meanwhile, others were warning that humanity would soon be plunging into an abyss filled with endless nightmares. 

  Instead of a utopian new chapter in our history, we were warned that war, hunger, pestilence and relentless economic problems were on the horizon.

  

  Prior to 2020, to a lot of people it seemed like the irrational optimists might be right after all.

  Yes, there were lots of serious problems simmering in the background, but overall life seemed to be rolling along pretty good for most of the population.

  But then 2020 came along, and everything started to change.

  As I write this article in April 2022, war, hunger, pestilence and relentless economic problems have all materialized.  In fact, things are already so bad in Europe that rationing has now been instituted in some areas…

  Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has threatened the supply of critical commodities in Europe and thrown global supply chains, which were already struggling amid COVID-19, into complete chaos.

  As a result, the prices of everything from wheat to oil have soared, leading to multi-decade high inflation rates in places like Germany and Spain. The supply crunch in Europe is now so bad it’s causing governments to begin laying the groundwork for rationing, with some stores already limiting supplies.

  This isn’t Africa that we are talking about.

  If rationing is already taking place in Europe, how bad is it going to be for the poorer nations in the months ahead?

  Well, UN Secretary-General António Guterres is telling us that “the world’s most vulnerable people and countries” are heading into a “hurricane of hunger”…

  UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned urgently of the global consequences of the war as early as mid-March. The breadbasket is being bombed and a “hurricane of hunger” is threatening, he stated. Given Ukraine’s great importance as a food exporter, the invasion was “also an attack on the world’s most vulnerable people and countries.”

  Sadly, he is not exaggerating one bit.

  As I discussed yesterday, at this point even Joe Biden is admitting that the coming food shortages are “going to be real”.

  But even though global leaders are openly telling us that things are going to get really bad, most people still don’t seem very alarmed.

  This greatly frustrates me, because this is not a false alarm.

  There are 45 different nations that normally get “at least one-third of their wheat from Ukraine or Russia”…

  The world’s 45 least developed countries import at least one-third of their wheat from Ukraine or Russia, and 18 countries among them import more than 50 percent. These include Egypt, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. These are all countries that are already dependent on humanitarian aid and food supplies because millions of people are currently suffering from massive hunger.

  How are all of those countries supposed to feed their people without that wheat?

  I keep asking that question, and not a single person has been able to answer it.

  Just look at the crisis that has erupted in Lebanon.  They normally get approximately 75 percent of their wheat from either Russia or Ukraine, and so far they have been unable to procure supplies from alternate sources…

  Lebanon, which obtains 75 percent of its wheat from Russia and especially Ukraine, is also desperately seeking other wheat exporters, but so far without success. The government turned to the international community with a call for help. There are now fears of rationing and sharp price increases, which will hit the already hard-pressed population hard.

  Meanwhile, the global bird flu plague just continues to intensify.

  Here in the United States, the total death toll is now just short of 28 million…

  The new cases mean that across the nation, farmers have had to kill about 22 million egg-laying chickens, 1.8 million broiler chickens, 1.9 million pullet and other commercial chickens, and 1.9 million turkeys.

  It has taken less than two months to go from the first confirmed case in the U.S. to nearly 28 million dead.

  So what will the death toll look like six months from now?

  And can you imagine what this will do to food prices?

  It is being reported that the price of a dozen eggs has already risen 52 percent since the start of this new pandemic…

  Egg prices are skyrocketing as a bird-flu outbreak ravages commercial chicken flocks in the U.S., with the price of a dozen large eggs spiking more than 52% in just under two months.

  For much more on this crisis, please see the article that I posted yesterday entitled “20 Facts About The Emerging Global Food Shortage That Should Chill You To The Core”.  I wish that I had sufficient words to properly convey the urgency that we should all be feeling in this hour.  We are heading into a complete and total nightmare, and I wish that I could get more people to understand this.

  Mike Adams is sounding the alarm too.  The following comes from an article that was published a few days ago in the Epoch Times…

  Food scarcity. Food vouchers. Food riots and flash mobs.

  All of that’s coming—and soon, says Texas-based food scientist and “Health Ranger” podcaster Mike Adams, who sees dire events unfolding in America in the short term.

  His advice: people need to get prepared now.

  Of course he is right on target.

  In fact, I have specifically been warning for years that all of these things were coming.

  At this point, it is clear that the “great debate” is over.

  The irrational optimists were wrong.  There will be no golden new era of peace and prosperity for humanity.

  Instead, we have entered a “perfect storm” of pain, suffering and horror.

  For many years, society laughed at the “doomsday preppers”, but they were right.

  And if you plan to make it through the extremely chaotic times that are coming, I would recommend that you become a “doomsday prepper” too.

  *  *  *

  It is finally here! Michael’s new book entitled “7 Year Apocalypse” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 19:40

• UCLA Pulls Ad For 'Unpaid' Professor Job Amid Backlash
  UCLA Pulls Ad For ‘Unpaid’ Professor Job Amid Backlash

  Universities (and the students and faculty who populate them) like to hold themselves out as paragons of virtue. But despite the immense financial resources of elite American universities, the overwhelming majority of the instructors who teach their classes are poorly paid, and enjoy little – if any – job security, something that has become a ‘fact of life’ for academics.

  

  But UCLA recently tried to push things to the limit, eliciting a furious backlash from academics, who felt the university was trying to exploit its workforce by attempting to hire an adjunct professor with an offer of “zero compensation”.

  Unpaid internships for college students are one thing, but the job posting asked for a lot: the candidate needed to have a PhD and a strong teaching record. As the backlash worsened, the university withdrew the job posting – but not before the NYT picked up on it.

  The job posting for an assistant adjunct professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, set high expectations for candidates: A Ph.D. in chemistry or biochemistry, a strong teaching record at the college level, and three to five letters of recommendation.

  But there was a catch: The job would be on a “without salary basis,” as the posting phrased it. Just to be clear, it hammered home the point: “Applicants must understand there will be no compensation for this position.”

  The posting last month caused an immediate uproar among academics across the country, who accused the university of exploiting already undervalued adjunct professors, and suggested this would never happen in other occupations. Under pressure, U.C.L.A. apologized and withdrew the posting.

  But the unspoken secret had been fleetingly exposed: Free labor is a fact of academic life.

  Unpaid, or poorly paid, positions are the biggest drivers of the ‘inequality’ that American colleges purport to oppose (even though they contribute to the phenomenon, due to a combination of academic selectivity and increasingly unaffordable tuition). As it turns out, the academics union at the University of California system has been fighting these arrangements for years.

  What’s even more unfair than the low – or no – pay is that the instructors typically spend long hours reading dense academic papers and answering student questions.

  The union representing contingent faculty at the University of California has been fighting the uncompensated positions for years, said Mia McIver, the president of the union, which represents about 7,000 members. “The fact that it is common does not excuse it,” she said.

  The union suspects that the number of uncompensated teachers at the university is increasing, said Dr. McIver, who is also a lecturer in the U.C.L.A writing program. “As of March 2019, we had identified 26 faculty members at U.C.L.A. alone,” she said.

  In the California system, the trend seemed to have begun with the financial crisis of 2008, Dr. McIver said. By 2010, she said, “We became aware of people who had been laid off and who were teaching for free in the hopes, without any commitment from the university, that if the work came back they would be hired back to teach for pay.”

  Many instructors who find themselves suckered into these work-for-free arrangements apparently regret it later. One woman who taught biology class at Washington University for free told the NYT that she later regretted agreeing to do so – especially after she found that instructors in other departments were paying paid.

  Liza Loza, a graduate student in molecular microbiology and microbial pathogenesis at Washington University, was excited to be asked to teach a discussion section about four years ago. She had to do a lot of preparation, spending hours reading very dense scientific papers and anticipating students’ questions.

  But she saw the job as her chance to make those discussions more hospitable to women and other students who had been shut out of the hard sciences. She remembered her own experience having professors who were so intimidating that she was afraid to speak, and she wanted to set a counterexample.

  She was told that the job was unpaid because it was a professional development opportunity. She says the experience was valuable. “I did get a lot out of it on my C.V., but also personally, as something that I wanted to help make better about the program,” she said.

  Then last semester, in her third year of teaching the section, she found out by accident that graduate students in other departments were being paid $1,000 for the same work.

  “That was for me a bright line,” she said. “It just seemed sort of straightforwardly unfair once I figured that out.”

  Elite Universities have fought to keep the system in place, while at the same time seeking to distract from it by promoting their efforts to ’empower’ women and members of the LGBTQ community.

  But like the old saying goes, “you can’t eat prestige”. As surging inflation makes it increasingly difficult for anybody to work for free (including white men and women who are members of the upper- and upper-middle-class), will we see a rebellion of the instructors and “contingent” faculty who keep these universities ticking?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 19:20

• "Gary Is Just Making Up Random #s" – San Francisco Homeless Officials Caught Lying About Fabricated Data
  “Gary Is Just Making Up Random #s” – San Francisco Homeless Officials Caught Lying About Fabricated Data

  Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Substack,

  Emails released through California Public Records Act show San Francisco Department of Public Health lied about data that had been fabricated by city contractor HealthRight360…

  

  Hilary Kunins, Director of Behavioral Health, Department of Health (Left) Gary McCoy of HealthRight360 (center), Deborah Bourne, Deputy Director, Public Health Department (right)

  The operator of San Francisco’s supervised drug use site fabricated the number of people who the site allegedly served, according to a San Francisco Department of Public Health executive, whose emails were released as part of California’s Public Records Act.

  “I think Gary is just making up random #s,” wrote Dr. Rob Hoffman, Special Project Manager with the San Francisco Department of Health, in a February 8 email to other city employees including ones with the Department of Emergency Management and city homeless service agencies.

  Gina McDonald, co-founder of Mothers Against Drug Deaths, filed the public records request, and was the first to report that of the 23,367 drug users who have visited the Tenderloin Linkage Center, just 18 have received drug treatment. 

  The Gary in question is Gary McCoy, an employee of city contractor HealthRight360, which is one of the private sector operators of the Tenderloin Linkage Center, which San Francisco Mayor London Breed created last December as part of her proposed crackdown on the open drug market in United Nations Plaza in downtown San Francisco.

  

  

  The numbers in question were for so-called “meaningful engagements” between city contractors and drug users, many of whom are homeless. Emails between city officials and Linkage Center operators show a struggle over how to measure whether or not the effort is working.

  A section of the same email says Hoffman had “concerns about the hr360 metrics. I think they are reporting interactions as meaningful engagements… I observed the HR360 staff and did not see anything that can account for the high numbers of meaning engagements… I think Gary is just making up random #s.”

  On February 15, an executive with the Department of Emergency Management, Kay Vasilyeva, wrote, “Adrienne had some concerns about the FEST [Felton Institute Street Team] metrics… Only 229 total encounters but over 200 for both health referrals and linkage center referrals? This must mean there is double counting, which is problematic.”

  

  

  On February 23, another Department of Public Health employee, Dr. Matthew Goldman, wrote an email to colleagues saying, “After the second & third week there were concerns with HR360’s data, but Gary from HR360 insisted it was valid.”

  In response to a request from a reporter with the San Francisco Standard news organization, the Director of Communications with the Department of Public Health, Alison Hawkes, misrepresented what had occurred.

  In a separate email later the same day, Hawkes re-wrote a public statement written by Goldman. “Part-way through the most recent reporting period (OP10),” wrote Goldman in his draft, “the TLC metrics team discovered that one of the CBOs was inaccurately recording data on engagements.”

  

  Hawkes re-wrote the statement to read, Part-way through the most recent reporting period (OP10) the TLC metrics team discovered that one of the providers at the site was defining engagements in a way inconsistent with other teams on the site.”

  Six minutes later, Hillary Kunins replied to Hawkes saying, “thx Alison! made a few additional edits. I don’t think we should use the terms, ‘incorrect’ or ‘mistake,’ and don’t think we should refer to the ‘privacy area,’ as that has been an internal term, and not (as far as I know) a publicly used description. see below. I do think we need to define meaningful engagement – I don’t have that.”

  The emails offer a glimpse into the shared culture of the Department of Public Health and its contractors. One senior Department executive, Deborah Borne, wrote in an email to an employee with the Department of Emergency Management, “I would love to do a real tarot reading for the new year for you!”

  

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to Michael Shellenberger’s Substack here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 19:00

• Bank Of Russia Eases More Capital Controls, Allowing Euro & USD Withdraws
  Bank Of Russia Eases More Capital Controls, Allowing Euro & USD Withdraws

  Russia’s central bank has announced Friday the easing of more capital controls following its surprise policy meeting, exactly a week after it began loosening some restrictions on the transfer of funds abroad, which authorized transfers up to $10,000 – or another currency equivalent – within a one month timeframe. 

  “The Bank of Russia rolled back some capital controls, allowing banks to exchange rubles for hard currency once more and for some hard-currency account holders to withdraw euros and not just dollars,” Bloomberg reports of the fresh Bank of Russia decision.

  

  It’s latest among a series of signs that the Russian financial system is stabilizing. As we noted earlier in the day the biggest news out of Moscow was the central bank’s unexpected move of slashing rates by 300bps (from 20% to 17%). And was even more surprising to many is that the Ruble – previously dismissed as “rubble” by President Biden – actually strengthened further on the rate-cut, surging by end of day to just below 80/USD.

  Further according to Bloomberg, “Individuals with foreign currency accounts or deposits open prior to March 9 who hadn’t used up their $10,000 limit for withdrawing cash, can receive euros as well as dollars from April 11, the central bank said in a statement.

  “Banks can sell foreign currency once again from April 18, but only the foreign currency that the banks received since April 9,” the report indicates. The fresh curbs also included canceling the 12% commission on brokers’ FX purchases.

  3/ The Bank of Russia is also marginally easing capital controls on individuals: those who still didn’t manage to get their $10k can do it in € now as well (still max $10k till September). Banks can start giving individuals FX cash, but only from fresh FX since 9 April 2022. pic.twitter.com/GOviSvmwkP

  — Elina Ribakova 🇺🇦 (@elinaribakova) April 8, 2022

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

  Meanwhile, the media are claiming that the strength of the ruble “may be illusory” or that Russia has exploited a “loophole” in the sanctions and used “financial alchemy” to “rescue the ruble”.

  But as the FT observed yesterday (while telling their readers to “Whisper it quietly…”), “The domestic banking sector also seems to have stabilized, after bank runs in the initial days of the war,” pointing out that “The need for central bank liquidity has faded sharply and the commercial banking sector as a whole could soon end up having surplus deposits with the CBR, the IIF [Institute of International Finance] notes.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 18:40

• Durham Asks Court To Compel Production From Clinton Campaign, DNC
  Durham Asks Court To Compel Production From Clinton Campaign, DNC

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

  Special counsel John Durham’s team on April 6 asked a federal judge to force Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and two other parties to hand over documents they claim are protected by attorney–client privilege.

  

  The campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and research and intelligence firm Fusion GPS appear to be withholding documents that aren’t actually protected by the privilege, Durham’s team said in the filing, entered in the case against ex-Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann.

  Of the withheld materials, almost all “appear to lack any connection to actual or expected litigation or the provision of legal advice,” prosecutors told U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee who is overseeing the case.

  In fact, of the 1,455 documents being withheld by Fusion GPS, only 18 emails and attachments are said to involve an attorney.

  The Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Fusion didn’t respond to requests for comment.

  The documents in question are being sought for the upcoming trial of Sussmann, who was charged with lying to the FBI for going to a bureau lawyer in 2016 and falsely stating he didn’t hand over unsubstantiated claims about then-candidate Donald Trump on behalf of a client.

  The claims were compiled with funding from the campaign and the DNC by former British spy Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS, which was founded by former reporters.

  Sussmann and his lawyers have been pressing the judge to dismiss the case prior to trial, arguing that the lie about not bringing the information on behalf of a client wasn’t material to the information itself.

  Attorney–client privilege protects many communications between a client and their lawyer. Disclosure to third parties usually undercuts privilege claims.

  In the new filing, Durham’s team pointed out that Fusion GPS co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch penned a book published in 2019, which means even if a valid privilege did once exist, it might have since been waived.

  Prosecutors also noted that Fusion GPS operatives regularly communicated with reporters about their work, resulting in several stories before the 2020 election and a spate of others after voters hit the polls.

  Further, the Clinton campaign (HFA) and the DNC have claimed privilege over communications sent between Rodney Joffe, whom Sussmann was also representing at the time, and a Fusion operative, “despite the fact that no one from either the DNC or HFA is copied on certain of these communications,” prosecutors said.

  The government subpoenaed information from the parties in 2021.

  Fusion GPS was paid by the Democratic entities through Perkins Coie, a law firm. The agreement was introduced as an exhibit in the case.

  Many if not most of the actions taken by Fusion GPS employees “do not appear to have been a necessary part of, or even related to” Perkins Coie’s legal advice to the campaign and the DNC, Durham’s team said.

  Prosecutors want to examine the communications in a private, in-camera setting “in order to resolve these issues and ensure that only legitimately privileged and/or attorney work product-protected communications and testimony be withheld from the otherwise admissible evidence and testimony that is presented to the jury at trial.”

  The trial is currently set to start on May 16.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 18:20

• Global Food Prices Explode Higher In March As Ukraine Supply Shock Strikes
  Global Food Prices Explode Higher In March As Ukraine Supply Shock Strikes

  Global food prices jumped to a new record high, soaring the fastest on record, as the conflict in Ukraine unleashed food supply shocks across the world. 

  “The current conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation is increasing the risk of a further deterioration of the food insecurity situation at global level,” the FAO said in a recent food insecurity assessment (pdf).

  March’s food price index from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) printed 159.3 points in March, up 19.15 points from February, when it had already reached record highs. The index was up 33.6% from the same time last year.  

  

  The March rise in food prices is a stunning 12.64% MoM – almost double the previous record monthly surge…

  

  Leading the charge was the FAO Cereal Price Index, up 17.1% in March than in February, entirely driven by significant price increases in wheat and grains as a result of the Black Sea breadbasket region going offline because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and sanctions-related supply disruptions by Western countries on Russia. The invasion has choked off more than a quarter of the global wheat trade, about a fifth of corn, and 12% of all calories traded globally. 

  

  Another driver was FAO Vegetable Oil Price Index, up 23.2%, driven by higher prices of sunflower seed oil, of which Ukraine is the world’s leading exporter. Palm, soy, and rapeseed oil prices increased due to higher sunflower seed oil and Brent crude prices. 

  It’s not just a shortage of food, but also shortages of fertilizer and skyrocketing diesel prices, the ability to farm and even perhaps produce robust harvests by the end of the Northern Hemisphere growing season could be in jeopardy, which would ultimately extend the global food crisis through 2023. 

  “Looking forward to 2022-23, we’re already seeing signs that production is going to be reduced in Ukraine,” Erin Collier, an economist at the UN, told Bloomberg.

  “The amount they’re able to export really depends on how much longer this conflict continues.”

  The bad news is the world’s hunger problem isn’t going away and may only get worse from here…

  The risks of soaring basic foods are possible inflation riots in emerging market economies. Last week, the UN pointed out millions of Middle Eastern and North African families struggle to buy even the most basic foods to keep hunger at bay. 

  “People’s resilience is at a breaking point. This crisis is creating shock waves in the food markets that touch every home in this region. No one is spared,” Corinne Fleischer, UN’s World Food Programme Regional Director said. 

  The risk of uprisings is increasing by the week as the UN projects food prices to soar even higher. It’s important to note that food prices were already rising before the Ukrainian conflict. 

  We’ve outlined the most reliant countries on Ukraine wheat, including Egypt, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Turkey (the countries that could see unrest first). 

  However, in South America, inflation riots have already begun as the government declared a curfew last weekend. Arab Spring 2.0 appears to be emerging, but this time it could be global, unlike a decade ago. 

  We are in the early innings of this https://t.co/PPKOq1vDzb

  — Doomberg (@DoombergT) April 7, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 18:00

• David Stockman On The Coming Stock Market 'Crash Of Biblical Proportions'
  David Stockman On The Coming Stock Market ‘Crash Of Biblical Proportions’

  Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

  International Man: Whether we like it or not, the reality is, the Federal Reserve has an enormous influence over the dollar and the stock market.

  And right now, the Fed has an urgent and fateful decision to make.

  It can keep printing trillions of dollars, let inflation skyrocket or tighten monetary policy, and watch the stock market crash.

  In other words, it can sacrifice the stock market or the dollar. 

  David, what do you think the Fed will do, and what are the implications?

  

  David Stockman: Well, I think whether it wants to or not, the Fed will crash the stock market. The Fed has painted itself into a hellacious corner because it’s made such a fetish out of its 2% inflation target, especially since January 2012, when it officially adopted this quantitative target.

  In fact, most of the massive money printing, which has occurred since 2012, when the economy was pretty much recovered from the Great Recession anyway, has been justified by an inflation shortfall, which wasn’t true, but that was the justification.

  They were trying to raise inflation and therefore felt that they could keep quantitative easing at these huge rates, including $120 billion per month, until recently. And as a result, we’re now in a world in which inflation is heading towards double digits.

  I think they’re going to have no choice but to throw on the brakes much harder than the market is expecting, much harder than they would like to do, or maybe even intend at the moment, but there’s no choice.

  Now, when you have double-digit inflation, number one and second, you’re going into what’s going to be a nasty election season in which the Republicans will finally see hope for their salvation in a horrendous battle on the inflation front blaming the Democrats and Biden.

  That means the Fed will not be in a position over the next 2, 3, 4 quarters to retreat on the inflation battle. Whether it wants to or not, it will have to raise interest rates even far more than are expected now.

  It’s going to begin QT, quantitative tightening, or draining its $9 trillion balance sheet faster than it is talking about at the moment or what the market expects. That’s because it’s not going to be able to justify or maintain any credibility when inflation is running at the CPI level at nearly 10%.

  So that’s a new ballgame.

  We haven’t been in these kinds of uncharted waters for a long time, not since the 1970s, and even in the 1970s, the story was far different than it is today. So, the market will struggle with a Fed that turns out not to be their friend. It’s going to time and time again, think that the worst is over, buy the dip and make a lot of money, only to be disappointed.

  I point out one final kind of analogy here.

  If you go back to March 2000, when the dot-com bubble collapsed, the NASDAQ peaked at 4600, and the market dropped by 30% in the next 15 days. And after that bone-rattling drop people said it’s all over. The worst has happened, and you should buy the dip. You’re going to make a lot of money.

  And over the next two years, they kept buying the dip, but over the next two years, the NASDAQ went from 4,600 to 3,300, all the way down to 800. An 80% plus decline and all that dip buying resulted in massive losses and pain.

  I think we’re going to go through the same thing again.

  International Man: Suppose the Fed does raise rates aggressively in the months ahead. What are the chances that they will capitulate and reverse course as soon as Wall Street starts screaming about it?

  David Stockman: Well, that’s what people expect, but I think this time, they’re not going to capitulate soon and easily. In other words, the so-called Fed put is a lot lower on the S&P 500 index than people may expect or that the Wall Street bulls would like to believe. They think it might be 3,500 or something like that. I think it’s around 2000 because the Fed won’t have the maneuvering room.

  Even the official inflation statistics are running high. They are understating the true inflation when you adjust for all the gimmicks they put in the CPI in the last 20 years. But when inflation on the government statistics is running at 7-10%, they’re just not going to have room to start the printing presses again.

  International Man: Given the rapidly rising debt levels—corporate, personal, and for the federal government—is it even possible for the Fed to raise interest rates beyond a token amount?

  David Stockman: Well, I think you can say it would be dangerous, and yes, the debt levels are really something to behold.

  If you take public and private debt today, it’s $88 trillion, which is 370% of GDP. It’s off the charts compared to where a stable economy historically stood. If you go back to 1970, before Nixon pulled the plug on sound money, the ratio was 150%. In other words, we had about $1.5 trillion of total debt and a GDP of $1.0 trillion.

  So now we’ve had two extra turns of debt added to the economy over the last 50 years. Two turns of additional debt amount to $50 trillion today, burdening all sectors of the economy, households, non-financial business, governments especially, and even financial institutions, than would be the case had we stuck to kind of that golden mean of 150% debt to GDP. That’s the leverage ratio of the national economy that prevailed for a century up to 1970.

  So yes, there is a massive problem with this enormous debt burden. When the Fed raises interest rates, it will notch up the carry cost and service cost enormously, creating all kinds of dislocations in households that will have to pay more for their mortgages and their other debt.

  As interest rates go up, all that money corporations borrowed to buy back stock and pay dividends that weren’t being earned will result in larger interest expenses and lower profits.

  So the whole thing will be a pretty big mess, but that will not stop the Fed from using the only tool it has.

  It has one tool. It’s like the craftsman with a hammer, and everything looks like a nail. So if the Fed wants to accomplish something, it will have to hit the nail.

  So the Fed will have to raise interest rates, not just a 2% by the end of this year or 2.5%. They’re going to have to go up into the 4-6% range to slow down the economy and break the back of inflation.

  I was around when Volcker took interest rates to 20% on the overnight rate to finally break the back of inflation. But, of course, that will cause a lot of damage to the economy. But I don’t think they have much choice.

  In short, you’re going to have one difficult time bringing inflation under control, and the consequences of those moves will be mind-boggling and historic in terms of their negative impact.

  International Man: Given everything we’ve talked about today, what can the average person do? What can they do to protect themselves and profit from what is coming next?

  David Stockman: Well, I think the most important thing is to stay out of the casino.

  The bond market is vastly, massively overvalued. As a result, the price of bonds will drop dramatically, and people will be shocked by how much you can lose in allegedly safe sovereign debt.

  The stock market is even more dangerous, and it’s entirely because of these artificially low, ultra-low interest rates. So now we’re starting to move into the realm of reality, let’s say normalcy, as interest rates come back up. And I think they got a long way yet to go.

  If you’re going to be in the stock market, be on the short side.

  But if you don’t have discretionary capital or savings, and if you don’t have the stomach for what will be a very volatile ride, the best thing to do is stay in cash, even though you’re losing ground against inflation. At least bank accounts are not going to lose principle. Whereas bonds and stocks can lose 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% of their value in the next year or two as we go through this great correction.

  *  *  *

  The Fed has already pumped enormous distortions into the economy and inflated an “everything bubble.” The next round of money printing is likely to bring the situation to a breaking point. If you want to navigate the complicated economic and political situation that is unfolding, then you need to see this newly released video from Doug Casey and his team. In it, Doug reveals what you need to know, and how these dangerous times could impact your wealth. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Ukraine Foreign Minister Demands More "Weapons, Weapons, Weapons" In NATO Meeting
  Ukraine Foreign Minister Demands More “Weapons, Weapons, Weapons” In NATO Meeting

  “Weapons, weapons, weapons” is what Ukraine’s government is still demanding of NATO countries, even after the Biden-approved $800 million package last month.

  Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba issued the plea after meeting with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg in Brussels, stating on Twitter that the “three most important things” for Ukrainians are “weapons, weapons, weapons.”

  “Met with Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at NATO HQ in Brussels. I came here today to discuss three most important things: weapons, weapons, and weapons,” Kuleba wrote. “Ukraine’s urgent needs, the sustainability of supplies, and long-term solutions which will help Ukraine to prevail,” he added.

  

  Already the Pentagon has agreed to send more Javelin anti-armor systems, also as Stinger anti-aircraft missiles are being supplied, which Moscow sees as a huge provocation, with the war entering its sixth week.

  During a press conference in Brussels, Kuleba said his agenda in meeting with NATO leaders remains “simple”…

  “We know how to fight. We know how to win. But without sustainable and sufficient supplies requested by Ukraine, these wins will be accompanied by enormous sacrifices,” Kuleba said. “The more weapons we get and the sooner they arrive in Ukraine, the more human lives will be saved.”

  Previously, CNN had documented that Kiev is increasingly pushing Washington for more advanced battlefield weapons, especially to take out Russia’s superior tanks and aircraft:

  The Defense Department plans to accelerate production of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and Javelin anti-tank missiles so it can refill its own depleted stocks as it continues to send the vital systems to Ukrainian forces fighting the Russian invasion, according to defense officials.

  Ukraine wants 500 Javelin anti-tank missiles and 500 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles delivered from the US daily, according to a recent military assistance wish list. CNN viewed the document that details the items Ukraine believes it needs from the US.

  CNN wrote further in an end of last month report: “By March 7, less than two weeks into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US and other NATO members had sent about 17,000 anti-tank missiles and 2,000 anti-aircraft missiles to Ukraine. Since then, that number has certainly increased but an update has not been made public.”

  Moscow has warned that it will hold outside powers responsible for instances where Russian troops come under attack by foreign-supplied weaponry – something which has clearly already happened many times.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 02:45

• Playing Pipeline Politics
  Playing Pipeline Politics

  Authored by Pieter Cleppe via The Critic.co.uk,

  The Gulf countries may not be reliable partners against Russia…

  

  Earlier this month, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad was welcomed in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates. To the dismay of the United States, the red carpet was rolled out for him, on the anniversary of the uprising against Assad, amid war mongering by his Russian ally in Ukraine.

  Just before, British PM Boris Johnson has been on a visit himself to both the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, not only to promote Global Britain, but also in a bid to convince both Gulf states to increase oil production. Johnson was acting as an emissary from the West, after the Gulf countries’ leaders declined to take a call from U.S. President Joe Biden to build international support for Ukraine and contain a surge in oil prices, signalling their unhappiness with the perceived Western lack of support for their security.  

  These grievances include concerns about Biden’s move to take Yemenite Houthi rebels off of America’s official list of global terrorist groups. Drone and missile attacks on U.A.E. capital Abu Dhabi, launched earlier this year by the Iran-backed rebel group, and the prospect of a restoration of the Iran nuclear deal have added to the U.A.E. and Saudi Arabia’s complaints.  

  It’s not just refusing to take Joe Biden’s calls, however. More broadly, the Gulf states are hedging their bets on the Ukraine issue. The Emirates abstained during a United Nations vote condemning Russia’s invasion, and the Emirati leader, popularly known as “MBZ”, referred to “Russia’s right to ensure its national security” in a call with Russian President Putin. There has even been speculation that the U.A.E. could help Russia avoid Western sanctions, with Emirati officials reportedly assuring Russians that they will not enforce sanctions unless mandated by the UN — something which Moscow would certainly veto. 

  On top of that, there is a deal between Russia and the Saudi-led oil cartel, OPEC, which the Saudis and Emiratis are reluctant to abandon, as it was hard-fought in 2020 and involved great concessions from Russia. 

  The OPEC question will become increasingly important, because the situation on the energy front is dire. The International Energy Agency has warned a global oil supply shock may be coming due to large-scale disruptions to Russian oil supplies, which would drive oil prices to even higher levels than today. While Saudi Arabia isn’t pumping oil at full capacity and has not yet pledged to do so, the U.A.E have promised to push OPEC to pump more oil, but this development has yet to materialize and wasn’t agreed upon with other OPEC members in advance. Despite the talk, actions on the ground further indicate the Emirates are moving away from the West, a shift which is in line with broader trends in the Gulf region. 

  King dollar no more? 

  Indeed, the sanctions which have cut off several Russian banks from the SWIFT international payments system and frozen reserves accumulated by the Russian central bank, have renewed debate on the role of the U.S. Dollar as global reserve currency, particularly in the Gulf.  

  Some have argued that “we are witnessing the birth of Bretton Woods III — a new world (monetary) order centred around commodity-based currencies in the East that will likely weaken the Eurodollar system.” For the moment, however, this remains a minority view, while the general consensus is that there is little alternative to the U.S. dollar in the short- to medium-term. 

  The lack of trust in China’s currency should stymy Beijing’s hopes of turning the yuan into a global reserve currency. Gold has proven to be a safe store of value, but despite the fiat money of governments being eroded to finance state spending, gold is not used as a regular payment method. The euro is still plagued by its shaky political underpinnings, while it is still an open question whether bitcoin will be able to resist state action banning it, if it will ever be widely adopted in the first place.  

  King dollar also retains its primacy due to the fact that oil sales are conducted in USD — at least for now. This week, it emerged that Saudi Arabia is considering accepting yuan instead of dollars for Chinese oil sales.  

  This is likely to be a bluff, or rather a Saudi cry for attention from Washington decision makers. Switching millions of barrels of oil trades from dollars to yuan every day could unsettle Saudi Arabia’s economy given that the Saudi currency is pegged to the dollar. Aides to the Saudi crown prince have apparently warned him of unpredictable economic damage which could result from moving ahead with the plan. It’s not hard to see how trading oil in a currency plagued by rampant capital controls could easily backfire — meaning that Gulf countries abandoning the imperfect dollar umbrella may soon find themselves in stormy weather. 

  UK faces “tough” talks with Gulf countries  

  The continued primacy of the U.S. dollar also makes the argument less convincing that Western sanctions against Russia will push into to a separate trading bloc led by China, creating a kind of dichotomy within the global economy. That is unlikely to happen fast. Not only is China far from enjoying the degree of trust required to offer the world’s reserve currency, it’s impossible for Russia to simply replace its trade with the West with Chinese trade, as the volume of Russia’s current trade with the West is simply too high.  

  The West, however, is determined to reduce that trade. Ahead of his trip to the Gulf, Boris Johnson vowed the world must “starve Putin’s addiction to oil and gas”, adding that “Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are key international partners in that effort.” Then, only one day after Johnson’s visit, UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed pledged, during a visit to Moscow, to cooperate with Russia on bolstering global energy security. 

  Johnson’s government seems to be wary to embrace fracking, which before Putin’s war helped the United States enjoy gas prices that are only one sixth of the level in Europe. Unless Johnson revisits that stance, the UK has no choice but to become more energy dependent on the rest of the world, particularly petrol-rich states like the Gulf countries. So far, however, it’s unclear whether they’re ready to play ball. With UK talks with Gulf countries over increased oil production labelled “tough” and the Emirates gearing up to water down the effect of Western sanctions on Russia, something’s got to give. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 02:00

• Does China's Friendship With Russia Really Have "No Limits"?
  Does China’s Friendship With Russia Really Have “No Limits”?

  By Simon Watkins of OilPrice.com

  For several years, China and Russia have been building an alternative world order to that offered by the U.S. and its allies. This was expedited by the unilateral withdrawal of the U.S. in May 2018 from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, its withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, and its ‘end of combat mission’ in Iraq in December 2021, among other factors.

  

  China’s strategy to achieve this new world order is one based on incremental advances of power, based around money flowing from its ‘One Belt One Road’ (OBOR) program. However, Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov’s comments before his meeting last week with Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, that Moscow and Beijing are paving the way “towards a multi-polar, just, democratic world order” are too much too soon as far as China is concerned. The widely-publicised remarks have left Beijing needing to be even more careful in how its dealings with Russia are interpreted by the U.S., especially in the energy sector in which high oil prices pose direct economic and political threats to Washington. China stated two weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine that “there is ‘no limit’ to how far Russian and Chinese friendship may go” and signed a swathe of huge oil and gas deals shortly thereafter that provided an additional layer of insulation to both from any U.S. sanctions in the future. However, signalling perhaps that Beijing did not believe that Russia would necessarily launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine before it did so, only a day after the military conflict spread to Ukraine’s major cities, Chinese President Xi Jinping held urgent talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and advocated peaceful negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. “China was signifying its discomfort over Russia’s military actions, [and] has reiterated that it respects the ‘sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries’,” Eugenia Fabon Victorino, head of Asia Strategy for SEB, in Singapore, told OilPrice.com last week.

  At the same time, though, she added, Beijing has refrained from calling Russia’s actions an ‘invasion’, and abstained to vote on a UN Security Council resolution that would have deplored Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. “In addition, so far, China has not indicated an intention to take direct action against Moscow, and has kept trading links with Russia open,” she said. A key reason for this, over and above any ideological aspirations of a new world order is that although Russia accounts for only 2.9 percent of China’s total imports, Moscow did resolutely step up to the plate in 2021 when China faced an energy crunch. “As a result, Russia now accounts for 20.1 percent of China’s total coal imports, and its share of China’s imported crude oil has steadily risen to 15.6 percent by end-2021 from 11 percent in 2014,” highlighted Victorino. Russia’s vital strategic importance to China was bolstered again with the 30-year contract for Russia to supply gas to China through its new Far Eastern pipeline – following the earlier installation of the Power of Siberia-1 pipeline which began pumping supplies in 2019 – as highlighted by OilPrice.com.

  “Despite stronger ties between Beijing and Moscow in recent years, there are limits to China’s friendship,” Victorino underlined. “While Russia is an increasingly important source of energy, its total trade with China pales in comparison with China’s trade links with the United States and the European Union [EU],” she said. According to the latest figures, among China’s top trading partners, the EU accounts for 15.3 percent of China’s total trade, followed by the U.S. with 12.5 percent. “As sanctions against Russia mount, there are reports that some of China’s largest state-owned banks are already limiting financing for transactions of Russian commodities,” she told OilPrice.com. “Although sanctions have so far stopped short of Russia’s energy trading, Chinese banks may have already stopped issuing US$-denominated letters of credit related to Russian commodities,” she added. Having said this, she underlined, Chinese yuan-denominated financing for Russian commodities may still be available, albeit with a higher level of scrutiny. “Large Chinese banks would be reluctant to lose access to dollar transactions, in our view, and in the past, China’s big four banks have complied with U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea in a bid to maintain access to the dollar clearing system,” she concluded.

  The precariousness of the position into which Russia has put China is further evidenced by the fact that increasing fears of U.S. retaliatory measures against Beijing added fuel to the sell-off in Chinese equities in the aftermath of the invasion on the 24th of February. “China will need to make a stronger gesture of neutrality if Beijing wishes to lower the risk of second order political and economic spillovers from the Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Rory Green, head of China and Asia research at TS Lombard, in London, told OilPrice.com last week. “Our view remains that China will comply with the existing sanctions regime and is prioritising three objectives in the current geopolitical turmoil: first, maintaining normal ties with Russia but avoiding aiding the war effort; second, non-alienation of the EU; and, third, avoiding secondary sanctions and economic damage.”

  The relative importance of the first objective is now much lower, he said, as Beijing has made efforts to moderate its stance and move closer to European and Western positions. “Following intelligence leaks and U.S. accusations, Chinese officials have sought to clarify Beijing’s stance, with the Chinese Ambassador to the U.S., Qin Gang, writing a Washington Post editorial that underscored Ukraine’s sovereignty and played up China’s neutral position,” he told OilPrice.com. “Also, in a bilateral call, President Xi called on [U.S.] President [Joe] Biden and their respective countries to ‘work for world peace and tranquillity’,” Green underlined, “Additionally, earlier in the week, Xi described the conflict as a ‘war’ for the first time, and Chinese state media have also begun to report less favourably on Russia including coverage of civilian deaths,” he said. “Overall, despite the shared values and Beijing’s reluctance to succumb to Western pressure, we think strategic rationality will dominate,” highlighted Green. “China has indicated a strong preference for avoiding the economic consequences of Russia’s actions and, given the rising growth and market concerns in Beijing, we expect economics to dominate ideology,” he concluded.

  Although being seen to comply with U.S. strictures on Russia is important to China, it remains the case that there are several legal and quasi-legal ways for it to continue to import Russian energy in significant volumes, so adding to the overall global supply and affecting oil prices. As analysed in depth by OilPrice.com recently, China has a long history of being able to work around sanctions – ranging across the gamut of legality and beyond – with basic factors working in its favour regarding Russia being the lack of exposure of China’s firms to the U.S. financial infrastructure and to the US dollar, and the direct oil and gas infrastructure between the two countries. It is apposite to note that around the same time as the two huge new oil and gas deals were signed between Russia and China, there were discussions between Gazprom and China National Petroleum Corporation that the contract would be settled in euros to diversify the payment from the U.S. currency.  

  “As the U.S. dollar becomes more weaponized, there is an incentive to convert more FX reserves into yuan,” underlined SEB’s Victorino. “In the case of Russia, earlier restrictions imposed following the annexation of Crimea in 2014 led to the significant diversification of Russia’s foreign reserves away from U.S. dollars: of the US$643 billion reserves, the share of U.S. dollars has fallen to 16.4 percent as of Q2 2021 from 44.4 percent in 2014, whilst over the same period Russia made cumulative purchases of almost US$78 billion worth of Chinese yuan, meaning that the yuan’s current share is at 13.1 percent,” she said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 04/08/2022 – 00:05

• US Air Force Delays Hypersonic Missile Program Over "Flight Test Anomalies"
  US Air Force Delays Hypersonic Missile Program Over “Flight Test Anomalies”

  While Russia launched hypersonic air-to-ground missiles during the invasion of Ukraine and China flew a hypersonic weapon around the world late last year, the US continues to fall behind the hypersonic curve as a new round of delays were announced by the US Air Force (USAF), according to Bloomberg. 

  The AGM-183 Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) was expected to be declared “early operational capability” by Sept. 30. However, according to a USAF statement, those timelines have been pushed back to the next fiscal year. 

  

  ARRW, expected to be the Pentagon’s first hypersonic weapon, suffered three consecutive failed tests last year. ARRW’s latest hurdle was two upcoming ground-based booster motor tests by June 30. But, it appears “due to recent flight test anomalies,” the missile test would be shifted out to as late as December with additional tests planned next fiscal year, according to the USAF statement.

  “The ARRW production decision remains event-driven and will occur after operational utility is demonstrated through successful system end-to-end flight tests,” the service continued.  

  Lockheed-Martin’s ability to manufacture and deliver the new weapon appears to be a 2023 story. Western countries have yet to field a hypersonic weapon while the old world order crumbles as a multipolar world emerges, pushing Russia and China closer together. 

  Perhaps that’s why President Biden is set to unveil a new trilateral security hypersonic pact with the UK and Australia to advance the development of hypersonic weapons. 

  On Wednesday, Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama sounded the alarm at the House Armed Services Committee hearing that China has “more troops, ships, and hypersonic missiles than the United States.” Republican Rep. Michael Turner of Ohio said the US needs to increase its hypersonic development. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 23:45

• State Department Memo In Early 2020 Assessed That Lab leak Was Most Likely Origin Of COVID-19
  State Department Memo In Early 2020 Assessed That Lab leak Was Most Likely Origin Of COVID-19

  Authored by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke via The Epoch Times,

  A newly released memo from the U.S. State Department reveals that government officials knew early on that the COVID pandemic likely originated at a lab in Wuhan, China.

  

  That memo, dated April 2020, states that out of five possible origins for COVID, a lab leak was by far the most likely. The memo also suggests that alternative theories had been introduced to prevent a lab leak from being investigated. The memo, which focuses almost entirely on the likelihood of a lab leak, contains a large amount of information that wasn’t known publicly at the time it was written.

  Although a lab leak is now widely accepted as a likely origin for the virus, when the memo was written, a concerted effort was underway to discredit that possibility. It also raises the question of what senior State Department leadership—including then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo—knew and why the information was withheld from the public.

  According to the newly released memo, the State Department knew as of April 2020 that the central issue surrounded an obsession with collecting and testing a massive amount of virus-carrying bats on the part of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and China’s Wuhan-located Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  The State Department noted that lab testing of the earliest-known patient at the Wuhan Central Hospital in December 2019 determined that the virus was a “Bat SARS-like Coronavirus.” At the time this patient was tested, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) hadn’t disclosed that there was any problem at all.

  When they finally acknowledged an outbreak, they initially blamed it on pneumonia. It was only at the end of January that the CCP finally started admitting that COVID-19 was caused by a new virus that was transmitted between humans.

  By that time, the virus had already been seeded across the globe and any chance at suppression had been lost. It was during this same period that the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci, was made aware of the virus’s likely origin, having been told by a group of scientists whom he was funding that there was a high probability that the virus was engineered.

  Although it’s been known since June 2021 that Fauci and the NIH covered up his knowledge of the virus’s origin, the State Department’s early insight into these matters wasn’t fully known until late March 2022, when the transparency group U.S. Right to Know obtained the April 2020 memo.

  Two Labs

  The memo, titled “An Analysis of Circumstantial Evidence for Wuhan Labs as the Source of the Coronavirus,” comprises five pages and is written in military BLUF style, meaning “bottom line up front.”

  The memo begins by stating that one of two Wuhan labs is the likely source of the COVID outbreak. The two labs identified by the state department are the Wuhan CDC’s lab located in downtown Wuhan and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where Shi Zhengli was known to have conducted dangerous gain-of-function experiments on bat viruses.

  The State Department’s focus on the Wuhan CDC lab as a possible source is particularly significant as that facility is located only a few hundred feet from the Huanan Seafood Market where an already infected customer may have caused a superspreader event in December 2019.

  Notably, the World Health Organization’s lead investigator of the virus’s origin, Peter Ben Embarek, privately told a Danish TV crew that he suspected that the Wuhan CDC lab was the origin of the pandemic. Embarek, who promoted a natural origin for the virus in his public report, privately noted that the CDC lab had mysteriously moved to its new downtown location in early December and that such a move may have increased the chances of a lab leak or accidental spillage.

  The other lab identified by the State Department as the likely source of the pandemic is the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which has been the main focus of attention over the past two years.

  The State Department memo noted that the Wuhan Institute, by far the most logical place to investigate the virus origin, had been completely sealed off from outside inquiry by the CCP. The memo also noted that a gag order regarding both Wuhan labs had been issued on Jan 1, 2020, and a major general from the People’s Liberation Army had assumed control over the Wuhan Institute of Virology since early January of 2020.

  The State Department memo emphatically stated that “All other proposed theories are likely to be a decoy to prevent inquiry to Wuhan CDC and Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

  It bears repeating that the memo was written in April 2020.

  That’s because the State Department’s decoy argument mirrors the actions taken by Fauci and then-National Institutes of Health (NIH) head Dr. Francis Collins who–at the same time this memo was written–were actively suppressing and censoring any public discussion of the lab leak scenario. When Fox News ran a story in April 2020 suggesting that the virus came out of a Wuhan lab, Collins immediately contacted Fauci to explore ways the two men could “put down this very destructive conspiracy.”

  Collins had previously told Fauci and his group of scientists that “science and international harmony” could be harmed if the lab leak theory took hold. Collins’s directive led Fauci’s group to publish two papers that categorically dismissed the lab leak theory, one in the medical journal the Lancet and the other in the scientific journal Nature. Those two papers would become the cornerstone of combined efforts from Fauci’s scientists, the media, Big Tech, and the U.S. government to suppress any discussion of a lab leak, while simultaneously promoting the natural origin theory.

  The State Department memo also lists many facts that the public has only come to know in piecemeal fashion over the course of the past two years. We’ve previously covered many of these details on our show, including that the Wuhan CDC had a resident “Batman”—Tian Junhua—who bragged about personally having collected more than 10,000 virus-carrying bats as lab samples from Chinese caves.

  Tian also was widely known for his recklessness and carelessness during his collection process.

  Regarding the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the State Department memo noted that the director of the lab, Shi Zhengli, had conducted gain-of-function engineering of bat viruses to make them more easily transmittable to humans. As we now know, the defining feature of the COVID-19 virus, its furin cleavage site, is what makes the virus particularly transmissible in humans. While no furin cleavage site has ever been observed in naturally occurring SARS coronaviruses, Shi was part of a 2018 research proposal that aimed to insert exactly such a feature into coronaviruses.

  The State Department’s memo also highlights the poor safety standards at the Wuhan Institute, a fact that could easily lead to an unintentional leak of the deadly virus to the outside population. Interestingly, the memo also questions the disappearance of lab worker Huang Yanling, whose bio, profile, and picture were scrubbed from the institute’s website shortly after the outbreak. To this day, Huang’s whereabouts and well-being remain unknown.

  Lastly, the memo takes a detailed look at a Chinese medical professional whose online name is Wu Xiaohua. Wu claimed that Shi Zhengli was playing God by creating coronaviruses with the specific aim of making them more transmissible in humans. Wu also claimed that Shi used intermediate animals in her lab and that her lab’s management of deadly viruses was appallingly poor and negligent.

  The State Department memo found Wu’s claims to be credible and that assessment holds up well, given the information that has been made public in the intervening two years. We now know Shi had an active plan to insert furin cleavage sites into bat viruses, we know that she used humanized mice to test how her virus creations would affect humans, and we know that her lab was repeatedly cited for its poor safety record.

  The most striking takeaway from the memo is that it focuses almost entirely on the lab leak scenario, reflecting that the State Department was almost certain in April 2020 that the virus had originated in a lab. What remains entirely unclear is why neither the State Department nor Secretary Pompeo released this information as soon as they had it.

  Had the memo been made public nearly two years ago when it was written, the course of events would have been very different. Knowing that the virus came out of a lab would have refocused public attention and the search for remedies could have been more focused.

  There also would have been more concerted efforts to prevent future leaks. Rather than misdirecting the public toward a natural origin, Fauci and the NIH would have been exposed for their role in funding the work at the Wuhan Institute.

  Most importantly, the Chinese Communist Party would have been subjected to greater international pressure for its role in suppressing any advance information regarding the outbreak. The memo might also have had an impact on the 2020 presidential election, as voters tended to see Donald Trump as far more capable than Joe Biden in taking on the CCP.

  While we don’t know with certainty why the memo was concealed, the only person who had a constitutional role in deciding if suppression of a lab leak should be the policy of the U.S. government was President Trump. Although it’s possible that Trump decided it would be better to conceal the facts, it’s far more likely that, like all of us, the president was kept in the dark.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 23:25

• Beijing Hired TikTok 'Influencers', 'Real Housewives' Stars To Spread Propaganda Ahead Of Winter Games
  Beijing Hired TikTok ‘Influencers’, ‘Real Housewives’ Stars To Spread Propaganda Ahead Of Winter Games

  In recent years (most notably since the dawn of TikTok, which has been known to intersperse bits of Chinese propaganda with videos of scantily clad, attention-seeking American teenagers) Beijing has sought to influence American public opinion in its favor by manipulating social media.

  And as the international backlash over China’s treatment of its Uygher Muslim minority in the far-flung Xinjiang Province threatened to derail the Winter Olympics in Beijing, the CCP ratcheted up its influence campaign, and as it turns out, American social-media influencers, and one-well connected management firm, were eager to help (for a price).

  According to the latest update from the Washington Free Beacon, which the story using records from the DoJ, Monumental Sports and Entertainment, a company co-owned by Jobs, was paid by China Central Television to carry out a ‘promotional blitz’ for the 2022 Winter Games during a Washington Capitals hockey game.

  And as part of another promotional effort, the Chinese consulate in New York hired 11 social media influencers to talk up the Games (and China’s amenable business climate) on TikTok and Instagram.

  

  Disclosure filings revealing work for foreign entities revealed that the consulate in New York paid $300,000 to public relations firm Vippi Media to have TikTok and Instagram users promote the Beijing Olympics, just as pressure was growing for corporate sponsors in the West to join a boycott over China’s human rights abuses.

  One TikTok influencer, Anna Sitar, released a video on Feb. 11 that used the hashtags #Beijing2022 and #WinterOlympics. In the clip, Sitar touted the fact that Beijing is the only city to host both the winter and summer Olympics. The clip was a success: it went on to garner 2.2 million impressions.

  @annaxsitar We know I woulda taken home gold if I was there ✨Go team USA! #Beijing2022 #WinterOlympics #Partner ♬ original sound – anna x

  https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js

  Through its American intermediary (a mercenary marketing firm), Beijing also recruited stars from The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, and a former Paralympian swimmer, to promote the games. Some of these influencers even promoted claims from Chinese officials that the internment camps in Xinjiang were actually “education training centers” – a claim that Beijing has long pushed to its own people and the international press.

  Vippi Media also hired Ryan Dubs, a TikTok influencer who uses the site to promote his line of beauty products. Dubs touted China’s business climate, at one point praising China’s “high tech and forward thinking.” In the same video, Dubs said it would be “impossible” to make his products elsewhere.

  Dubs also published an interview he conducted with Huang Ping, the Chinese consul general in New York. Dubs said he was “really impressed” with Huang’s comments about China’s climate change goals. He and Huang expressed their mutual opposition to U.S. tariffs against Chinese products, which were enacted during the Trump administration in response to China’s unfair trade practices.

  Huang has denied China is engaged in human rights atrocities and said that internment camps housing Uyghurs are legal “education training centers.”

  Vippi Media also recruited a cast member of the reality show Real Housewives of Beverly Hills and American Paralympian swimmer Jessica Long to promote the games.

  One Real Housewives star, Crystal Kung Minkoff, promoted the Beijing Winter Games on her Instagram account.

   

   

   

   

  View this post on Instagram

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  A post shared by Crystal Kung Minkoff 孔令华 (@crystalkungminkoff)

  //www.instagram.com/embed.js

  Toward the end of its report, the Free Beacon mentioned that none of the influencers who shared Chinese propaganda on TikTok and Instagram were registered as foreign agents (something that all Americans who do any kind of politically-sensitive work on behalf of foreign governments are required by law to do).

  This of course begs the question: how many more ‘influencers’ are presently engaged in similar work?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 23:05

• US Says China Would Face Sanctions Similar To Russia For Invading Taiwan
  US Says China Would Face Sanctions Similar To Russia For Invading Taiwan

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  On Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that the US would be ready to use sanctions similar to what has been imposed on Russia against China if Beijing were to invade Taiwan.

  Yellen told the House Financial Services Committee that she believes the US has shown it can impose significant economic pain. “I think you should not doubt our ability and resolve to do the same in other situations,” she said.

  

  Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman also testified before the Committee and warned that the US would impose harsh sanctions on China if it helped Russia in its war in Ukraine. “It gives President Xi, I think, a pretty good understanding of what might come his way should he, in fact, support Putin in any material fashion,” she said.

  China has strongly denied US claims that it was considering giving Russia military support. Last month, US officials told media outlets that Moscow had asked Beijing for help. But US officials told NBC News this week that the claim “lacked hard evidence.”

  US officials have also warned that Washington would take action against Beijing if it helped Russia avoid Western sanctions. Over the past few years, the US has imposed a series of sanctions and export controls against Beijing, but they have not been as harsh as what Russia is facing.

  While Washington is warning Beijing it could impose tougher sanctions, such measures could do serious damage to the US economy since it is so intertwined with China’s.

  In comments to NBC News, US officials basically admit that the Biden administration is lying to us about Russia’s war in Ukrainehttps://t.co/4nNwBmyWHB pic.twitter.com/i5TwK82fXW

  — Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) April 6, 2022

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

  For now, Yellen said that the US shouldn’t sanction China for its relationship with Russia. “We would be very concerned if they were to supply weapons to Russia, or to try to evade the sanctions that we’ve put in place on the Russian financial system and the central bank,” she said. “We don’t see that happening at this point.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 22:45

• Shanghai Sees Record COVID Cases For 6th Day As Unrest Spurred By Lockdown Worsens
  Shanghai Sees Record COVID Cases For 6th Day As Unrest Spurred By Lockdown Worsens

  As the situation in Shanghai continues to deteriorate, residents have been pushing back against the CCP’s authority in ways that are rarely seen in China. Since the start of the pandemic, and the CCP’s decision to adopt a “war like” position to enforce its “zero COVID” policy, has rarely elicited much resistence. Until now.

  Yesterday, videos of Shanghaiers taking to their balconies to sing in protest of the local authorities’ decision to order an ‘indefinite’ lockdown went viral in the West (they were quickly censored on Weibo).

  As seen on Weibo: Shanghai residents go to their balconies to sing & protest lack of supplies. A drone appears: “Please comply w covid restrictions. Control your soul’s desire for freedom. Do not open the window or sing.” https://t.co/0ZTc8fznaV pic.twitter.com/pAnEGOlBIh

  — Alice Su (@aliceysu) April 6, 2022

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

  Authorities counted nearly 20K cases in Shanghai alone on Wednesday, nearly matching the number for all of China from the day before. It marked the sixth daily record for the city, according to the SCMP. Symptomatic cases climbed to 322, up from 311 a day earlier, while the vast majority of the cases showed no symptoms. Local authorities have counted more than 70K cases since March 1.

  We noted a few days ago that the situation in Shanghai has evolved to become more than just a public health crisis. Instead, it has become a political test for the CCP, as it fights to protect the legitimacy of its “zero COVID” approach. In that sense, the battle for Shanghai has become “too big to fail.”

  The NYT said as much Thursday.

  As the coronavirus races through Shanghai, in the city’s worst outbreak since the pandemic began, the authorities have deployed their usual hard-nosed playbook to try and stamp out transmission, no matter the cost. What has been different is the response: an outpouring of public dissatisfaction rarely seen in China since the chaotic early days of the pandemic, in Wuhan.

  The crisis in Shanghai is shaping up to be more than just a public health challenge. It is also a political test of the zero tolerance approach at large, on which the Communist Party has staked its legitimacy.

  For much of the past two years, the Chinese government has stifled most domestic criticism of its zero tolerance Covid strategy, through a mixture of censorship, arrests and success at keeping caseloads low. But in Shanghai, which has recorded more than 70,000 cases since March 1, that is proving more difficult.

  Shanghai is China’s most populous metropolis, its shimmering commercial heart. It is home to a vibrant middle class and many of China’s business, cultural and academic elite. A large share of foreign-educated Chinese live in Shanghai, and residents’ per capita disposable income is the highest in the country. Even in a country where dissent is dangerous, many there have long found ways to demand government responsiveness and have a say over their own lives.

  “I’m just too angry, too sad,” said Kristine Wu, a 28-year-old employee of a tech company who was visited at home by two police officers after she criticized the city’s Communist Party leader on social media. She recorded her defiant confrontation with them, in which she asked why they were wasting time harassing her, when they could be helping people in need of care. She then shared a photo of the encounter on social media, despite the officers’ warnings against doing so. (It was later censored.)

  “I thought, whatever, I’ll just go for it,” said Ms. Wu, who had not considered herself political before the lockdown. “I used to live pretty comfortably, and before anything had happened, everyone was very polite, very rule abiding. Now all that has just crumbled.”

  The CCP is caught in a difficult dilemma. Public health experts are keenly aware of the fact that China is unprepared to live with the coronavirus: just over half the of Chinese age 80 and over are fully vaccinated as of late March. And Chinese vaccines have been shown to be less effective than their western counterparts.

  Already, the people of Shanghai are struggling with crippling food shortages as they’re forced to rely on the government for essential supplies, according to the AP.

  Residents of Shanghai are struggling to get meat, rice and other food supplies under anti-coronavirus controls that confine most of its 25 million people in their homes, fueling frustration as the government tries to contain a spreading outbreak.

  People in China’s business capital complain that online grocers often are sold out. Some received government food packages of meat and vegetables for a few days. But with no word on when they will be allowed out, anxiety is rising.

  Zhang Yu, 33, said her household of eight eats three meals a day but has cut back to noodles for lunch. They received no government supplies.

  “It’s not easy to keep this up,” said Zhang, who starts shopping online at 7 a.m.

  “We read on the news there is (food), but we just can’t buy it,” she said. “As soon as you go to the grocery shopping app, it says today’s orders are filled.”

  As the food shortage worsens, containers full of frozen food and chemicals are piling up at Shanghai’s biggest port as the lock down of the city and virus testing prevents workers from getting to the docks to pick up boxes, according to Bloomberg.

  Of course, Shanghai isn’t the only part of China struggling with an outbreak. The Province of Jilin is still facing a surge (and the attendent restrictions) even after authorities technically lifted a weeks-long lockdown

  

  Source: BBG

  Going even further than its rival the NYT, the Washington Post on Thursday declared the situation in Shanghai to be a “powder keg” that could call the entire CCP authoritarian system into question.

  But Shanghai looks like a powder keg for China, where the party-state justifies its rule by casting itself as guardian of the people’s health and welfare. Shanghai’s residents are growing desperate. People are complaining on social media that they are unable to get food and water delivered. When some began shouting protests out their windows, demanding supplies in one Shanghai neighborhood, a drone flew by and warned them to stop, and to please “control the soul’s desire for freedom.”

  Now, it is authoritarian China’s turn to face questions about whether its system, based on tight controls, is really better at controlling the pandemic. China would be well advised to learn lessons from the West and pivot to more flexibility. Mr. Xi should admit he needs a new strategy. But can he?

  While no more videos of protesting locals have made it to western social media over the last day, one video of riot police being dispatched to prepare for any more ‘unrest’ did catch the public’s attention.

  PLA arrived in Shanghai to support riot police against possible protests against the strict lockdown pic.twitter.com/BgqPKuOVjA

  — Matt Davio (@MissTrade) April 6, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 22:25

• "This Is Shocking": Quant Guru Calculates Fed Can Only Hike To 1% Before It Must Halt The Cycle
  “This Is Shocking”: Quant Guru Calculates Fed Can Only Hike To 1% Before It Must Halt The Cycle

  Earlier today, futures slumped to session lows (before an algo driven meltup sent stocks soaring to session highs) when the Fed’s resident uberhawk and FOMC dissenter, James Bullard, poured more overpriced gasoline on the tightening fire when he said that “the current policy rate is too low by about 300 basis points” according to a version of the Taylor rule which showed that the Fed has a long way to go to catch up to where it should be if, somewhere around 3.5%, it has any hopes of denting runaway inflation around 8%, which as shown below sounds about right considering the last time inflation was here, the fed funds rate was 12%.

  

  While Bullard’s comments were not surprising – we already knew that he had dissented in favor of a 50bps rate hikes in March – comments by Lael Brainard, regarded as the most dovish of all Fed Governors, shocked the markets on Tuesday when she highlighted the likelihood the Fed will undertake a more rapid shrinkage of its balance sheet than markets were expecting.

  Here, one obvious question is whether the Fed can hike anywhere close to 12% – or even 3.5% – without crashing the entire financial system. Another question is whether the Taylor rule is applicable in such a unique situation where not only are rates still at rock bottom but the Fed has some $9 trillion in securities on its balance sheet. Indeed, while the prevailing hawkishness across the FOMC means  monetary policy will be tightened faster than expected, a third question is how much faster, or in other words, “what is the trade-off between QT and higher Fed Funds? Surely the faster the balance sheet is shrunk, the fewer rises will be needed in Fed Funds.”

  According to at least one Wall Street strategist, the answer to these questions is also the reason why the Fed Funds rate won’t climb beyond 1.0%!

  We refer to SocGen’s resident permaskeptic, Albert Edwards, who today writes that “the prospect of the Fed engaging in rapid balance sheet shrinkage (QT) has spooked the markets.” But, as we muse above, how does one combine the concurrent impact of QT with the Fed Fund hikes to get a handle on where Fed Funds might peak?

  Well, Edwards believes he may have the answer, or rather he says that his “learned colleague”, SocGen’s in house quant guru Solomon Tadesse has an answer. While few in the mainstream have ever heard of Solomon, back in mid-2018, not long before the Fed’s rate hike plans blew up spectacularly, the SocGen quant made waves on Wall Street trading desks when he went against the consensus view, and in May 2018 pinpointed the peak in Fed Funds at a lowly 2½%. He was absolutely spot on.

  The problem: his latest analysis for this cycle puts the peak of the Fed Funds at just below 1.0%, or less than 3 more rate hikes before the Fed is forced to reverse! That, as Edwards notes, “is so far away from  the current consensus that it deserves some serious analysis.”

  

  * * *

  First, for those curious about the details some background: Solomon’s explanation of the first generation Shadow FFR based on Wu and Xia (2016) and his second generation estimate from De Rezende and Ristiniemi (2020) are in this note here. For those pressed for time, what the analysis says is that the pace of QE or QT can be combined with the headline Fed Funds rate to calculate a Shadow FFR.

  So combining the expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet from sub-$4 trillion at end 2018 to almost $9 trillion was the equivalent of the FFR falling to minus 5% (charts below)! But now that the Fed has reveresed, ending QE combined with just one ¼% hike in the headline FFR means the Shadow FFR has already jumped from minus 5% to minus 2.5% – a 250bp hike (blue line below).

  

  We now take a brief tour down memory lane to remind readers how when Solomon made his mid-May 2018 call that the FFR would peak at 2½%, the market was looking at something nearer 3% (see chart below). Not much difference you might think, but as the Fed enacted its final hike to 2½% in Dec 2018, expectations of easing were rapidly taking hold as investors realized that the Fed had clearly overdone the tightening cycle (as we had said previously, the Ghost of 1937 has emerged right on schedule and the Fed has overtightened) even though just back in October 2018, Powell said that “we are a long way from neutral.”

  

  Meanwhile, as Edwards reminds us, the US bond rally from mid-Nov 2018 onwards was typical of the situation when yields tend to peak before the last rate hike. By comparison, currently the market expects the Fed to tighten rates rapidly and the peak in the FFR to be close to 3½% by March 2023.

  

  On that basis, you should wait until the back end of this year before dipping your toe into the bond market. But with inflation considered rampant, many investors believe the headline FFR will peak nearer 4%, despite recession fears mounting, and earlier this week, Deutsche Bank became the first large broker to forecast a US recession.

  Needless to say with market consensus expecting rates to rise as high as 3% before the Fed starts cutting around the next recession, if Solomon is right that the Fed will struggle to raise FFR to 1% or above, this is a huge divergence with consensus. One can see clearly in Solomon’s chart below how the recent 250bp Shadow FFR hike compares to the cumulative easing and tightening in previous Fed cycles:

  

  As depicted in the chart above, Solomon constructs a Monetary Tightening to Easing ratio (MTE, the ratio of the degree of tightening to the degree of easing in the preceding cycle). The charts below show how the MTE ratio declined in the 1980s as disinflation became the dominant theme. Hence since the mid-1980s the tightening cycle has topped out at around 70% of the previous easing cycle. But shouldn’t this ratio now return to 1.5x given CPI inflation has comprehensively overshot, Edwards asks and answers: Maybe…

   

  You see, the main reason why Solomon’s MTE ratio has been consistently lower (at 70%) recently is that tightening cycles have been halted because financial market bubbles, created by excessive Fed easing, then blow up and prevent the Fed from further tightening. Another way of visualizing this is the infamous chart showing that every Fed tightening cycle ends in crisis (and this one will be no different);

  

  So putting it all together, if we take the 70% MTE ratio above, Solomon calculates that the Shadow FFR will likely top out with 550bp of tightening (70% of the 800bp easing), and even though the Fed will fail to tame inflation the crash in markets and the recession (or depression) that will hit the hyperfinancialized US economy, with its 6.3x financial assets to GDP…

  

  … will force the Fed to not only end tightening early but to rush into an easing cycle

  The final point: prior to Lael Brainard’s comments, the remaining 300bp hike in the Shadow FFR was split between a headline FFR rise to only 1½% with the remainder being QT. But now that the Fed minutes confirmed that the pace of QT will accelerate accelerate to $95BN (or more) per month, Edwards concludes that “the actual FFR will struggle to get to 1% before the Fed needs to halt the tightening cycle. That is shocking.”

  

  The full notes, both Edwards and Solomon’s are available to pro subs in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 22:05

• Hospital Refuses Father-To-Son Kidney Transplant Over COVID Jab
  Hospital Refuses Father-To-Son Kidney Transplant Over COVID Jab

  Authored by Alice Giordano via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A 9-year-old boy is being denied a life-saving kidney transplant because his father is not vaccinated against COVID-19.

  

  Dane Donaldson was found to be a perfect match for his son Tanner back in early 2018 by the Cleveland Clinic Children’s Hospital before the outbreak of the pandemic.

  The family decided to wait a little longer before having Tanner undergo the transplant since transplanted kidneys from a live donor only lasted about 20 years.

  Then COVID-19 hit and put a freeze on the procedure.

  Now the hospital is refusing to perform the life-saving father-to-son kidney transplant it agreed to do nearly four years ago over the senior Donaldson’s unvaccinated status.

  In a statement released to The Epoch Times, the Cleveland Clinic cited a 2021 policy it adopted requiring all donors and candidates for organ transplants to be fully vaccinated against the virus.

  “Individuals who are actively infected with COVID-19 have a much higher rate of complications during and after surgery, even if the infection is asymptomatic,” the hospital stated.

  Donaldson, who is in the insurance business, told The Epoch Times he is opposed to the COVID-19 vaccine for religious reasons, but also because he has seen a rising number of clients get critically ill after receiving it. 

  He believes the hospital is contradicting itself by requiring a living donor to be vaccinated, but not a deceased one.

  “I asked them in that car accident victim, would you vaccinate him on the way to the hospital to rip his kidney out and they said ‘no’,”  Donaldson told The Epoch Times.

  Donaldson said he even offered to sign a waiver freeing the hospital from any liability should either himself or his son develop COVID-19. At the same time, the hospital has refused to agree to take any responsibility for any side effects that he or his son experienced from the vaccine.

  The hospital, he said, is blowing the chance of a lifetime for his son.

  “A live donor is the best donor for kidneys,” said Donaldson, “but they’ll take a kidney from a deceased person not vaccinated, it makes no sense.”

  The Cleveland hospital agreed that live donors are the best source for kidney transplant recipients, but emphasized that they were “not without risks”—noting that there is medication kidney transplant patients must take that compromises the immune system.

  “We continually strive to minimize risk to our living donors, and vaccination is an important component to ensure the safest approach and optimal outcomes for donors,” it stated. 

  Donaldson said he and his wife Jenn are now in the process of finding another hospital to perform the transplant. They had wanted to stay with the children’s hospital because it has been treating his son since birth.

  Tanner was born with compromised kidneys due to a rare birth defect that caused irreversible kidney damage in utero and resulted in stage 4 chronic kidney disease as well as bladder and urinary dysfunctions.

  He now has only 18 percent function left of his kidneys, according to Donaldson.

  The Donaldsons join a number of other publicized cases of U.S. hospitals that have refused to perform organ transplants because either the donor or recipient was not vaccinated.

  Last month, The Epoch Times covered the story of an Air Force veteran who was denied a kidney transplant because he was refusing the vaccine. 

  Chad Carswell had only 4 percent kidney function left when the Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, refused to keep him on their candidate list for a donated kidney.

  Fortunately, after his story went public the Medical City Fort Worth Transplant Institute in Texas offered to put Carswell on their recipient list for a kidney. His attorney Adam Draper said that as of April 3, Carswell was still in need of a match for the transplant.

  In January, attorneys for the conservative organization Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) wrote a seven-page letter to the Cleveland Center requesting it reconsider the decision, and also the science behind it.

  “Presently, it appears the hospital is operating under a psychosis of flawed morality in choosing to sacrifice the health and wellness of its 9-year-old patient in exchange for what it perceives to be the ‘greater good,’” ICAN’s lawyers Aaron Siri and Elizabeth Brehm wrote.

  ICAN also called the hospital irrational because the entire family, including Tanner and his older brother, all had COVID-19 and recovered from it, meaning they have natural immunity.

  In its letter to the hospital, ICAN cited a number of international studies that showed that re-infection of COVID-19 after recovering from the virus was rare.

  Of the studies it cited was one performed by Cleveland Clinic itself.

  In the study, the hospital looked at SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infections in 52,238 vaccinated and unvaccinated health care workers over a five-month period.

  It found that none of the previously infected healthcare workers who remained unvaccinated contracted SARS-CoV-2 over the course of the research despite a high background rate of COVID-19 in the hospital.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 21:25

• Containers To Be Removed From Massive Ship Stranded In Chesapeake Bay 
  Containers To Be Removed From Massive Ship Stranded In Chesapeake Bay 

  A massive container ship has been stuck in the Chesapeake Bay waters outside Baltimore for three weeks. Numerous refloating attempts have failed, and Evergreen Marine, the owner of Ever Forward, declared “General Average” last week. Now salvage crews, left with only one option, will begin to unload thousands of containers to reduce the ship’s current weight for future refloating attempts. 

  According to local news WMAR, the massive 1,100-foot container ship with 5,000 containers on board is stuck in 24 feet of water and needs about 42 feet of draft. The failed attempts to refloat the vessel will make way for two cranes in the coming days that will begin unloading hundreds of containers from both the starboard and port side in a move called “lightering.” The entire process could take two weeks or more. 

  

  “Salvage experts determined they would not be able to overcome the ground force of the Ever Forward in its current loaded condition,” the Coast Guard said in a statement.

  John Martino, from the School of Seamanship, said unloading containers off the vessel will be no easy task:

  “They also have to be careful the order they take the containers off.

  “So, they have to make sure everything stays balanced as they go along,” Martino said. 

  As an undertaking to free the container ship can be very expensive, Evergreen declared “General Average” last week to transfer some of the refloating costs to cargo owners. 

  Unloading containers risks unbalancing and damaging the ship. There are concerns that stress on the hull buried in more than 20 feet of mud could result in a fuel leak, or worse, structural damage to the vessel that could make it a more permanent fixture in the Chesapeake Bay. 

  More on the situation from local news channel WJZ. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 21:05

• FDA Floats Moving COVID-19 Vaccines To Flu-Like Model
  FDA Floats Moving COVID-19 Vaccines To Flu-Like Model

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

  Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials have proposed a future model for developing new COVID-19 vaccines that would be built on the approach to creating influenza vaccines.

  

  Accumulating data suggest the current COVID-19 vaccines, based on a virus strain that is now generations old, “may need to be updated at some point to ensure the high level of efficacy demonstrated in the early vaccine clinical trials,” the FDA said.

  One concern is how new strains of SARS-CoV-2 keep emerging, some of which bypass protection bestowed by the vaccines better than others.

  The vaccines provide virtually no protection against infection from Omicron, the strain that is dominant in the United States at present, though they have held up better against severe disease.

  U.S. regulators say an orderly and transparent process should be outlined for changing the composition of the COVID-19 vaccines, with the process ideally being adopted by countries around the world in addition to the World Health Organization (WHO).

  The model in place for annually updating influenza vaccines can inform the process, officials say.

  “The strain selection process for determining the composition of seasonal influenza vaccines may provide a general outline for the approach needed for updating the composition of COVID-19 vaccines to address current and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants,” the FDA said.

  The influenza vaccine model is based on predicting which variants will be circulating in the future. WHO leads the effort, voting on the composition of the vaccines to be deployed in the northern hemisphere five to six months later and the southern hemisphere three to four months in the future.

  U.S. authorities often adopt the WHO’s recommended composition, though the FDA, in consultation with its expert advisory panel on vaccines, occasionally diverge from the advice.

  While the flu model could be used as a foundation for future COVID-19 vaccines, there are unique issues for COVID-19 that will need to be addressed, FDA officials say, including how the seasonal pattern for SARS-CoV-2 surges has yet to be identified; how the COVID-19 vaccines are built across different platforms, such as messenger RNA; and how the experience with those vaccines to date wouldn’t be sufficient to get authorization or approval without clinical trial data.

  Further, even the best-matched flu vaccines end up being around 60 percent effective, a figure some vaccine manufacturers have described as poor.

  The proposed shift to a flu-like model contains “a lot of assumptions,” John Moore, a professor of immunology at Weill Cornell Medicine, told The Epoch Times.

  Clinical trials of Omicron-specific shots are ongoing, with data on human subjects not out yet. Data from animal studies, though, which are “usually pretty predictive, do not support the use of that specific vaccine as a boost,” Moore said. “So if that’s going to be the case in the humans, why go through the complexity of introducing a new vaccine if it’s not needed?”

  The new model was proposed in a briefing document published ahead of an April 6 meeting. During the meeting, which The Epoch Times will stream live, FDA officials will discuss with the agency’s expert advisers various matters relating to COVID-19 vaccines, including optimal use of additional COVID-19 shots in the future.

  The FDA recently cleared fourth doses for millions of Americans without consulting the advisers, part of a growing pattern of minimizing their role.

  Among those presenting will be Dr. Kanta Subbarao, a WHO official, on COVID-19 vaccine composition, and Robert Johnson, a government official on the development of variant-specific vaccines.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 20:45

• Goldman Warns Of Higher Oil Prices & Volatility Due To "Self-Sustaining" Physical & Financial Deficit Doom-Loop
  Goldman Warns Of Higher Oil Prices & Volatility Due To “Self-Sustaining” Physical & Financial Deficit Doom-Loop

  On the same day as oil prices slip to their lowest since Putin’s invasion of Ukraine – and reports of Russia selling oil to China for Yuan – Goldman Sachs doubled-down on their Poszar-esque commodity-currency-linked warnings about the regime-change under way in the energy complex.

  As Goldman’s Jeff Currie recently warned, commodities are entering a volatility trap.

  

  Crucially, as we detail below, this self-sustaining regime-shift driven by both physical and financial factors, is likely to last years rather than weeks.

  ‘Physically’

  Inventories are already at historical lows in terms of ‘days of demand’ following 20 consecutive months of deficit…

  

  …and Goldman notes that the unavailability of the usual system buffers of inventory and spare capacity…

  

  …has required an evolution in the pricing regime towards the more abrupt mechanism of demand destruction, amplifying the price and volatility impact of the continued pandemic shocks and, currently, the Russia-Ukraine war.

  Remember, the ‘physical’ markets have suddenly become significantly more complicated (and delivery anything but guaranteed) as we recently noted ‘oil is no longer fungible’ to some extent, for some buyers… “Russian oil bidless, non-Russian oil offerless”…

  

  ‘Financially’

  Volatility is both curbing liquidity and restricting access to the very credit required to maintain orderly financial and physical trading of commodities.

  In addition, it is also exacerbating the medium- to long-term capital shortages that have built up after an era of low returns and ample supply, reinforced by political and investor ESG concerns.

  This can be visualized in the following vicious doom-loop of volatility creating more illiquidity and lowering capital, leading to more volatility and so on…

  As oil becomes more volatile…

  

  …the range of possible outcomes becomes wider, with a greater potential for loss…

  

  …that shifting distribution drives up the Vale-at-Risk (VaR)…

  

  …which drives down the hedgeable amount of commodities, for any given amount of risk capital…

  

  And a lack of risk capital lowers market participation, driving down liquidity and exacerbating volatility, and further discouraging potential lenders and investors, reinforcing lower participation and higher volatility.

  This volatility trap is a direct consequence of the “Revenge of the Old Economy”.

  As commodity producers under-invest in new supply, commodity inventories deplete, raising volatility as the market loses its balancing buffer between small supply and demand shocks. This volatility in turn keeps commodity producer assets unattractive – it raises the uncertainty surrounding the investment’s true value, lowering its appeal to investors. Capital continues to stay away from the sector, keeping new supply capacity – and hence inventories – low.

  And as we saw in the 1970s, such a volatility trap can create persistently higher commodity inflation and a supply constrained market.

  • In the 1970s, the markets turned to long-term fixed price contracts and built large conglomerates to deepen the balance sheets required to deal with these funding stresses.

  • In the 2000s (pre GFC) they used financial markets, and a higher degree of bank leverage, to share the risks. Neither avenue is fully available in today’s regulatory environment.

  But, it’s different this time.

  Given there is unlikely to be a widespread lift of sanctions on Russia, regardless of the outcome of the war, as has historically been the case with such regulatory impositions, Goldman expects this new, more volatile pricing regime to persist for the foreseeable future.

  All of which reinforces Goldman’s forecast for $125/bbl Brent crude in 2H22 and reinforces Poszar’s warnings that you can print money but not print oil, iron, or wheat, or VLCCs or other ships to guarantee delivery of the critical commodities. Thus, as Poszar concludes rather ominously, commodity reserves will be an essential part of Bretton Woods III, and historically wars are won by those who have more food and energy supplies. And as Goldman’s price forecast suggests, the current ‘lull’ in the stagflationary storm (as oil prices slide to post-invasion lows) is perhaps just the eye of a very much larger and longer storm.

  However, while many have been predicting the birth of a new monetary system in the past decade, it is the nuances of Zoltan’s vision of the monetary future that is especially troubling: as he puts it “we are witnessing the birth of Bretton Woods III – a new world (monetary) order centered around commodity-based currencies in the East that will likely weaken the Eurodollar system and also contribute to inflationary forces in the West.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 20:25

• Tennessee Titans Become First NFL Team To Accept Bitcoin
  Tennessee Titans Become First NFL Team To Accept Bitcoin

  Authored by Shawn Amick via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  The Tennessee Titans are the first NFL team to accept bitcoin for large and recurring purchases through a third-party service provider…

  

  The Tennessee Titans today announced they are now the first NFL team accepting bitcoin for key investments through a third-party conversion service. The establishment of this partnership allows fans to offer bitcoin in payment for season tickets, suites, PSLs and sponsorship opportunities with the Titans and Nissan Stadium events.

  Initially the Titans will only allow bitcoin for larger purchases and recurring payments, but the team hopes to open up the initiative to allow the purchase of single-tickets, merchandise, and at-game food and beverage sales.

  Bitcoin Magazine and UTXO Management, a Nashville-based digital assets fund, offered close advice through a partnership with the Titans in order to bring this functionality to the team.

  “We’re proud to partner with the Tennessee Titans as they start their Bitcoin journey and offer fans a new way to pay,” said David Bailey, CEO of BTC Inc and partner at UTXO Management.

  “2022 is a special year as we continue to work with professional sports teams to help educate and further mass adoption of Bitcoin. The Titans are a top NFL franchise and a natural fit for this partnership.”

  Joining the ranks of MLB’s Oakland Athletics and the NBA’s Sacramento Kings and Dallas Mavericks, the Titans will be the first NFL team to accept bitcoin.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 20:05

• Canada Set To Announce 2 Year Ban On Foreign Purchases Of Residential Real Estate
  Canada Set To Announce 2 Year Ban On Foreign Purchases Of Residential Real Estate

  What goes up must come down.

  At least, that looks like what the story is going to wind up being for the Canadian housing market. The country is reportedly set to announce that it will ban foreign purchases of residential real estate for two years. 

  “The foreign buyers ban will apply to condos, apartments, and single residential units,” according to CTV. “Permanent residents, foreign workers, and students will be excluded from this new measure. Foreigners who are purchasing their primary residence here in Canada will be exempt.”

  The effects will likely be dramatic, as foreign purchases of real estate accounted for a lot of the bid that helped Canadian housing skyrocket to begin with. 

  “The timing is a classic case of closing the barn door after the horses have left,” ForexLive’s Adam Button wrote this week. He noted that the market had already started to cool in March amidst interest rate hikes.

  

  After calling the housing market top on Bloomberg last month, Button says this action by the government “certainly adds” to his conviction. He wrote:

  “The question now is whether it will be a soft or hard landing. These measures from the Federal government are being combined with provincial measures and BOC hikes to create a perfect storm in a market that was already way out of line.”

  As recent as last fall we were documenting how rural shacks were selling for as much as 37% above asking price within days of being listed. 

  A rancher built in the 1970s had an asking price of $998,000 in June 2021 and sold later that month for $1,365,000. Just days on the market, a fierce bidding war broke out with 13 bidders who ultimately bid up the price 37% above list. 

  “There wasn’t a lot of inventory, and there was another property that had sold recently in multiple offers, so we wanted to take advantage of any leftover buyers,” Toronto-based agent Luisa Piccirilli said at the time. 

  Piccirilli described the bidding war mainly between those who wanted to escape city life and wanted a backyard. 

  “There’s an exodus of people leaving the city and wanting more property and land,” Piccirilli said.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 19:45

• Large Israeli Study Finds That Protection Against COVID From 4th Shot Drops Quickly
  Large Israeli Study Finds That Protection Against COVID From 4th Shot Drops Quickly

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  An Israeli study found that a fourth dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine doesn’t offer long-lived protection against the Omicron variant of the CCP virus.

  

  Using Ministry of Health data on more than 1.2 million people, researchers found that a second booster dose of the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine offered protection against significant COVID-19 infections for six weeks. But protection against all virus infections started to drop quickly after four weeks and nearly disappeared after eight weeks, according to the study, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

  The researchers, however, said that there appears to be some benefit conferred by a second booster, or fourth dose, of the Pfizer vaccine.

  “Overall, these analyses provided evidence for the effectiveness of a fourth vaccine dose against severe illness caused by the omicron variant, as compared with a third dose administered more than 4 months earlier. For confirmed infection, a fourth dose appeared to provide only short-term protection and a modest absolute benefit,” the study’s authors wrote.

  They made note of reports indicating that the “protection against hospital admission conferred by a third dose given more than 3 months earlier is substantially lower against the omicron variant than the protection of a fresh third dose against hospital admission for illness caused by the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant.”

  “In our study, a fourth dose appeared to increase the protection against severe illness relative to three doses that were administered more than 4 months earlier,” they added.

  The authors further stipulated that because the study only covered a two-month period, it’s not clear if the vaccine’s protection against severe illness faded after eight weeks. More studies and follow-up research is needed to make a clear determination, the study said.

  The study also focused on adults aged 60 and older. It did not provide data on the second booster’s efficacy on younger groups.

  Their findings come as policymakers publicly debate if Americans need additional booster shots. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held a panel of advisers on Wednesday on the extra COVID-19 vaccine shots.

  In March, the FDA issued an emergency use authorization for second boosters of the Pfizer and Moderna shots for individuals aged 50 and older as well as immunocompromised people aged 12 and up. The drug regulator also authorized giving an mRNA vaccine booster for those who received the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine, which uses an adenovirus.

  Several weeks ago, Israeli researchers found in a separate preprint study that the protection from a second Pfizer booster quickly diminished.

  Protection against infection rose initially after the fourth dose, reaching 64 percent during the third week, but it rapidly declined to 29 percent by 10 weeks, they found.

  “It appears that effectiveness of the fourth dose wanes sooner, similarly to the fact that the third dose wants sooner than the second dose,” the study said.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 19:25

• Four Secret Service Agents Tied To Phony Cop Scandal Suspended
  Four Secret Service Agents Tied To Phony Cop Scandal Suspended

  Four US Secret Service agents have been suspected over links to two men accused of impersonating federal law enforcement officers, who reportedly gave thousands of dollars worth of gifts to agency personnel – including one assigned to First Lady Jill Biden’s detail, according to Reuters.

  

  The two Washington men, Arian Taherzadeh, 40, and Haider Ali, 35, appeared in federal court on Thursday a day after being arrested. Prosecutors said they plan to charge them with conspiracy in a scheme in which they are accused of posing as U.S. Department of Homeland Security agents.

  Taherzadeh offered to purchase a $2,000 assault rifle for a Secret Service agent assigned to protect first lady Jill Biden and told other government officials they could have access to what he claimed were “official government vehicles,” the FBI said. -Reuters

  According to federal prosecutor Joshua Rothstein, Ali told witnesses he was linked to the Pakistani Intelligence Service (ISI), while US authorities have reportedly recovered a passport from Ali which shows he had three visas to visit Pakistan and two for Iran.

  The pair were caught when they lied to a US Postal inspector investigating the March assault of a letter carrier. The men told the inspector they were part of a special police investigative unit looking into undercover gang-work and investigations into the January 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol. They had been posing as such since at least February 2020 according to the report.

  Taherzadeh attempted to delete his social media history after he learned he was under investigation, according to Rothstein.

  

  They offered multiple gifts to Secret Service members – as well as a DHS employee – which included rent-free apartments valued at $40,000 per year, as well as iPhones, surveillance systems, a flatscreen TV, an assault rifle case, a generator, a drone and other paraphernalia.

  Rothstein said the FBI uncovered evidence after searching several apartments tied to the defendants including a loaded Glock pistol, ammunition, components from disassembled guns and sniper equipment.

  In addition, it recovered body armor, gas masks, zip ties, handcuffs, firearm storage cases, a drone, Department of Homeland Security patches and law enforcement clothing, DHS training manuals, surveillance equipment and a binder with a list of residents in the apartment complex.

  The Justice Department said the suspects tried to recruit at least one person to join what they claimed was an official DHS “task force.” -Reuters

  “Taherzadeh and Ali required that the ‘applicant’ be shot with an Airsoft rifle to evaluate their pain tolerance and reaction,” one FBI agent wrote in a sworn statement. “Subsequent to being shot, the applicant was informed that their hiring was in process. The applicant was also assigned to conduct research on an individual that provided support to the Department of Defense and intelligence community.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 19:05

• Texas Governor Directs State To Bus Or Fly Illegal Immigrants To DC As Title 42 Ends
  Texas Governor Directs State To Bus Or Fly Illegal Immigrants To DC As Title 42 Ends

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Wednesday said that his government will provide charter buses or flights to transport illegal immigrants released from federal custody into its territory to Washington D.C.

  

  The Republican made the remarks during a press briefing, saying that his state on the southern border has been “overwhelmed by hordes of illegal immigrants who are being dropped off by the Biden administration.”

  “We are sending [the illegal immigrants] to the United States capital where the Biden administration will be able to more immediately address the needs of the people that they are allowing to come across our border,” Abbott told reporters.

  The measure comes in response to the lifting of Title 42 by the Biden administration last week.

  The public health provision is a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) order that was invoked in March 2020 under President Donald Trump to minimize the spread of COVID-19 by ensuring that only essential travel occurred at U.S. borders.

  It directed that illegal immigrants could be quickly expelled back into Mexico as a pandemic precaution, rather than be processed under Title 8 immigration law, which is a much more protracted process inside the United States.

  As the Biden administration prepares to drop the measure on May 23, Border Patrol agents and local officials along the border are bracing for an even greater influx of illegal immigrants.

  In a release that followed shortly after the governor’s press conference, Abbott’s office said only those who volunteer will be transported, and must show documentation that they have been processed by the Department of Homeland Security.

  “The Biden Administration’s open-border policies have paved the way for dangerous cartels and deadly drugs to pour into the United States, and this crisis will only be made worse by ending Title 42 expulsions,” Abbott said.

  “With the end of Title 42 expulsions looming next month, Texas will immediately begin taking unprecedented action to do what no state has done in American history to secure our border,” the governor added.

  “The new strategies announced today and next week will further strengthen our already robust response to the Biden border disaster, and we will use any and all lawful powers to curtail the flow of drugs, human traffickers, illegal immigrants, weapons, and other contraband into Texas.”

  Abbott also announced additional strategies being deployed immediately to “secure the border.”

  

  DPS and the Texas Military Department (TMD) are preparing additional boat blockades, deploying razor-wire at low-water crossings and high-traffic areas, and installing container blockades to stem the flow of illegal crossings, Abbott’s office said.

  The state may announce additional policies in the coming weeks to “respond to the expected surge in illegal immigration,” the governor’s office added.

  Charlotte Cuthbertson contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 18:45

• China Sides With Russia During Key Vote At UN Human Rights Panel
  China Sides With Russia During Key Vote At UN Human Rights Panel

  The UN General Assembly voted Thursday to suspend Russia from the UN Human Rights council due over what the assembly cited as human rights violations and the humanitarian crisis stemming from its invasion of Ukraine.

  There were 93 votes in favor of the suspension, 24 against and 58 abstentions. The resolution cited the power of the assembly to “suspend the rights of membership in the Human Rights Council of a member of the Council that commits gross and systematic violations of human rights.”

  

  The draft of the resolution further said there was “grave concern” following reports of “gross and systematic violations and abuses of human rights” and “violations of international humanitarian law”.

  The US led the charge to achieve the two-thirds vote needed, with Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield saying ahead of the vote, “Russia should not have a position of authority in a body whose purpose – whose very purpose – is to promote respect for human rights. Not only is it the height of hypocrisy – it is dangerous.” She said further: “Every day, we see more and more how little Russia respects human rights.”

  Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Nations, Sergiy Kyslytsya, also said just before the vote: “Now the world has come to a crucial juncture. We witness that our liner is going through treacherous fog towards deadly icebergs. It might seem that we should have named it the Titanic instead of the Human Rights Council. … We need to take an action today to save the council from sinking.”

  Notably China was Russia’s most powerful backer, voting against the resolution. Also notable is that India abstained. 

  

  According to Newsweek and The Associated Press, Russia had made threats to multiple countries over how a “yes” vote might alter relations:

  The vote by China to back Russia comes shortly after the Associated Press reported that Russia threatened several nations to vote against the resolution on Thursday. According to the Associated Press, Russia told several nations that voting in favor of the resolution or abstaining from the vote would be considered an “unfriendly gesture” and alter that country’s relationship with Russia.

  “Belarus, China, Iran, Russia and Syria were among the U.N. members that voted against the resolution. India abstained from voting,” NBC reported. Cuba was also among those voting “no” to the resolution.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 18:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Bill Introducing 'Mandatory Vaccination' For All Germans Over 60 Expected To Pass
  Bill Introducing ‘Mandatory Vaccination’ For All Germans Over 60 Expected To Pass

  The COVID pandemic has largely subsided in Europe (although health authorities have warned about an uptick in cases caused by subvariants and hybrid variants of the omicron strain). But this hasn’t stopped German lawmakers from pushing for a new law that would legally require people age 60 and older to be vaccinated.

  But that’s not all. The deal struck by members of Germany’s ruling “stop sign” coalition, which includes Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democratic Party, the Greens and the ‘classical liberal’ Free Democrats, also includes an option for making COVID shots mandatory for everybody age 18 and older.

  

  That second provision will depend on how the next wave of the pandemic develops during the fall, according to Bloomberg, which cited a local report.

  According to other provisions in the proposed law, the government would initially try to “encourage” the unvaccinated to voluntary submit to inoculation (Germany still has millions of unvaccinated citizens, not unlike the US). Fortunately, even if the proposal becomes a law (it’s due for a vote on Thursday), it will also include provisions that would reverse the situation if enough people receive their COVID shots voluntarily before the summer.

  Lawmakers told Bloomberg that the goal of the proposal is “effective prevention.”

  “We are united by the goal of effective prevention through the highest possible level of basic immunity for all adults for the fall, because in this way we can prevent the health system from being overwhelmed,” they added.

  Germany is still recording more than 200,000 cases and more than 300 deaths from the virus on most days. But with more than 75% of its population vaccinated, the pressure on the country’s health-care system has significantly lessened since the depths of the pandemic.

  Most western countries have strongly opposed mandatory vaccination requirements (although the Biden Administration in the US has attempted to force millions of workers to either get vaccinated or risk losing their jobs before the Supreme Court to declare Biden’s executive orders unconstitutional). But Chancellor Scholz has decided that mandatory vaccination is permissible, so long as the Bundestag grants its blessing.

  Another lawmaker said compulsory vaccination for all Germans over 60 will help the German economy remain “free” during the fall wave. Whether that’s true or not remains to be seen.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 02:45

• Finland Mulling NATO Membership After Russia Warns Of 'Serious Consequences'
  Finland Mulling NATO Membership After Russia Warns Of ‘Serious Consequences’

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone & Will Porter Via The Libertarian Institute,

  Finland is mulling whether to join the NATO military alliance, Prime Minister Sanna Marin said, noting that a decision could come by next spring while citing a new “security environment” in Europe following Russia’s attack on Ukraine.

  Speaking to fellow members of the ruling Social Democratic Party over the weekend, the PM said Moscow’s ongoing invasion is a “flagrant violation” of international law, arguing that “Russia is not the neighbor we thought it was.” She added that this has prompted the government to rethink its long-standing policy of neutrality toward the NATO bloc.

  

  “In this new situation and changed security environment, we’ll have to evaluate all means to guarantee the safety of Finland and Finns,” Marin said. “We’ll have to seriously mull over our own stance and approach to military alignment. We’ll have to do this carefully but quickly, effectively during the course of this spring.”

  Marin previously stated that NATO membership would be “very unlikely,” but has since changed her tune, now saying the assault on Ukraine had altered relations with Russia in “irreversible” ways. 

  While Finland maintained a strict stance of non-alignment throughout the Cold War, refusing to enter NATO as well as the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact, recent polling indicates that Finns are increasingly favorable to membership in the North Atlantic alliance. A survey conducted in February showed a majority of respondents (53%) would back the idea, up from just 19% in 2017 – dubbed a “historic shift” by former Prime Minister Alex Stubb.

  Opposition leaders such as Petteri Orpo, who heads up the National Coalition Party, have also publicly supported NATO membership for Finland, arguing that it is not only necessary for the country’s defense, but would mean it had fully joined the West. 

  “In order to improve our security and guarantee our independence, we should join NATO. We still have a powerful and aggressive neighbor,” Orpo said, referring to Russia. “For me, NATO membership is not just about the pros and cons, it’s a bigger question of our identity. We are a western country… In this sense, our place is in NATO.”

  However, some in government have objected to the idea, with one senior official telling the Financial Times the move may be seen as a dangerous provocation by Russia. “Applying for membership carries awful risks for Finland, and for NATO,” they said. “I have always said that joining military alliances is something you do in quiet times, so that you do not import any instability into the organization you join.”

  If Finland and Sweden apply to join NATO, they would be welcomed, Stoltenberg says https://t.co/n6elOmy0uj pic.twitter.com/vCSkZoAUzZ

  — Reuters (@Reuters) April 5, 2022

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

  In comments to CNN on Sunday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that both Finland and Sweden would be “very much welcomed by all 30 allies,” even suggesting their membership could be fast-tracked.

  Russia has long demanded an end to the eastward expansion of NATO, citing assurances from Washington that the alliance would not grow by “one inch” just before the fall of the Soviet Union. While it has vocally opposed membership for its neighbors Ukraine and Georgia, Moscow has also repeatedly warned that it would retaliate should Finland or Sweden join the bloc, though officials have yet to say how. 

  “It is obvious that [if] Finland and Sweden join NATO, which is a military organization to begin with, there will be serious military and political consequences,” said Russian Foreign Ministry official Sergei Belyayev. “[It] would require changing the whole palette of relations with these countries and require retaliatory measures.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 04/07/2022 – 02:00

• While You Were Distracted By Will Smith, The International Elitists Met At The World Government Summit
  While You Were Distracted By Will Smith, The International Elitists Met At The World Government Summit

  Authored by Derrick Broze via TheLastAmericanVagabond.com,

  While much of the “mainstream” world has spent the last week obsessing over and debating the celebrity spectacle surrounding American actor Will Smith slapping American comedian Chris Rock, the international elitists were meeting in Dubai for the 2022 World Government Summit.

  

  From March 28th to the 30th, corporate media journalists, heads of state, and CEOs of some of the most profitable companies in the world met for discussions on shaping the direction of the next decade and beyond. Anyone with a functioning brain should ignore the tabloids and instead pay attention to this little known gathering of globalist Technocrats.

  Let’s take a look at the speakers and the panels, starting with Mr. Great Reset himself, Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum.

  Schwab gave a talk entitled, Our World Today… Why Government Must Act Now?.  “Thank you, to his excellency for enabling this initiative to define a longer-term narrative to make the world more resilient more inclusive and more sustainable,” Schwab stated during his address. The use of the term narrative is important because in January 2021, Klaus and the World Economic Forum announced the next phase of The Great Reset, The Great Narrative.

  As with The Great Narrative event, the World Government Summit was also held in Dubai. As I wrote during the Great Narrative meeting:

  “While the political leaders of the UAE and Klaus Schwab may promote themselves as the heroes of our times, we should judge them according to their actions and the company they keep, not the flowery language they use to distract us. The simple fact is the UAE has a horrible record on human rights. The nation is known for deporting those who renounce Islam, limited press freedoms, and enforcing elements of Sharia law.”

  During Schwab’s short talk he also mentioned his pet project “the 4th Industrial Revolution“, which is essentially the digital panopticon of the future, where digital surveillance is omnipresent and humanity uses digital technology to alter our lives. Often associated with terms like the Internet of Things, the Internet of Bodies, the Internet of Humans, and the Internet of Senses, this world will be powered by 5G and 6G technology. Of course, for Schwab and other globalists, the 4IR also lends itself towards more central planning and top-down control. The goal is a track and trace society where all transactions are logged, every person has a digital ID that can be tracked, and social malcontents are locked out of society via social credit scores.

  Immediately following Schwab was a panel which made no attempt to hide the goals of the globalists. The panel, Are We Ready for A New World Order?, featured Fred Kempe, president and CEO of the Atlantic Council since 2007, as well as an anchor for CNN and a former advisor to former US president George W. Bush. Before joining the Council, Kempe was a prize-winning editor and reporter at the Wall Street Journal for more than 25 years.

  In fact, the Atlantic Council had a fairly large presence at the World Government Summit, including appearances by Defne Arslan, senior director of the Atlantic Council IN TURKEY program, and Olga Khakova, Deputy Director of Global Energy Center of Atlantic Council.

  For those who are unfamiliar with the Atlantic Council, I first reported in May 2018 that Facebook had partnered with the thinktank connected to NATO. I wrote:

  “The Atlantic Council of the United States was established in 1961 to bolster support for international relations. Although not officially connected to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Atlantic Council has spent decades promoting causes and issues which are beneficial to NATO member states. In addition, The Atlantic Council is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Organization, an umbrella organization which “acts as a network facilitator in the Euro-Atlantic and beyond.” The ATO works similarly to the Atlantic Council, bringing together political leaders, academics, military officials, journalists and diplomats to promote values that are favorable to the NATO member states. Officially, ATO is independent of NATO, but the line between the two is razor thin.

  Essentially, the Atlantic Council is a think tank which can offer companies or nation states access to military officials, politicians, journalists, diplomats, etc. to help them develop a plan to implement their strategy or vision. These strategies often involve getting NATO governments or industry insiders to make decisions they might not have made without a visit from the Atlantic Council team. This allows individuals or nations to push forth their ideas under the cover of hiring what appears to be a public relations agency but is actually selling access to high-profile individuals with power to affect public policy. Indeed, everyone from George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton to the family of international agent of disorder Zbigniew Brzezinski have spoken at or attended council events.”

  Less than 6 months after Facebook and The Atlantic Council announced their partnership, more than 500 FB pages were accused of being “Russian disinformation” and deleted. The pages largely consisted of anti-war, police accountability, and independent journalism outlets. These pages and journalists directly challenged the narratives spun by the Atlantic Council stooges.

  Dissecting the World Government Summit: Ukraine, SDGs, ESG, Blockchain, and AI

  While many of the names in attendance might be unfamiliar to a western audience, the speakers are men and women who absolutely play a vital role in international geopolitics.

  Some of the featured speakers include:

  • – António Guterres, Secretary General of United Nations, giving a talk tiled Is Our World Today… Our World of Tomorrow?

  • – Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus, Director General of World Health Organization

  • – David Pekoske, Administrator of USA Transportation Security Administration

  • – Dr. Kaitlyn Sadtler, an American immunologist and bioengineer and Stadtman Tenure-Track Investigator at the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, part of the US NIH. She gave a presentation about Re-engineering Immunity with Next Generation Technologies

  • – H.H. Sheikh Sabah AlSabah, Prime Minister of Government of the State of Kuwait

  • – Jeon Hae cheol, Minister of the Interior and Safety of Government of the Republic of Korea

  • – Supattanapong Punmeechaow, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Energy of Secretariat of the Prime Minister of Thailand

  • – Mrs. Belinda Balluku is the Minister of Infrastructure and Energy of the Republic of Albania

  • – Mohammad Sanusi Barkindo Secretary General of OPEC, speaking about “Oil and Gas in a Net-Zero World“

  The Russia-Ukraine conflict ​​​​​​​was also part of the discussions. Notably, Maxim Timchenko, CEO of DTEK, made an appearance. His bio states, “under his leadership, DTEK has evolved from a regional conventional energy company into Ukraine’s largest private investor as well as leading energy company.”

  The appearance of Mr. Timchenko should not be overlooked, especially because he appears in a discussion called Post-Crisis Ukraine: New Energy for a New Europe, featuring Olga Khakova of the Atlantic Council, and Paula Dobriansk, Senior Fellow, Harvard Kennedy School of Government of Atlantic Council. Again, the presence of the Atlantic Council should not be taken lightly. They are the representatives of the Western Bloc of the New World Order.

  The Russia-Ukraine conflict also factors into another panel title, Getting Off Russian Gas: Practical Steps for Europe, featuring more of the Atlantic Council goons, including Richard Morningstar, Founding Chairman of Global Energy Center, Atlantic Council, and Phillip Cornell, Senior Fellow of Global Energy Center, Atlantic Council.

  The World Government Summit also spent considerable time discussing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which form the core of the Agenda 2030, itself part of The Great Reset agenda. Some speakers discussing the SDGs include:

  • – Dr. Mahmoud Safwat Mohieldi, the United Nations Special Envoy for the 2030 Finance Agenda, who is speaking on a panel about Arab Nations and the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

  • – María Sandoval, First Lady of Colombia of Government of Republic of Colombia, discussed “The Role of Women in Achieving the SDGs“. The first day of the summit was actually dedicated to the role women will play in rolling out the so-called New World Order and global governance schemes. Sandoval celebrated the fact that Colombian President Ivan Duque launched “the first national development plan that was directly aligned with the SDGs, and this of course was something that provided a wider spectrum for women to act react and participate in these achievements of the SDGs.”

  • – Catherine Russell, Executive Director of United Nations Children Fund, participated in a panel titled SDGs for Every Child

  The Summit also addressed the Environmental, Social, and Governance criteria (ESG) promoted by the UN in a panel entitled, Where does ESG Go From Here?. ESG investing is also sometimes referred to as sustainable investing, responsible investing, or socially responsible investing (SRI). The practice has become an increasingly popular way to promote the SDGs. The panel featured Neil R. Brown, Managing Director, KKR Global Institute and KKR Infrastructure. KKR Global Institute is the same organization that former US Army General and former CIA Director David Petraeus joined in 2013.

  Additionally, a panel entitled, Is the World Ready for A Future Beyond Oil?, featured H.E. Suhail bin Mohamed AlMazrouei, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure of Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure; H.R.H Prince Abdulaziz Al Saud, Minister of Energy of Ministry of Energy – Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; and H.E. Masrour Barzani, Prime Minister of Kurdistan Regional Government.

  Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence are a major piece of the Technocratic vision for 2030, so naturally there were several discussions on the use of blockchain, AI, and even 6G (the eventual successor to 5G technology).

  There was a discussion on blockchain technology in a panel entitled, The Future of Blockchain… A Perspective from Industry Pioneer, featuring Changpeng Zhao, Chief Executive Officer of Binance, among others. Other panels focused on De-Fi (decentralized finance) featured Jamie Crawley, Editor in Chief of Coin Desk, and Charles Hoskinson, Co-Founder of Ethereum. I have recently reported on Hoskinson’s statements regarding using blockchain to implement ESG and SDG programs and the danger they pose to privacy and liberty.

  There was also a panel focused on the introduction of Central Bank Digital Currencies entitled, CBDCs and Stablecoins: Can They Co-Exist?. The CBDCs schemes being rolled out in nations around the world are a crucial component of The Great Reset.

  One panel focuses on a concept called Human Meta-Cities, which sound like a rebranding or updating of the so-called Smart Cities. The panel description states,

  “in a world of change and rapid technological development, we shed light on a new vision for planning future cities centered around human needs and aspirations. This new framework will help governments refine their role in planning the new world taking advantage of the digital transformation opportunities that are taking place.”

  Another panel which makes clear the Technocratic dream was entitled, The Invisible Government: Eliminating Bureaucracy Through Technology. The description of the panel states:

  “Technology is creating new possibilities as it simplifies processes, enables instant feedback, and ultimately improves customer experience. In the public sector, digitalization and artificial intelligence are creating a new model of governance – “invisible” governments that are more agile, responsive, human-centric, and data-driven. In this session, global policymakers and experts will share their bold vision and experience in utilizing technology to eliminate bureaucracy and innovate government services for the future.”

  What goes unsaid in the panel description is that making the government “invisible” will actually lead to a world of no accountability for government and politicians. In reality, the Technocrats imagine a world where the tyrannical technological systems are invisible and the average person has zero recourse for preventing exclusion or punishment based on their social credit score.

  This is the world these technocrats — many of whom are unelected — envision. The only way this vision will not come to pass is if the people of the world throw their televisions away, ignore the celebrity drama, and start exiting from these slavery systems. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 23:40

• Chinese EV Manufacturers Grapple With Rising Raw Material Costs, Shrinking Margins
  Chinese EV Manufacturers Grapple With Rising Raw Material Costs, Shrinking Margins

  Chinese EV manufacturers are facing similar problems as the ones we pointed out that Japanese manufacturers are facing: rising raw material costs and shrinking margins.

  Many EV manufacturers are doing the only thing they can to help alleviate the pressure – and that means raising prices for consumers. 

  Bloomberg noted in a Monday morning wrap up that the problems China faces are slightly more unique to the country, because it is also trying to engineer a “soft landing” from EV subsidies, which Beijing has been rolling back – and will continue to roll back.

  

  “What makes China unique is its commitment to simultaneously rolling back EV subsidies, setting up a delicate balance between growth and profit in the world’s biggest market for clean cars,” Bloomberg wrote. 

  Companies like Tesla, BYD, Xpeng and Li Auto all hiked prices in March, the report says. Among the manufacturers raising prices was also Contemporary Amperex Technology, the world’s biggest EV battery maker. They said they were making “dynamic adjustments to the prices of some of our battery products”.

  Remember, we just wrote days ago that Japanese automakers were also grappling with the skyrocketing cost of raw materials and a shortage of semiconductors still. 

  Even as some parts have become unavailable, raw materials for other parts have skyrocketed in price. For example, palladium, nickel and aluminum have all surged to record highs this month. The metals are used in automobile catalytic converters, batteries and other car parts.

  

  The price hikes are likely due to the fact that 40% of palladium production comes from Russia, Nikkei noted last week. This has forced auto manufacturers to abandon buying from Russia and seek out alternative sources. 

  Hiroo Suzaki, president of South African metal producer Impala Platinum Japan, commented: “Losing Russian supply would leave a significant impact on the palladium market.”

  Some demand for palladium will eventually wane due to the adoption of electric vehicles, Mikio Fujita, senior market analyst for Johnson Matthey, said. But for now, that doesn’t help automakers. Fujita commented: “As the auto industry shifts to electric vehicles, catalyst demand is expected to gradually shrink in the long run.”

  Nickel, on the other hand, is expected to see a significant increase in demand thanks to the adoption of EVs. “This has led to an even tighter market and premiums are soaring to record high levels in Europe,” one trader told Nikkei. 

  Recall, Tesla reportedly signed a “secret deal” to obtain nickel from Vale that is helping it sidestep a spike in prices. 

  

  Gene Munster of Loup Ventures said: “What Tesla has done with nickel is a hidden competitive advantage. Tesla continues to be a couple of steps ahead of the rest.” And Munster is right, in that Musk has “repeatedly” flagged nickel as a concern for the company amidst broader sector demand that is expected to more than triple by 2030. 

  On an earnings call two years ago, CEO Elon Musk urged: “Please mine more nickel. Tesla will give you a giant contract for a long period of time if you mine nickel efficiently and in an environmentally sensitive way.”

  Meanwhile, other EV manufacturers are left scrambling. “The nickel price surge and the implications from the Russia-Ukraine invasion are likely to push battery manufacturers, particularly in the U.S., to secure alternate supply chains,” Bloomberg wrote.

  Tesla’s “secret deal” is one of many it has put in place over the last year, the report says. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 23:20

• Gen. Milley Says Risk Of 'Significant Conflict' Between Great Powers Is Increasing
  Gen. Milley Says Risk Of ‘Significant Conflict’ Between Great Powers Is Increasing

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley warned Congress on Tuesday that the chances of a “significant international conflict between great powers” are increasing. Milley warned that both China and Russia are threats to the so-called “rules-based” global order.

  “We are now facing two global powers: China and Russia, each with significant military capabilities both who intend to fundamentally change the rules-based current global order,” Milley told the House Armed Services Committee. “We are entering a world that is becoming more unstable. The potential for significant international conflict between great powers is increasing, not decreasing.”

  

  Gen. Milley further called Russia’s action the “greatest threat to peace and security of Europe, perhaps the world in my 40 years of service and in uniform.”

  “The Russian invasion of Ukraine is threatening to undermine not only European peace and stability but global peace and stability that my parents and a generation of Americans fought so hard to defend,” he described.

  The hearing was focused on the Pentagon’s $773 billion budget request for 2023, part of the $813 billion in military spending President Biden has asked Congress for. Milley said the budget is in alignment with the new National Defense Strategy (NDS) that was recently briefed to Congress but has yet to be declassified.

  In a fact sheet on the new NDS, the Pentagon named China as the top “threat” facing the US military, while Russia was second. The US military’s shift in focus towards “great power competition” was first outlined by the 2018 NDS, which put China and Russia as equal concerns.

  Gen. Mark Milley: “We are entering a world that is becoming more unstable and the potential for significant international conflict between great powers is increasing, not decreasing.” pic.twitter.com/ltNSF0gMYK

  — Wittgenstein (@backtolife_2022) April 6, 2022

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

  The Pentagon has plans to boost the US military’s presence in the Asia Pacific to counter China and in Eastern Europe to face Russia. While done in the name of deterrence, US military buildups in the regions will only make a conflict more likely.

  This is demonstrated by the fact that one of Russia’s main justifications for invading Ukraine was Kyiv’s alignment with NATO and the military alliance’s presence in the region.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 23:00

• White-Collar New Yorkers Plan To Axe Time Spent In Office 
  White-Collar New Yorkers Plan To Axe Time Spent In Office 

  More than two years after the virus pandemic locked down New York City and upended the world of work, there are continued signs of storm clouds gathering over the office real estate sector. 

  According to Bloomberg, citing a new study by Nicholas Bloom, an economics professor at Stanford University, the average white-collar worker plans to halve the time spent in the office and reduce discretionary spending in the metro area by $6,730. Before the pandemic, those in offices spent on average $12,561 in a pre-pandemic world. 

  

  On Thursday, Bloom revealed his findings at a Federal Reserve Bank of New York conference. He said hybrid and remote work could cost New York around 5-10% of its city-center population. The implications of declining white-collar workers traversing city streets from home to work could dampen the economic recovery. 

  The city’s unemployment rate is shockingly high (7.6%) compared with the rest of the country at 3.8%. High unemployment is due to the lack of white-collar workers because so many industries in the city are dependent on them using their services, such as the restaurant and entertainment industry. 

  “People used to live in cities because they had to come into the office five days a week,” said Bloom, who surveyed 5,000 workers and 1,000 businesses about pandemic-related changes to work habits. 

  “If they don’t have to, and they want a backyard, they move out to the suburbs. We see that across cities, and call it the doughnut effect,” he added. 

  Bloom’s survey comes as Manhattan landlords have struggled with a glut of commercial real estate properties. It was reported by Savills Research this week that office space available in the city is at 19%, the highest since the dark days of the Dot Com bust (2000). 

  There will be no recovery in the city’s office sector unless workers return to the office. 

  Keycard swipes tracked by security company Kastle Systems show NYC offices are about 36% occupied, far below pre-COVID levels.

  

  As vacancy rates continue to hit levels not seen since prior bust cycles, the world’s largest commercial real estate owner, Blackstone, is giving up on one of its Midtown Manhattan office buildings. There is trouble brewing in the office space market. 

  “That’s an indication that something not great might be starting to bubble up within the office sector,” Lea Overby, a Barclays analyst covering the commercial mortgage market, told Axios.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 22:40

• Taibbi: America's Sexual Red Scare
  Taibbi: America’s Sexual Red Scare

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  On March 18th, the New York Times published “America Has a Free Speech Problem,” an editorial wrapped around a poll, asserting roughly 80% of the country withholds opinions over fear of “retaliation or harsh criticism.” The piece prompted outrage from Twitter’s moral police — “arguably the worst day in the history of the New York Times” cried blue-check analyst Tom Watson — some of whom claimed the article did so much to legitimize right-wing propaganda about speech suppression that the entire Times editorial board should resign or be fired.

  A day before the Times editorial, the Chronicle of Higher Education published an article by author and longtime professor Laura Kipnis called “Academe is a Hotbed of Craven Snitches.” My first question upon reading this disturbing piece was why the excellent word “craven” isn’t used more by writers. The second, after digesting the content — a litany of horrific scenes of students, administrators, and academics destroying each other’s careers and reputations, often over consensual, legal sexual encounters — is how anyone familiar with even a fraction of what Kipnis writes about could quibble with the notion that America has a “speech problem.”

  

  This country doesn’t just have a narrow civil liberties dispute about speech. We’re in a crisis of communication and intimacy, compounded by a uniquely American terror of sex that probably dates back to the days of the Puritans, and seems at the core of what Kipnis calls the “carceral turn” in her world of higher education. Atop legitimate and necessary mechanisms for identifying and stopping campus predators — Kipnis stresses that “sexual assault is a reality on campus, though not exactly a new one” — we’re building new bureaucracies to prosecute an array of social or even just intellectual offenses.

  These range from consensual but “inappropriate” workplace affairs (the downfall of University of Michigan president Mark Schlissel), to explicitly permitted sexual relations with adult students not under one’s tutelage (among the reported crimes of University of Rochester professor Florian Jaeger), to trying to intervene on behalf of a lawyerless, accused student (the no-no of University of Colorado professor David Barnett, who was hit with a “retaliation” charge by an administration that then spent $148,000 investigating him), to countless other mania-inspired offenses, from “suspicious eye contact” to a female professor dancing “too provocatively” at an off-campus party, to a ballet teacher saying “I always wanted to partner a banana” in class.

  Kipnis was a canary in this speech-lunacy coal mine. She made history in 2015 by becoming the subject of two harassment complaints for the seemingly impossible offense of writing an article (also in the Chronicle, called “Sexual Paranoia on Campus”). Students accused Kipnis of creating a hostile environment via the piece, in which she’d questioned the harassment investigation against fellow Northwestern professor Peter Ludlow, criticized new campus prohibitions against relationships between professors and graduate students, and argued that the logic behind some new campus enforcement policies were politically regressive, re-imposing an old-school paternalism that cast women back in roles as helpless victims in constant need of saving. “If this is feminism,” she wrote, “it’s feminism hijacked by melodrama.”

  Kipnis was cleared of the charges, but not before being taken on a tour of the bizarre inquisitorial bureaucracy of Title IX, a federal law originally instituted in 1972 that most Americans associate with an effort to bar gender discrimination and achieve funding parity for women’s sports. The law expanded in the Obama years to encompass not just discrimination but sexual misconduct. The concept ended up being worded so vaguely that, as Kipnis discovered, Title IX was soon used as the broadest of political tools, to hammer out everything from office disagreements to parameters of acceptable thought. She later wrote:

  Perhaps you’re wondering how an essay falls under the purview of Title IX, the federal statute meant to address gender discrimination and funding for women’s sports? I was wondering that myself… The answer, in brief, is that the culture of sexual paranoia I’d been writing about isn’t confined to the sexual sphere. It’s fundamentally altering the intellectual climate in higher education as a whole, to the point where ideas are construed as threats —writing an essay became “creating a chilling environment,” according to my accusers — and freedoms most of us used to take for granted are being whittled away or disappearing altogether.

  Most Americans don’t know a whole lot about Title IX, among other things because the accused are encouraged/ordered to keep experiences secret. Kipnis’s accusers inadvertently did her an enormous favor here. Not only did they make a colorful writer with a keen satirical bent an eyewitness to a prosecutorial mechanism silly enough in its mindless destruction to have been written by the cast of Monty Python, they also spurred her to look into the case of Ludlow, a once-prominent philosophy professor accused of inappropriate behavior who ended up delivering to Kipnis a literary gold mine.

  Campus protesters marched against the possibility of any kind of settlement with Ludlow, so he resigned without a confidentiality agreement, which left him free to hand over to Kipnis the gold mine, i.e. the files from his cases. The transcripts of interviews conducted by Ludlow’s campus inquisitors, along with the mountain of emails and other materials introduced as evidence, painted a picture of a bureaucracy of pre-determined guilt, casual institutional cruelty, and ingrained sexual terror so extreme that the whole concept of viewing sex as anything but predatory appeared to have become taboo in the eyes of officialdom.

  Because Kipnis broke the seal on what had been a mostly secret national phenomenon, an avalanche of letters about Title IX incidents soon filled her inbox, offering a shocking sense of the scope of the problem. In her 2017 book Unwanted Advances, she writes that a biopic about disgraced screenwriter Dalton Trumbo “left me reflecting that sex is our era’s Communist threat, and Title IX hearings our new HUAC hearings.” A bold statement, given how ingrained a part of the national psyche the “communist threat” was for generations, but the idea holds up. The book opens by describing her experience and the Ludlow case in painful detail, moves on to recount scores of other incidents and statistics, and concludes with essays asking profound and uncomfortable questions about America’s deteriorating relationship toward sex and intimacy.

  Subscribers to TK News can read the rest here.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 22:20

• AccuWeather Warns La Nina To Spark Active Hurricane Season
  AccuWeather Warns La Nina To Spark Active Hurricane Season

  AccuWeather forecasters are predicting the seventh straight above-average Atlantic hurricane season because of La Niña and warmer ocean temperatures. 

  AccuWeather’s senior meteorologist and hurricane expert Dan Kottlowski is once again anticipating an above-normal season of tropical development in the Atlantic basin, along with higher probabilities of major hurricanes making landfall in the U.S. 

  Kottlowski forecasts 16-20 named storms and six to eight hurricanes. Of those hurricanes, he believes three to five could exceed Category 3 strength. 

  AccuWeather’s forecast of 16-20 named storms is higher than the 30-year average of 14 per year. The projection of six to eight hurricanes is in line with averages. 

  This year’s upcoming season could be identical to how 2020 and 2021 played out. Last season, there were 21 named storms, seven hurricanes, and four major hurricanes. Eight of those storms made direct impacts on the U.S. mainland. About four to six are expected to hit the U.S. this year. 

  

  Kottlowski said the climatological phenomenon known as La Niña will play a crucial role in the active hurricane season, which begins on June 1 and ends on Nov. 7. There’s also a risk of tropical storms before the season starts. 

  La Niña has been extremely active in the last two years and has reduced the amount of vertical wind shear in the atmosphere. Greater vertical wind shear can often stymie developing cyclones.  

  Kottlowski said La Niña and above-normal sea-surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean and off the U.S. East Coast would produce another active hurricane season.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 22:00

• Woke Medicine's Got A Tricky Operation: Grafting 'Systemic Racism' Onto Hard Science
  Woke Medicine’s Got A Tricky Operation: Grafting ‘Systemic Racism’ Onto Hard Science

  Authored b John Murawski via RealClear Investigations,

  Just a few years ago, concepts such as “white supremacy,” “systemic racism,” and “structural intersectionality” were not the standard fare of prestigious medical journals. These are now the guiding ideas in a February special issue of “Health Affairs” that focuses on medicine and race.

  

  Featuring nearly two dozen articles with titles such as “Racism Runs Through It” and “Sick and Tired of Being Excluded,” as well as a poem called “Identity,” the Washington, D.C.-based, peer-reviewed journal analyzes racial health disparities not through biology, behavior, or culture, but through the lens of  “whiteness,” along with concepts such as power, systems of oppression, state-sanctioned violence, and critical race praxis – a sampling of terms that come up in the February issue.

  Health Affairs, dubbed by a Washington Post columnist as “the bible of health policy,” represents something much more ambitious than woke virtue signaling. Its February issue reflects the effort of newly empowered “anti-racist” scholars to transform concepts that are still considered speculative and controversial – and some say unprovable – into scientific fact. This growing effort to document, measure, and quantify racism is being advanced by other high-profile publications, including The New England Journal of Medicine, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and Scientific American, which last year ran articles entitled “Modern Mathematics Confronts Its White, Patriarchal Past” and “Denial of Evolution Is a Form of White Supremacy.”

  But this scientific aspiration faces major challenges. Science demands verification, testability, and replicability, whereas race is a social construct that can be difficult to separate from factors like class or culture, and explaining the data often remains dependent on academic theories about systemic racism. The articles in Health Affairs indicate that elevating the concept of systemic racism from moral certitude to scientific fact will require developing new tools and methods – and even more theories – in the face of skepticism and resistance from dissenters who view this direction in research as unscientific and ideological.

  For example, five co-authors of the Health Affairs article “Improving the Measurement of Structural Racism to Achieve Antiracist Policy” observe that “there is a disconnect between the conceptualization and measurement of structural racism in the public health literature” – that is to say that acceptance of the idea outpaces the evidence for it.

  In a Health Affairs paper titled “The Intellectual Roots of Current Knowledge on Racism and Health,” researchers from Harvard University and the University of Maryland argue that turning the study of systemic racism into a scientific enterprise will require the scientific community to embrace terminology and research that “can be unsettling to some”:

  Until recently, the language and terminology of racism has been contested, often ignored, and viewed as not relevant to, or acceptable for, accounting for and intervening on racial and ethnic inequities in health.

  The Harvard and Maryland scholars identify “the critical need for paradigmatic shifts that incorporate racism as a driver of inequities,” noting that “scientific language has the power to encourage normative standards.” In another article, a team of five scholars calls for “outlining specific methodological approaches that will move the field forward.”

  Those pushing the effort expect that it will take years to build up a knowledge base and critical mass of scholarly research. If successful, it would empower the anti-racist movement with what advocates expect to be recognized as unimpeachable scientific authority that could be used to support a myriad of diversity and equity policies and interventions that are now being advocated as moral and polemical arguments by legal scholars, educators, historians, and journalists.

  According to researchers now studying the relationship of medicine and race, racial inequalities in lifespans, health, income, and other metrics largely result from a single cause: cultural norms and unconscious beliefs that have the appearance of colorblindness but systematically privilege whites and males at the expense of groups that lack power and are oppressed.

  Since the murder of George Floyd by a Minnesota police officer in May 2020, the cultural elites advocating this view – whether one calls it wokeness, systemic racism, critical race theory, or just the truth – are no longer marginalized outsiders. They are now in charge of many leading institutions that produce culture and certify knowledge through the media, publishing, universities, scholarly journals, foundations and advocacy groups, large K-12 school systems, and the sprawling apparatus of the federal government.

  Although medical research informed by critical race theory has been conducted for decades, its broad embrace by the field’s highest echelons has been both sudden and expansive.

  Alan Weil, Health Affairs’ editor-in-chief, committed the journal to “dismantling institutional racism” in January 2021. Scientists must question their assumptions about merit, quality, and excellence and make room for new research designs, methods, paradigms, and theories, Weil suggested, because traditional scientific protocols can make it impossible to study racism in the United States or recognize the problem within their own institutions.

  “The reason it’s relevant is because if you decide only certain [research] methods are valid, then you have also decided that certain questions cannot be answered – they can’t even be asked,” Weil said in a phone interview. “I view this as a call to researchers to try to look at questions that they might have historically passed by — or viewed as ones that couldn’t be studied.”

  

  The February issue of Health Affairs provides examples of how the new approach to research can be implemented to make the case for the pervasiveness of systemic racism in routine aspects of society.

  The first of the nearly two dozen articles in the February issue sets the tone. The article describes an anti-racist initiative at the Mass General Brigham health system, where measuring and attaining equity – an ideal of equal health outcomes across racial groups – is now a core component of the institutional culture, like patient safety.

  One thing that system leaders are not doing: studying whether or not racism actually affects health outcomes. “They believe that this fundamental question has already been answered,” the article states. The anti-racist initiative, called United Against Racism, will cost $40 million in the first year alone. “The initiative has no set end date,” the article states, and a system executive “expects their budget to increase every year.”

  Another article urges the need to teach white Americans “the truth” about racial oppression, “despite the discomfort that it generates.” True racial progress requires the “understanding by White people of how they have benefited from systemic racism” – and how much more they stand to gain from social justice.

  An article about the generational trauma of racism recommends respect for “Indigenous principles” and adopting a policy of federal reimbursement to traditional Native American healers who perform ceremonial and spiritual interventions.

  There are also articles about black women in low-wage jobs in the healthcare sector; about black people living farther from rural hospitals than whites; about racial and minority Medicaid enrollees reporting significantly worse experiences; an article titled “Addressing the Interlocking Impact Of Colonialism And Racism On Filipinx/a/o American Health Inequities,” and more.

  Medicine is just one of the major American institutions that has committed itself to equity. The seemingly overnight transformation has not been without its share of “cancellations” and controversy over such issues as prioritizing non-whites for Covid vaccines and suspending conventional academic standards to boost diversity.

  As high-profile journals advance the systemic racism argument, other influential institutions are putting the contested ideas into practice.

  The American Medical Association’s 86-page strategic plan for racial justice and health equity also challenges the morality of prevailing standards of quality and merit as a strategy of protecting the privileged domain of white males: The AMA condemns “equal treatment” and meritocracy as “malignant” white supremacist ideologies that obscure “true power and site of responsibility.”

  The Association of American Medical Colleges, which co-sponsors the accrediting body for U.S. medical schools, is working to establish an advocacy culture in medical schools that haven’t yet gotten with the program voluntarily. The AAMC is expected to issue an update this year to its recommended professional “competencies,”  the AAMC’s term for professional standards and best practices, that medical schools would be encouraged to adopt.

  The proposed competencies include practicing self-reflection, “allyship,” and cultural humility, as well as attaining fluency in the “various systems of oppression,” to wit: colonization, white supremacy, acculturation, and assimilation.

  For medical school faculty, the AAMC sets such professional expectations as teaching “how systems of power, privilege, and oppression inform policies and practices and how to engage with systems to disrupt oppressive practices.”

  Not surprisingly, the handful of people who are willing to risk their careers and reputations to publicly critique anything to do with systemic racism and equity say the medical establishment has become captive to a leftist ideological agenda. These dissenters argue that “anti-racism” can be hard to distinguish from anti-science when it fixates on a single variable (race), selectively seeks out data to prove a hypothesis (confirmation bias), ignores plausible alternative explanations – and worst of all – silences criticism. 

  “Confounding science with political ideology is never good,” said Michael Shermer, the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, whose monthly column was terminated at Scientific American after 18 years in a disagreement over what Shermer saw as woke ideology infecting the venerable publication.

  “They’re saying we already know the answer – the answer is racism,” Shermer said in a phone interview with RealClearInvestigations. “We’re going to ignore all the other variables. They’re just reducing complex problems to one variable.”

  

  This embrace of systemic racism is piggybacking on a long tradition of public health research that attributes population health disparities to social conditions, going back to a study by Friedrich Engels in the 1840s that said life expectancies in Liverpool, England, varied by the occupation of the city’s residents. For generations, however, the mainstream medical establishment understood racial health disparities to be a matter of genetics, behavior, culture, class – or a combination of these factors. Public health scholars, meanwhile, have been pouring forth hundreds of scholarly articles that attribute racial disparities in heart disease, diabetes, mental illness and other key metrics to societal conditions.

  Health Affairs traces the evolution of racism as medical scourge through the release of “Unequal Treatment,” the groundbreaking 2003 Institute of Medicine (now National Academy of Medicine) report that said black people received inferior care in nearly every medical category. More recent is the 2019 declaration by the Pan American Health Organization, a regional arm of the World Health Organization, that structural racism is a key driver of health inequity, followed by the 2021 declaration from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that racism is a public health threat.

  The Health Affairs articles in the February special issue rely on sociological theories, personal testimonials, and even poetry to augment traditional scientific protocols. Because there is no single correct way to measure structural racism, the five scholars “encourage the use of a theory-driven approach” to interpret data that would otherwise have to be treated as random or inconclusive.

  For such scholars, theory is often the connective tissue that can link practices or events that, to the untrained eye, might seem too remote or speculative or simply unrelated. Within the narrative structure of a productive theory, facts fall neatly into place, and hidden patterns emerge. Thus, theories are the key to linking sociological phenomena separated by 50, 100, and even 200 years.

  “Future studies should examine how modern health is shaped by a wider array of past forms of structural racism, such as slavery, lynching, unequal treatment in the criminal-legal system, forced sterilization, and other manifestations of racialized violence,” according to the quintet of academic scholars.

  “Theory suggests inextricable links,” they say, “with historical forms directing, constructing, and molding contemporary structural racism.”

  Researchers from Duke University and Florida State University argue that depriving African American felons of the right to vote affects the health of the entire community. The co-authors acknowledge they can’t directly prove that voting prohibitions for convicted felons harmed community health, but they noted that “there is a strong theoretical basis on which to expect that racialized disenfranchisement affects health.” 

  The article states that living in states with higher levels of “racialized felony disfranchisement” is “associated with” worse physical and mental health among black people, such as more symptoms of depression and functional limitations. The article concludes that “enacting laws to dismantle racialized felony disenfranchisement would likely improve the health of Black people and make progress toward achieving health equity.”

  That claim includes footnotes that take the reader to three other articles – one based on “ecosocial theory,” another drawing on sociologist Bruce Link’s theory of “stigma power,” and another resting on the theory of “fundamental causes.” These articles provide the so-called theoretical basis for concluding that stripping felons of the right to vote affects community health. (The Link theory posited that “stigma is a form of power” used to control, exploit, and dominate people with mental illness.) 

  “Skeptics dismiss structural racism as a slippery concept for which robust empirical evidence documenting its effects is lacking,” the two researchers declare in their paper. “This study provides empirical evidence that makes it harder to dismiss the links between health and structural racism manifested as disproportionate Black felony disenfranchisement.”

  Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, a kidney specialist who retired last year from the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, agreed to review this article for RCI. A former associate dean of curriculum at Penn’s medical school, Goldfarb said the Health Affairs article contains all the mandatory caveats about its methodological limitations, and then ignores them.

  “This approach just drives me crazy. It’s basically finding associations and claiming it proves causality,” Goldfarb said. “They are going to find evidence for their theory because they are trying to do everything they can to prove their theory. That’s why they keep saying: We have to find the evidence.” 

  Alan Weil declined to discuss critiques of individual Health Affairs articles, and the lead author of the felon study and of the hospital study didn’t respond to RealClearInvestigations’ emails. But Weil, and others, say the anti-racist imperative in medicine is no more of an ideological “agenda” than the quest to discover a cure for cancer. Moreover, the advocates assert that the imperative to dismantle systemic racism is more urgent because it is more lethal than cancer.

  “These sociopolitical exposures are exposures, just like we study in cancer research,” said Katherine Theall, a social epidemiologist and professor of public health at Tulane University. “And they’re even more powerful in many ways across a host of health outcomes.”

  One way of summarizing this dispute is that traditionalists like Goldfarb are suspicious of scholarly activism as a corrupting influence on science, whereas researchers like Weil and Theall are suspicious of neutrality and colorblindness as an invisibility cloak for systemic racism.

  “We want objective science, but there’s a point in public health, too, where we need to be doing more consequential work,” said Theall, a co-author of one of the Health Affairs articles. “We should be doing more advocacy, we should be trying to change these factors that we know matter for health.”

  Weil describes researchers as “heroic” for trying to make sense of a complicated problem for which there is no single measure, but whose existence is beyond dispute.

  “I don’t find the existence of systemic racism to be a controversial or difficult question to answer,” Weil said. “I see it around me all the time. I think the evidence base is so clear that I don’t want to spend a lot of my time trying to figure out whether or not the problem exists.”

  Other articles in Health Affairs seek to document evidence of systemic racism in unexpected places. The team of scholars that includes Theall suggests that urban policing, specifically stop-and-frisk encounters, can lead to domestic violence and violent crime, as well as to poorer community health.

  Theall said there are a number of theories scholars can “pull off the shelf” to analyze the effect of stop-and-frisk encounters on community health and local crime. But the causality is complicated, she said, because some effects, like heart disease and obesity, can take years to develop. Other effects, like rates of smoking or inadequate physical activity, could happen relatively quickly.

  And taking this tack requires scholars to connect smoking for the alleviation of stress, or a reluctance to go outside for exercise, to police harassment – as opposed to connecting it to, say, gang terror. Theall said it takes years of effort and reams of studies to create a convincing case, patiently building evidence and refining methods.

  “Our thesis is that even if you’re not a perpetrator of violence, for example, that level of community stress, of over-policing, is important for health,” Theall said. “And it’s important for that production of violence, whether that’s additional violent crime in the neighborhood or maybe the stress of living in a stressful neighborhood and what that might do for domestic violence.” 

  Theall’s article focuses on data from New Orleans. The article notes that the city had the fourth-highest murder rate in the United States in 2019 – a rate five times the national average.

  Much of the action in Theall’s article takes place in the substratum of footnotes. The cited research relies on an array of sociological, psychological, and criminological theories that associate cops with harmful effects, including stress and distrust, the latter presumably causing residents not to call 911 for police assistance when they need it.

  One of the articles cited by Theall (in footnote 27), in turn, cites previous articles that have been passed down from paper to paper. And it is here, burrowing into the footnotes, where one can find explanations and theories that speculate on how policing can lead to crime and poor health.

  “Policing may also have epigenetic implications,” the reader learns, “whereby chronic exposure to stress from a particularly imposing police presence can lead to altered gene transcription/expression and epigenetic changes that can be passed on to subsequent generations.”

  But with so many theories to choose from, could a researcher be tempted to cherry-pick a theory, or just make one up, to make the data tell a coherent story about how cops are escalating crime and violence and community illness?  

  “I don’t know the best answer for that, but I see where it can be a critique,” Theall said. “I would just think that’s probably not the route most researchers are taking in terms of analyzing their data, and then finding a theory to fit it.” 

  To the contrary, Theall believes some scholars are so scrupulous that they “overcontrol” for random factors and end up with research findings that are inconclusive. She said that because papers with negative findings tend not to get published as often as papers with splashy results – a research phenomenon called publication bias – a misimpression can result, that anti-racist scholars find racism everywhere they look.  

  Still, there is a theory in criminology called “the Ferguson effect,” developed after the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, that posits the opposite of Theall’s: that crime increases when cops reduce pro-active policing.

  Chris Ferguson, a psychology professor at Stetson University in DeLand, Fla. (not related to the Ferguson effect theory), agreed to read Theall’s paper for RCI. He described this scholarship as a classic example of stubborn data being shoehorned into an uncooperative theory.

  “This feels like an example of institutional capture, where you’re only good if you buy into the theory,” he said, “and therefore everything is seen through the lens of that theory, no matter how much you have to torture the data to make that happen.”

  Ferguson is a hardcore skeptic of this sort of research. In a Quillette article last December, he described his resignation from the American Psychological Association as a protest against the organization’s embrace of wokeness. In the long run, Ferguson predicted, this research approach will prove unsustainable.

  “We’re in this confirmatory mode where people try to find evidence and not look at alternative explanations,” he said. “That’s the best way to form a consensus – just exclude the scholars who disagree.

  “What happens is, other scholars begin to pick at it and it falls apart,” Ferguson added. “Twenty years out this is going to look like a huge embarrassment.”

  email: jmurawski@realclearinvestigations.com

  Twitter: @johnmurawski

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 21:40

• How Much Living Space Does $1,500/Mth Get You In The US?
  How Much Living Space Does $1,500/Mth Get You In The US?

  A RentCafe analysis of Yardi Matrix data has revealed the U.S. city where renters get the most space on average for a monthly outlay of $1,500.

  

   

  Wichita, Kansas offers the most square feet of real estate, at 1,597.

   

  The city, with a population around the 400,000 mark, is accompanied in this part of the ranking by places like Oklahoma City (1,431) and El Paso, Texas (1,305).

  

  On the other end of the scale, the New York borough of Manhattan would yield the least space for renters in 2022 – a small but still very livable 262 square feet.

  If it has to be NYC, Brooklyn may be a slightly better option with 357.

  

  The west coast is also in a similar league – San Francisco would offer an average of 345 and Los Angeles 454.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 21:20

• "Pushed To The Brink Of Collapse": Leaked Recording Of Shanghai CDC Expert Describes Chaos Behind Lockdown Measures
  “Pushed To The Brink Of Collapse”: Leaked Recording Of Shanghai CDC Expert Describes Chaos Behind Lockdown Measures

  Authored by Li Jing and Luo Ya via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  While Shanghai continues its lockdown and massive PCR testing campaign as COVID-19 surges through the city, a CDC expert’s complaint about chaotic PCR test reports that have confused people was recently exposed online. Shanghai CDC issued a notice demanding staff answer public inquiries “in line with the policy.”

  

  There have been complaints about the conflicting PCR test results on Chinese social media because people receive a negative test result on their cell phones but then receive a positive test result from the CDC.

  Shanghai adopted the Healthcare Cloud app as its integrated Internet and Healthcare services platform. Locals register through the app for a PCR test and receive the test result on their cell phones. However, many people received a negative test notice via the app but still were then notified by CDC that they had tested positive and were thus subject to quarantine.

  Complaints have flooded the Shanghai CDC hotline.

  A recently leaked recording of a CDC expert responding to a caller revealed how the app has been problematic, how overloaded health workers have been stymied by a lack of transparency in pandemic prevention, and how the pandemic has become a political issue.

  The Test Negative Is Fake

  In the recording, the expert said, “We have received hundreds of calls every day, but our jobs are epidemiological investigations. We can’t solve your problem.”

  She said, “Let me tell you the facts: There’s no ward, the quarantine sites are filled, and there’s no ambulance.”

  A male was heard complaining, “But we have no way to address our issue, even Weibo is blocked.”

  The expert said, “I have brought this up too many times; as an expert, I have suggested that the mild to no symptom patients stay at home. Does anyone listen? No!”

  She continued, “Let me reiterate, do not bother checking your health cloud, it’s all a negative result. Only we will notify you when you have tested positive.”

  The caller responded, “So what we see is all fake?”

  She said, “That’s right.”

  In the recording, the expert encouraged making public the recording.

  

  A Pandemic Turns Political

  The expert explained that she had complained to her leader that CDC staff should not be contacting people about their testing positive while people have received a negative test message on the app. It has only exhausted the staff at the CDC and confused the public.

  She said, “We, as the professionals, are pushed to the brink of collapse by the situation. This pandemic has become a political issue that’s consuming so much manpower, resources, and money, just to solve this flu-like disease. What other country do you think is doing this kind of epidemic prevention now?”

  The expert also suggested to the caller, “The quarantine site is not up to standard, and there’s no medical service at the site. If you are forced to go to the isolation ward, ask them for proof of a positive test result before they can enforce it. Let me tell you, they won’t have it.”

  After the recording was leaked, multiple online articles confirmed that the Shanghai CDC expert was Zhu Weiping, director of the Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Section of Shanghai Pudong New Area CDC. The Epoch Times has not been able to independently verify the authenticity of the recording.

  According to the Chinese article, her comments drew criticism from those who support the communist regime, calling it a serious political incident—an advocate of “coexistence with the virus,” an aggressive attack on the party, and sabotaging and shaking the anti-epidemic deployment. Many netizens have supported her saying “protect Zhu Weiping.”

  The leaked recording was soon deleted from the Chinese internet.

  At the same time, the Shanghai CDC issued a notice to relevant departments demanding the hotline to be answered only by trained staff, and answers should be provided only in line with the current policy.

  On March 28, Shanghai imposed a two-stage lockdown of four days, first for the eastern side of the city, and then the western side of the city, divided by the Huangpu River, with two rounds of nucleic acid tests, until April 5.

  The city decided on April 4 to extend the lockdown with no known date to lift the restriction that affects more than 26 million people in the city.

  Mary Hong contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 21:00

• America's Largest Farm Cooperative Warns Sanctions May Spark Fertilizer Shortages
  America’s Largest Farm Cooperative Warns Sanctions May Spark Fertilizer Shortages

  America’s largest farmer cooperative sounded the alarm Wednesday about possible disruptions of fertilizer supplies from Russia due to Western sanctions on Moscow.

  CHS Inc., the largest agricultural cooperative in the US, said in an SEC filing that it’s concerned about obtaining Russian fertilizer because of sanctions making it “more expensive and difficult to do business with Russia.” 

  CHS warned that sanctions could “cause delays with respect to, or prevent, shipments of fertilizer to us, cause inflationary pressures on and impact our ability to purchase fertilizer, disrupt the execution of banking transactions with certain Russian financial institutions and result in volatility in foreign exchange rates and interest rates, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.”  

  The cooperative said it holds no operations in Russia. However, it has $30 million in grain inventories sitting in silos in Ukraine and will have to take an “impairment charge” because of its inability to access those stockpiles. 

  CHS warns there’s a risk the conflict in Ukraine “could lead to a much larger conflict and/or additional sanctions imposed by the United States government and other governments that restrict business with specific persons, organizations or countries or with respect to certain products or services.” And said if such an event did occur, it would wreck more global supply chains and “could materially adversely affect our business operations and financial performance.” 

  For some context, Russia is one of the world’s largest fertilizer exports. Countries already afflicted by food insecurity, such as emerging market economies, will experience some of the first fertilizer and food shortages first. By the way, violent inflation protests are already beginning in Peru. 

  

  The farming industry is being clubbed like a baby seal by the Ukrainian conflict and Western sanctions against Moscow. It’s the sanctions causing fertilizer prices to soar, diesel prices to erupt, and the cost of everything to inflate. Also, international shipping companies are steering clear of trade with Russia — making it even hard to acquire fertilizer products. The Ukrainian conflict and resulting sanctions make no food supply chain safe.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 20:40

• "What Have We Done To Our Kids?"
  “What Have We Done To Our Kids?”

  Authored by Suzy Weiss via Bari Weiss’ “Common Sense” Substack,

  The Teen Girls Aren’t Going to Forget

  “It’s like a sci-fi show where people went to sleep and woke up two years later.” Lockdown is over, but the scars of isolation aren’t going away…

  

  Cheerleaders at high school football game, Melrose, Massachusetts, 1969. (Photo by Spencer Grant/Getty Images)

  Lily May Holland, 16, remembers the long, lonely days during lockdown when her parents, both doctors, were at work. She’d watch “Gilmore Girls” and “Gossip Girl” and “Grey’s Anatomy” over and over. She stopped eating and started doing Chloe Ting workouts. “I’d have gum and a smoothie all day,” she said. They lived in the sticks north of Charlottesville, Virginia, on a dirt road between farms and trailer parks and the occasional Baptist church, and she didn’t have a license, so she couldn’t go anywhere or meet any friends. Teachers would post assignments online, but it was like—who cared? Everything happened in isolation, like they were atoms. “I would’ve gone to parties, and me and my friends were planning to go to concerts, and homecoming,” Lily said. “I had crushes freshman year. But all that fell away.” 

  Teenagers need a social life. Every single study and report and piece of data tells us so. But we don’t need studies to tell us what we all already know. Ask yourself: What would it have been like if you had spent your thirteenth year in solitude? 

  It was more than a year, actually. Millions of American kids had gone a year-and-a-half mostly alone. And every single girl I spoke to said the same thing about the experience: They felt like they were sinking, or being swallowed up. 

  So it almost seemed like an understatement when, in December 2021, the Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, said the effect of the lockdowns had been “devastating” for young people’s mental health. 

  “Usually, kids would be learning to disobey their parents and stay out late and figure out the consequences, but there was just none of that,” said Regine Galanti, a clinical psychologist in New York who specializes in adolescents with anxiety disorders. The impact of all that emptiness—the zig-zagging from one hazy, blue-ish screen to another and then to another—was starting to come into focus, and it was scary. Lily said that, at some point mid-lockdown, she got sick of communicating with other human beings via iPhone. So then she stopped communicating at all. Galanti said, “It’s almost like a volcano that we set ourselves up for.”

  It was an unprecedented volcano. In the past, Earth-shaking events—the Great Depression, World War II, Vietnam—had forced kids to grow up. Teenagers got jobs or were deployed overseas, and when they came back they settled down and had kids or left home and fled to the big city. The point is that they started their lives. 

  Covid did the opposite. Instead of nudging young people out the door, it anchored them to their parents, to their bedrooms and to their screens. And now that the madness is finally ebbing, they’re unsure how to proceed. Galanti said, “it’s like a sci-fi show where people went to sleep and woke up two years later, and the world has moved on but they haven’t.”

  Holland said that, when school started up again in person, “I didn’t feel like I belonged. I felt like I should still be a freshman.” 

  

  High school students at a Denver prom, 1976. (Denver Post via Getty Images)

  “Lately she has expressed some other unusual anxieties which we are seeking help for her to deal with. I am left to wonder if they are related to the general amount of elevated anxiety in our culture, especially among teenage girls.”

  This came from Amy Volk, a former state senator and mother of four in Saco, Maine, which is an hour-and-a-half north of Boston and known for its amusement park, Funtown Splashtown USA. Volk had posted a comment, in January, in response to a Common Sense essay by a teacher worried about her kids. Volk was worried about her youngest, Serena, who is 18.

  Recently, I spoke with Serena. She’d spent the previous few days in bed watching “Euphoria” and “Shameless.” The week before, she’d tested positive for Covid for the second time. “Monday I had a brutal headache for about four hours,” Serena told me. Her mom left sandwiches, ibuprofen, and vitamins at the bottom of the stairs. “I didn’t have any energy to do my hair or make TikToks or anything.”

  We were chatting on the phone as she drove back from a solo trip to the beach—her first excursion out in four days. “I just sat in my car for a while, then I got Panera,” she said. 

  Before the pandemic, Volk was a cheerleader. She’d been cheering since second grade, but she quit at the end of her sophomore year, when the cheering team stopped traveling to compete because of Covid. “There was no pride in winning,” she said. “I started to hate going to practice.” It was the same with class, which became an ambient, digital, white noise machine—an iPad tuned into English, geometry, chemistry or American history, but with the camera off.

  The tangibleness of high school—sweaty locker rooms, polyester prom dresses, the cool metal of a first-place trophy, the puff of a contraband cigarette—was gone. It no longer mattered how high schoolers dressed, or whether they dressed, or even whether they showered. 

  Volk described that time as “just so much emptiness.” 

  “All of their freedom and autonomy went away with the lockdowns,” said Lily’s mom, Dr. Eliza Holland, a pediatrician who sees teenage girls suffering from suicidal ideation, eating disorders, and drug overdoses. “I recently had a patient who was sent up from the Emergency Department who kept telling me, ‘I will kill myself if you send me back to my family.’” 

  It’s hard to know how seriously to take that kind of threat. Eliza Holland pointed out that the share-it-all, hyper-vulnerable format of the internet has different mores than real life. “When you say something like that online, you get a lot of positive reinforcement and you never have to look anyone in the eye. Even if you’re joking, it lands very differently in person.” 

  Holland spends a few weeks each summer as a volunteer physician at Lily’s sleepover camp in North Carolina. The past two summers, more girls have been homesick than usual. For the older teens, she’s had to send a few home who expressed desires to hurt or kill themselves.

  This didn’t start with Covid. “People are growing up more slowly,” said Jean Twenge, a psychologist at San Diego State University and the author of the 2017 book “iGen.” Jonathan Haidt, the psychologist and author of “The Coddling of the American Mind,” traces the downward spiral to 2013 and the explosion of social media. That’s when the helicopter-parented 18-year-olds started to leave home with their iPhones and not much else.

  But Covid has dramatically compounded these forces. Being hermetically sealed off from bad dates, bad breakups, awkward conversations, tough teachers and mean bosses has left young people even less capable of navigating the hiccups of daily life. 

  The CDC said that, from 2019 to 2020, the incidence of girls ages 12 to 17 who were rushed to the Emergency Room after attempting suicide jumped by 51 percent. E.R. admissions for eating disorders doubled among the same group, according to the CDC, and tripled for tic-related disorders, which experts trace in part to TikTok. (During roughly the same period, the overall U.S. suicide rate, which skews heavily male, dropped by about 3 percent.)

  “I got really into social media during lockdown,” Haley Shipley, a 14-year-old in Springfield, Missouri, told me. “I changed how I did my makeup. I’d stop eating.” 

  Haley’s mom, a medical coder, and her mom’s boyfriend were always stressed about money. One time, her mom threw a chair across the room. Haley got headaches from staring at the Chromebook her district had sent to every student. She had to take on more chores, and she could barely hear the teacher on Zoom while her siblings were running around and screaming. 

  In September 2020, Haley started cutting her arms. “A lot of girls did,” she told me, saying that social media “gave a lot of us depression.” She added, “I couldn’t sleep without feeling pain.” She retreated into her room except for meals and chores. She would wear hoodies to hide her cuts and scars. She checked out from friends. “I had visions of drowning in the bathtub,” she said. 

  Toward the end of summer, her mom saw her cuts. “I forgot to wear a sweatshirt one day, and my mom freaked out,” Haley said. She got her a therapist, and she texted the suicide hotline, which suggested that Haley journal and write down things she liked about herself on sticky notes, which helped her feel better and work through her emotions. 

  Courtney Connolly, 50, a mom from the Chicagoland area who has filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Chicago over its vaccine mandate, said her three kids “missed out on everything, and I don’t even think they understand how fucked they got.” She said her younger daughter, Emma, now 16, went from A’s in eighth grade to failing her fully-remote freshman year. “I asked her, ‘What’s going on? You haven’t turned in 20 Spanish assignments,’ and she would say, ‘So what?’”

  Around Christmas 2020, Connolly said, she’d find her older daughter, then-16-year-old Maisy, sobbing alone in her room. “She felt like she was rotting in her bedroom.” Connolly offered to move Maisy, then a sophomore, to another school, or pull her out of school, or anything. “I called her academic counselor and said, ‘Maisy is dying,’” she said. 

  When she was going to school online, Maisy told me she wouldn’t get out of bed all day. 

  One day, her math teacher took her aside to check in on her. “Technically, she just put me in a breakout room on Zoom,” Maisy said. That’s when the floodgates opened, and she couldn’t stop crying. One of her friends drank a bottle of vodka alone in her room and had to get her stomach pumped. Another tried to overdose on her parents’ pills. 

  Maisy was lucky. Her dad is in tech. Her mom doesn’t work. The family went to Arizona for a month in mid-April to do distance learning from there, and eventually bought a house in Naples, Florida so the youngest could go to school in-person. The big question is what comes next.

  Serena Volk’s mother, Amy, in Maine, was worried about that, too. The future. Serena had lost a ton of weight during the lockdown. One day, at her boyfriend’s place, she spotted her ribcage and spine in a mirror. She’s supposed to go to the University of New Hampshire next year. But she’s not a motivated student, her mom said. “I have massive concerns about the gaps in her education, especially in math,” Amy Volk told me.

  

  High schoolers in a cafeteria,1983. (Denver Post via Getty Images)

  Adam lives in the Washington, D.C., area with his wife and two daughters, now 15 and 17. He didn’t want his name in print for fear of upsetting them. It had been a long, horrible two years, unimaginable really, and the last thing he wanted was to upset them. They seemed fragile. 

  When he was their age, in the mid-eighties, he said, “I was focused on soccer, Van Halen, and tear-assing around Long Island with my friends and my 16-year-old girlfriend.” He said it seems as though his girls “have the weight of the world on them.” 

  He didn’t know how bad things had gotten with his older daughter until softball practice started up in the fall of 2020—she plays second base—and he noticed that her uniform was hanging off her body. “She could barely pick up the bat,” he said. “An irrational being crawled into my wonderful, cooperative, never-lied, straight-A student daughter,” he said. “There would be an hour-and-a-half breakdown over an English muffin with margarine.” His younger daughter would hide under her bed to escape the screaming and the tears.

  Around Thanksgiving of that year, Adam rushed his daughter to the hospital. It was Sunday morning, and they called their doctor since she seemed like she was about to pass out. He told them that if they didn’t get her to a hospital soon, her heart might stop.

  When they got there, they learned she was 74.6 pounds. “I’ll never forget that number as long as I live,” he said. They gave her a feeding tube, and she stabilized after a week. She was supposed to star in the play at summer camp, but camp was canceled. She was supposed to go out for debate, but that was off, too. She was supposed to do Model UN, but then Model UN went remote, and it was just sad. She was supposed to go to the beach with her grandparents, but would she ever put on a bathing suit again? There were so many things that were supposed to happen and just didn’t, and now everything was going back to normal, but it wasn’t. 

  Adam says, “I say to my wife all the time, ‘What have we done to our kids?’”

  *  *  *

  If you appreciate stories like this one, please consider becoming a paid subscriber today to Bari Weiss ‘Common Sense’ Substack here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 20:20

• Major Banks Consider Zelle For Merchant Payments In Nod To Competing With Visa, MasterCard
  Major Banks Consider Zelle For Merchant Payments In Nod To Competing With Visa, MasterCard

  Big banks look like they could be devising a plan to try and take on credit card giants Visa and Mastercard. And that plan is shaping up to look like it will depend on money transfer service Zelle, which saw its growth explode during the pandemic.

  Banks are considering bringing Zelle to the checkout counter at big retailers, a new report from the Wall Street Journal noted Wednesday morning. 

  

  The payment service posted 1.8 billion transactions in 2021 amounting to $490 billion in cash changing hands. In 2021, it posted “more than double” of its prepandemic levels of both number of transactions and dollar amount of transactions, the report said. 

  Banks like JP Morgan, Bank of America and Wells Fargo are weighing whether or not that explosion of activity can be used to create a payment option that competes with Visa and Mastercard.

  Moving away from Visa and Mastercard would give banks more say over fees for transactions, and potentially increase fees that wind up directed to the banks. 

  “Bank of America customers made more Zelle transactions than wrote paper checks for the first time ever last year,” the Journal noted in its writeup. There’s currently about 1,450 financial institutions that offer Zelle for their customers. 

  

  Banks have already begun reaching out to select merchants to see whether or not they would be interested in such a change. A spokesman for the company that owns Zelle said the company is “working with financial institutions to explore more opportunities”. 

  Zelle saw a 162% increase in small business payments in 2021, the report says. 

  Three banks are also planning on launching a pilot that will allow Zelle to send rent payments to large property managers. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 20:00

• A Dark Day In Economic History; Could It Happen Again?
  A Dark Day In Economic History; Could It Happen Again?

  Via SchiffGold.com,

  Yesterday (April 5) was the anniversary of a dark day in US economic history.

  

  On April 5, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued EO-6102. It was the beginning of the end for the gold standard.

  Many people refer to EO-6102 as a gold confiscation order. But confiscation is probably not the best word for what happened in practice.

  In effect, the executive order criminalized owning gold. People caught with more than small amounts of gold could face a fine of $10,000 or 10 years in prison for hoarding the yellow metal. The order required private citizens, partnerships, associations and corporations to turn in all but small amounts of gold to the Federal Reserve at an exchange rate of $20.67 per ounce.

  In effect, EO 6102 nationalized gold. But in practice, this did not lead to gold confiscation in the true sense of the word.

  Americans turned in gold to the government, but they did so voluntarily as an act of patriotism. And the government gave people dollars in return for their gold. The feds never made any concerted effort to confiscate gold by force. They never went door to door looking for gold. And few were prosecuted under the law. Most of the prosecutions involved people caught trying to sell gold in sting operations.

  Today, you’ll sometimes hear people warn against owning gold because the government can just confiscate it again. Some numismatic coin dealers and precious metals pundits also use Roosevelt’s moves in 1933 to instill fear and bolster the sale of what they claim are “confiscation-free” products.

  Of course, it is theoretically possible for the government to confiscate gold. It’s also theoretically possible for the government to confiscate cell phones. That doesn’t mean it will.

  Even if you view the Roosevelt executive order as a warning sign, it’s important to understand the political and economic dynamics are much different today than they were in 1933. The world was on a gold standard and the economy was in a deep recession. The nationalization of gold was all about controlling the monetary system.

  And it worked.

  Today, the Federal Reserve has complete authority to expand the money supply and control interest rates. This is done with or without gold reserves. In other words, the government doesn’t need your gold.

  There are numerous reasons to believe gold confiscation is highly unlikely. We outline them all in our new report, “Confiscation Con: Will the Government Take Away Your Gold?” The report outlines six facts you need to know before you get caught up in government gold confiscation hysteria.

  You can download the free report HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 19:40

• Wait-Times For Semi Chips Rise As China Lockdowns Re-Ignite Supply Chain Congestion
  Wait-Times For Semi Chips Rise As China Lockdowns Re-Ignite Supply Chain Congestion

  In March, the wait times for semiconductor deliveries increased again, an ominous sign that shortages persist and global supply chains remain congested. 

  Lead times — the lag between when a semiconductor chip is ordered and delivered — increased by two days to 26.6 weeks last month, according to Bloomberg, citing new data from Susquehanna Financial Group. 

  

  Susquehanna blamed increasing wait times on lockdowns in China and an earthquake in Japan that reduced the ability of major semiconductor manufacturers to increase output. In January, the group reported delays were diminishing, one of the first signs of improvements since 2019. However, that has since reversed as lead times rose in February. 

  China’s Zero-COVID policy and resulting lockdown since mid-March have sparked economic turmoil as China’s Caixin Services PMI crashed to 42.0 in March from 50.2 in February, the largest single-month decline since February 2020. 

  

  Taking a look at Goldman Sachs’ proprietary Effective Lockdown Index increased by more than ten points on average in March from February as tens of millions of people are in lockdown and factories are shuttered. 

  

  Susquehanna analyst Chris Rolland said lead times for power management, microcontrollers, analog, and memory chips increased the most. He said the Ukraine conflict, COVID lockdowns in China, and an earthquake in Japan “will have a short-term impact in the first quarter but may have lingering effects on the severely constrained supply chain through the year.” 

  The global shortage of semiconductors began more than two years ago in early 2020, driven mainly by the virus pandemic as the government showered Americans with helicopter money and work-at-home became widespread, pushing people to buy consumer electronic goods. Then there was a scarcity of chips as COVID shutdowns in China shuttered factories. At this rate, and considering the new developments at play, such as the war in Ukraine and China lockdowns, chip industry executives are now saying lead times might not alleviate until 2023. 

  As lockdowns were being implemented in China last month, our analysis suggested the world should brace for more supply chain pain. 

  Goldman Sachs’ transportation and logistics analyst Jordan Alliger wrote in a recent note to clients that weekly bottleneck metrics of the global supply chain remain elevated. 

  

  Alliger remains “somewhat concerned over the recent Covid lockdowns in China — while ports remain open, the impact to warehouses and trucking (i.e., driver testing requirements) could create some near term backlog in loading ships/sending them to the USA, which could eventually cause the West Coast to see renewed backups if too many ships leave China all at once.” 

  Even though Goldman and others had said global “bottlenecks have eased versus ‘peak’ levels in December/January (when our scale was at ’10’), we are still far from ‘normal’ congestion levels.” It appears congestion (but maybe not as severe) will be sticking around for the remainder of this year. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 19:20

• Citing Racial Discrimination, Black Leaders Target Roe v Wade
  Citing Racial Discrimination, Black Leaders Target Roe v Wade

  Authored by Alex Newman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A major lawsuit on behalf of unborn black babies making its way through the courts in Alabama has legal abortion in the crosshairs, alleging that the abortion industry is deliberately targeting black Americans and other minorities.

  

  If successful, the attorneys and activists behind the case told The Epoch Times that it might ultimately overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent-setting U.S. Supreme Court opinion that struck down state laws against abortion.

  Even if the case does not succeed in court, legal analysts and experts in the field say the implications for the court of public opinion are hard to overstate.

  The lawsuit was filed by pro-life leader Amie Beth Shaver, named Miss Alabama in 1994, on behalf of “Baby Q,” an African American baby in Alabama who was unborn when the case began. Baby Q represents all other similarly situated black babies in the womb across the state.

  According to the complaint, Baby Q and other members of the “class” are being unlawfully discriminated against and targeted for abortion by the industry. Abortion giant Planned Parenthood acknowledges its roots in the eugenics movement, but says it is working to rectify that legacy.

  “About 80 members of Baby Q’s class, which is African American babies in the womb, lose their lives in abortion every week in Alabama,” Sam McClure, the lead lawyer representing the babies, told The Epoch Times in a phone interview. “Enough is enough. This has to stop.”

  Several leaders involved in the case told The Epoch Times that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry more broadly have a long history of racism and support for eugenics, the highly controversial idea that humanity should be “improved” by weeding out allegedly inferior genes from the population.

  “This case really boils down to the question of whether states have the right to prohibit eugenics abortion,” added McClure.

  Many of the black leaders involved in the case were also behind the Equality Proclamation, signed in 2020 on the 158th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, to shine the spotlight on what they describe as the systematic targeting of black babies.

  Why Alabama?

  Conservative Alabama is the best jurisdiction in America to wage this fight, McClure said.

  Thanks to a measure approved by around 60 percent of voters in 2018, Alabama has one of the strongest protections for the unborn in its state Constitution. It says the policy of the state is “to recognize and support the importance of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life.”

  The Alabama Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized the personhood of unborn babies in other cases not directly involving abortion, McClure and other attorneys involved in the case told The Epoch Times.

  The Baby Q case also hinges on a state law known as the Human Life Protection Act, which makes committing an abortion a felony punishable by up to life in prison.

  Signed into law by Governor Kay Ivey in May of 2019, the measure bans all abortions in the state except to protect the health and life of the mother.

  That law is widely seen as one of the strongest in the nation prohibiting abortion. It is even stronger than the Mississippi statute currently being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case many legal experts on both sides of the debate believe could overturn or at least scale back Roe v. Wade.

  In October of 2019, a federal court issued a preliminary injunction against the Alabama law, arguing that it violates existing Supreme Court precedent.

  As a result, Ivey and Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall have declined to enforce it, for now, as the U.S. Supreme Court once again takes up the issue of abortion.

  Legal filings and attorneys in the Baby Q case also point to the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects unenumerated rights, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment providing for equal protection under the law.

  Finally, plaintiffs in the case cite the U.S. Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the states or the people all powers not specifically surrendered to the federal government, as authorizing or even requiring state action in defense of the right to life.

  Intervening in the case on behalf of Baby Q are almost 50 state lawmakers and a supermajority of the state Senate, as well as dozens of black leaders from across America alleging that the abortion industry is targeting people based on race.

  State GOP leaders are also active on the issue, with the executive committee calling on all Republican officials to use every tool at their disposal to stop abortion in Alabama, including shutting down clinics.

  The Objective

  The Baby Q case, originally filed in October of 2020, is aimed at forcing the government “to protect preborn African-American children from discrimination and to ensure their equal protection under the law,” according to court filings.

  “The abortion industry has systematically targeted the African American community for extermination by abortion, and this history is undisputed,” said attorney McClure, citing historical evidence and even recent statements.

  Over 20 million black babies have been aborted in America so far, and are three to five times more likely to be aborted than white babies, continued McClure. This sort of racial targeting is clearly prohibited under state and federal law, he added.

  “In New York City, more black babies are killed in abortion than are born alive,” he continued. “In Alabama, black Americans make up 27 percent of the population, and yet they make up more than 60 percent of the abortion cases. Nobody can argue that this is not deliberate.”

  The plaintiffs in the case are asking the court to order Gov. Ivey to enforce the Human Life Protection Act and protect unborn children in the state from abortion and discrimination based on their race.

  Eventually, the goal is to completely overturn Roe v. Wade and restore protections for the unborn that the landmark Supreme Court case undermined nearly 50 years ago.

  Because equal protection and prohibitions on racial discrimination are so firmly established in American jurisprudence, the activists and attorneys behind the case believe it could be a game changer in the abortion debate.

  The next major milestone will come on April 20, when the judge will hold a hearing on the issue after more than a year of no action on it.

  “Finally, on April 20th, these African American babies are going to get their day in court,” said McClure.

  The previous hearing, which took place on Zoom, dealt with whether the case should be public. The abortion industry is seeking to keep it behind closed doors, but the state judge expressed a willingness to having it in the open.

  Attorney Brent Helms, who is representing the legislators seeking to intervene in the case, explained part of the rationale in a phone interview with The Epoch Times.

  “If the judge denies this case, that offers us the opportunity to get to the Alabama Supreme Court,” he said.

  “When the legislature looks at this case, Alabama’s law is more strict and says that the unborn child is a person with constitutional rights,” Helms continued. “Those rights cannot be denied without due process and equal protection.”

  Helms added: “That means the child’s right to life would supersede or at least compete with the mother’s alleged right to privacy, as the right to life is an enumerated right, while the mother’s privacy rights to obtain an abortion were discovered in the penumbras as opposed to actually being written down.”

  Regardless of how the state circuit court judge rules, the losing side is expected to immediately appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court. The court is known as one of the nation’s more conservative state supreme courts.

  From there, it is practically certain that the losing side will appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

  The Role of the US Supreme Court

  Numerous legal experts told The Epoch Times that the courts involved in the Alabama case may wait until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks before making any major decisions.

  However, the Mississippi statute only protects unborn babies after 15 weeks, while Alabama is seeking to protect them from the time of conception. The Baby Q case also deals with racial discrimination, while the Mississippi case does not.

  The plaintiffs and intervenors hope the apparent conflict between the Alabama State Supreme Court’s positions and the federal district court’s rulings will be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of protecting the right to life of the unborn in Alabama and beyond.

  McClure, the lead attorney for Baby Q, said justices from the Supreme Court have been leaving “breadcrumbs” in their opinions regarding what elements they would like to see in a major abortion case.

  In his concurring opinion issued in the case of Box v. Planned Parenthood, for example, Justice Clarence Thomas raised the issue of racial targeting as an important component.

  “We think the type of case the U.S. Supreme Court wants to take on to return abortion issues back to the states involves eliminating the abortion industry’s history of racial targeting, a purely state law claim, and a reliance on the Ninth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” McClure said, noting that the Baby Q case had all of those.

  “Obviously, we care about all life in the womb, but this case in particular deals with the racial targeting of children of African descent and this is a key issue,” he added.

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s own 1973 ruling on abortion acknowledged that if the “suggestion of [a fetus’] personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [Fourteenth] amendment.”

  The people of Alabama, as well as many medical and scientific experts, have concluded that unborn children are indeed persons, attorneys and leaders involved in the case said. Thus, under the reasoning in Roe v. Wade, the high court must act.

  The hope is that, through the courts, the abortion industry can be prevented from targeting unborn persons based on race, and eventually, state governments can regain the authority to protect all unborn lives, McClure said.

  Racism in Planned Parenthood and Abortion

  Dozens of prominent black leaders from across America are involved in the case, arguing that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry have been deliberately targeting the nation’s African American population and other minorities.

  It started at the very beginning with Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, black leaders told The Epoch Times.

  In her writings and her speeches to groups such as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), Sanger openly advocated for eugenics to control the reproduction of populations she believed were less desirable.

  Indeed, in 1939, Sanger launched the infamous “Negro Project” to pay and train black leaders to promote birth control and other measures in the black community.

  Eventually, when Alan Guttmacher took the helm of Sanger’s organization, abortion became a major element of the campaign, Georgia gubernatorial candidate and Baby Q intervenor Catherine Davis told The Epoch Times in a phone interview.

  After Guttmacher and his allies were able to get the Supreme Court to strike down state laws protecting the unborn, “Planned Parenthood established their abortion clinics primarily in communities of color across America,” Davis said.

  Among other evidence, she pointed to an investigation using 2010 Census data showing that about 80 percent of the organization’s abortion clinics were located in minority neighborhoods.

  Planned Parenthood would claim that their clinics are located where there is “the greatest need,” said Davis.

  “But if you look at their marketing, they are regularly targeting black Americans,” she added. “On Halloween they even tweeted out that it was safer for a black woman to have an abortion than to carry the baby to term. This is outrageous.”

  According to Davis and the dozens of other black leaders involved in the case, this is racist population control and eugenics.

  “The closest example of this is what Hitler did in Nazi Germany,” she added. “Look at Planned Parenthood: this is exactly what Hitler was doing to Jews, but Sanger’s program was more successful because they take care to disguise their agenda as ‘helping’ women and protecting their ‘right’ to abortion.”

  Another prominent leader involved in the case, Martin Luther King’s niece and pro-life leader Alveda King, called this battle “the civil rights issue of our time.”

  “No racial group in America has ever been more left out of societal protection nor suffered more deliberate discrimination, dehumanization, agonizing dismemberment, and death legally imposed upon them than black children,” said King.

  “The Baby Q case is a gauntlet,” King told The Epoch Times in an email. “Pray that the hammer of justice will rule in favor of life.”

  The controversial racial component of abortion was also highlighted nationally in the 2009 documentary “Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America,” which argued that the targeting of black Americans in abortion constitutes a genocide.

  Planned Parenthood Confesses, Data Speaks Too

  In recent years, as the Black Lives Matter movement gained prominence, almost 20 Planned Parenthood affiliates with operations across 3 out of 4 states have issued public admissions of racism within the organization.

  Planned Parenthood of Greater New York, for instance, condemned Planned Parenthood founder Sanger’s “racist legacy” while announcing that her name would be removed from its building.

  “There is overwhelming evidence for Sanger’s deep belief in eugenic ideology,” the group said. “Removing her name is an important step toward representing who we are as an organization and who we serve.”

  Planned Parenthood of Pacific Southwest, meanwhile, acknowledged “white supremacy of the past and present,” including “our own organization” and the “implicit bias” that it said still exists within Planned Parenthood today.

  “Planned Parenthood has been complicit in upholding systemic racism,” the group’s Illinois affiliate said.

  Similar statements confessing to “present participation in white supremacy” and acknowledging that Sanger’s “racist ideals” have “shaped Planned Parenthood today” were issued by numerous other affiliates.

  And yet the massive disparities continue, advocates say. According to a legal filing by black leaders in the Baby Q case citing state health statistics, 63 percent of the 7,538 “unborn children killed by abortion providers in Alabama” in 2019 were black.

  This shows abortion providers “intentionally target African American children,” the black leaders said in the legal filing. And this “violence” based on race would never be tolerated in any other context, they argued.

  Where the Case Goes Now

  Later this month, a hearing on the case will be held in state court in Alabama to hear arguments from the various parties involved.

  In its response to the lawsuit, Planned Parenthood Southeast asked the court to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction and Baby Q supporters’ alleged failure to identify a claim where the court would be able to provide relief.

  Neither the national Planned Parenthood office nor the Southeast office responded to requests for comment from The Epoch Times on the allegations of racism or the ongoing litigation.

  The governor’s office is taking the same position as the abortion industry, urging the court to dismiss Baby Q’s case and refuse to allow legislators behind the Human Life Protection Act to intervene.

  Gov. Ivey’s office did not respond to requests for comment on why the governor has declined to enforce the Human Life Protection Act or why she is asking the court to dismiss the case.

  Attorney General Steve Marshall’s office also did not respond by press time.

  Colonel John Eidsmoe, a prominent constitutional scholar in Alabama who has worked closely with multiple state Supreme Court justices, told The Epoch Times that he did not anticipate a ruling by the Alabama courts until after the U.S. Supreme Court issues its opinion in the Mississippi case. That ruling is expected by this summer.

  “The general feeling is that the Supreme Court will uphold the Mississippi law, but it is not clear yet whether it will overturn or simply modify Roe v. Wade,” added Eidsmoe, a professor of Constitutional Law at Oak Brook College of Law & Government Policy as well as senior counsel for the Alabama-based Foundation for Moral Law.

  Alabama’s Supreme Court, he said, would likely want to wait for a favorable decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on the Mississippi law before moving on this.

  Eidsmoe also believes that, with its current makeup, the U.S. Supreme Court would be likely to uphold Alabama’s law protecting the unborn as well.

  Potentially even more important than the legal issues is what this case could do in the court of public opinion, said Eidsmoe.

  If Americans broadly recognize the facts in the abortion controversy and especially the racial targeting, the political and cultural implications would be beyond profound.

  Multiple experts and leaders involved in the case told The Epoch Times that these may be the last days for Roe v. Wade, legal abortion, and racial targeting of minorities by the industry. The outcome of the Baby Q case may play a key role in that historic shift.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 19:00

• US Approves $95 Million Patriot Missile Systems Boost For Taiwan
  US Approves $95 Million Patriot Missile Systems Boost For Taiwan

  At a moment the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley told Congressional leaders Tuesday that “significant international conflict between great powers” is now “increasing, not decreasing” – the US has announced approval of the sale of up to $95 million in new training and equipment for Taiwan.

  Crucially and quite provocatively from Beijing’s perspective, this new sale is focused on supporting Taiwan’s Patriot missile defense system, seen as key to defending the island in the event of an invasion.

  

  The Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency confirmed in a statement, “The proposed sale will help to sustain (Taiwan’s) missile density and ensure readiness for air operations.”

  The statement called the items important as a “deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen homeland defense,” and outlined it will include training, planning, fielding, deployment, operation, maintenance, and sustainment of the Patriot system, associated equipment, and logistics support elements, as well as ground support equipment and spare parts, according to the DSCA statement.

  Taiwan’s foreign ministry thanked the Biden administration and welcomed the deal, which marks the third such approved arms package of the Biden administration. Taipei emphasized it’s needed to defend against China’s “continuing military expansion and provocation.” 

   “In the face of China’s continuing military expansion and provocation, Taiwan must fully demonstrate its strong determination to defend itself,” the foreign ministry said. “Our government will continue to strengthen our self-defense and asymmetric combat capabilities.”

  Meanwhile, one top US Navy commander says China is watching the Russia-Ukraine war closely, with an eye on Taiwan:

  As the Russia-Ukraine war continues, a senior US commander stated that Washington must remain vigilant on the Taiwan issue as China is increasing its capabilities and making adjustments to its plans to forcefully unite the island nation.

  U.S. Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral Samuel J Paparo said, “China is undoubtedly watching what’s happened in Ukraine, taking notes, and learning from it.”

  “And there will be learning and there will be adjustments to the extent that they’re able to learn from it. And they will improve their capabilities based on what they learn at this time,” he told a gathering of Washington-based journalists from Indo-Pacific countries.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 18:40

• 450GB Of 'Deleted' Hunter Biden Laptop Material To Be Released Within Weeks
  450GB Of ‘Deleted’ Hunter Biden Laptop Material To Be Released Within Weeks

  A whistleblower who’s fled the United States for Switzerland has vowed to drop ‘450 gigabytes of deleted material‘ from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop, which he says he also gave the the Washington Post, New York Times, and Sen. Chuck Grassley – all of whom he says sat on it for months.

  

  For the past two weeks, former Steve Bannon War Room co-host Jack Maxey has been hiding in Zurich, where he told the Daily Mail he’s been working with IT experts to dig more data from Hunter’s ‘laptop from hell,’ and that he’ll post it all online in a searchable database in the coming weeks.

  Maxey says the data includes 80,000 images and videos, and more than 120,000 archived emails.

  “I came here so that we could do a forensic examination of Hunter’s laptop safely in a country that still respects human liberty and the ideals of liberal democratic principles,” he told the Mail. “I do not believe this would have been possible inside the United States. We had numerous attempts on us from trying to do things like this there.”

  Maxey said that after contacting DailyMail.com about the laptop last year, black suburban SUVs appeared outside his house, and former US intelligence officer friends he shared copies with told him they received strange calls.

  ‘I showed this to a friend of mine in desperation in February [2021] because nobody would listen to me. No news organizations would take it. In fact, the very first major news organization to take it was the Daily Mail,’ he said.

  ‘Very dear friends of mine, the sharp tip of the spear, were making welfare calls to me every day, basically to see if I was still alive.‘ -Daily Mail

  One former intelligence agency senior staffer allegedly told Maxey after he received the hard drive two years ago “If you don’t release enough of this, so that they know you can release all of it, I’m telling you brother, you’re a dead man.”

  

  After receiving this advice, he began posting caches of emails and other material from the laptop on various file sharing sites – only to find the links removed within an hour.

  “There were five drop boxes: two in the United States, one in New Zealand, two in the UK. All the same drop boxes in which they tell us child pornography is shared around the globe without any consequence because they can’t look at it,” he said, adding: “These are all Five Eyes countries, English speaking countries in an intelligence sharing agreement. And they were all ripped down.”

  “​​So this means that our intelligence services, who still have not even acknowledged that they have Hunter Biden’s laptop, were obviously diligently doing cache searches across the internet to find out if any of this stuff was being released. That should terrify every single decent person in the West.”

  

  According to Maxey, he went to Switzerland because they are home to the only file sharing site that didn’t nuke the laptop files – Swiss Transfer.

  The former Bannon podcast co-host said he is livid at the FBI, who he believes slow-walked their investigation into Hunter and failed to enter the laptop they received from Mac Isaac into evidence for months.

  According to the New York Times, files from the laptop are now part of the evidence in Hunter’s federal prosecution for alleged tax fraud, money laundering and illegal foreign lobbying.

  Among the files on the laptop are a raft of emails and documents showing Hunter’s dealings with Burisma, a Ukrainian gas firm that became the center of Trump’s first impeachment in December 2019.

  The then-president was accused of pushing Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to announce investigations into the Bidens and Burisma for alleged corruption. -Daily Mail

  “The FBI had this on the ninth of December 2019,” said Maxey. “‘I suppose the first person betrayed was a sitting US president in an impeachment hearing, when the FBI had the exculpatory evidence in their hands to have that end instantly, and they did nothing.”

  “The second group of people to be betrayed were all of the Democratic candidates in the spring primaries that year,” he continued. “The American people were utterly betrayed, because I guarantee you that Joe Biden couldn’t run for dog catcher if the American people knew about this laptop.”

  Read the rest of the report here.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 04/06/2022 – 18:20