• Smith: Will Biden's Presidency Be A Catalyst For Secession… Or Worse?
  Smith: Will Biden’s Presidency Be A Catalyst For Secession… Or Worse?

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  Over the past few months I have written a handful of articles which discussed what would probably happen if Joe Biden actually entered the White House and launched his administration. My initial belief was that Trump would refuse to concede and that this would be a trigger for national chaos blamed on conservatives, but I have also noted that Biden’s entry is almost just as disruptive, as it sends a signal to the political left that it is “open season” on anyone that disagrees with their ideology.

  

  Of course, conservatives are not going to simply sit still and be purged and abused, they are going to strike back, and this sets the stage for a number of events and outcomes, some of which are completely unpredictable, even for establishment globalists.

  First, though, we need to address how Biden and the globalists are going to create chaos so that they can then demand their own brand of “order”.

  In my article ‘A Biden Presidency Will Mean A Faster US Collapse’, published in October, I outlined why the ongoing economic crisis will accelerate in the wake of a Biden takeover. More specifically, I predicted that Biden would implement a federal covid lockdown, probably within the first year of his presidency, similar to the Level 4 lockdowns implemented in Europe and Australia. Biden may lure Americans into complacency with promises of “relief” and less restrictions in his first couple months, but he will then use the rather convenient news of “covid mutations” to bring in even harsher mandates.

  Such a lockdown, if Americans submit, would mean an even larger spike in unemployment, a loss of hundreds of thousands of small businesses as well as a huge loss in tax revenues for some states (mostly blue states).

  Another scenario is that Biden leaves the lockdowns in the hands of state governments, but pursues a nationwide program for medical passports. The passport, of course, would require people to take the vaccine and accept contact tracing apps on their phones; meaning 24/7 surveillance on the public. At least 30% of Americans have said in polling that they will refuse the vaccines outright. Another 60% have said they are wary of the vaccines and need proof of their effectiveness. So, the medical passports will lead to millions of people being denied participation in the mainstream economy and collapse happens anyway.

  In other words, the elites are going to try to hold the economy hostage while telling the public that if we don’t accept medical tyranny it will be OUR FAULT if the system breaks down.

  The economic crisis, however, started long before the pandemic, long before Biden and long before Trump. It has been building since the credit crash of 2008, and in the 12 years since, the Federal Reserve and other central banks have been pumping out trillions in stimulus while encouraging non-stop debt accumulation. Right before the beginning of the pandemic, the US was suffering from the highest corporate debt in history, the highest consumer debt in history as well as the highest national debt in history.

  What we are witnessing right now is the final phase of a collapse scenario that was more than a decade in the making, and Biden is about to help finish the job.

  Biden will no doubt seek to hyperinflate the dollar in the name of offsetting the losses and keep things afloat for a short time, but the real agenda will be to trigger price spikes in goods as well as eventually killing the dollar altogether. No amount of stimulus will stop the crash that has already been set in motion; the bailout measures from this point on are Kabuki theater, a show put on for the masses to make us believe that the government and the banks “did everything they could” to save us. The elites have no intention of stalling or stopping the collapse; their “great reset” demands it.

  One’s initial assumption would be that Biden would then take the blame for the economic crisis, but it appears that the establishment is going to set up a Herbert Hoover narrative and lay all the blame squarely on Trump and conservatives. In the past I have noted that Trump’s trajectory was very similar to Herbert Hoover’s, in that he was a business mogul and Republican that pushed for corporate tax cut policies and also extensive tariff’s.

  Hoover also served only one term, taking the blame for the crash of 1929 and the advent of the Great Depression, even though the crash was primarily caused by the Federal Reserve’s ultra low interest rates and easy money, followed by a series of rate hikes (a fact which former Fed chairman Ben Bernanke would later openly admit to in 2002). This launched the three term dominion of Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of the most communistic presidents in our history and the initiator of socialist programs which have since buried the American public in Quadrillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities.

  Biden’s latest statements indicate he will be introducing numerous executive orders to “correct the mistakes of the Trump administration”, thereby implanting the idea that whatever happens next is Trump’s fault. The “Reset” globalists and their central banking partners will have to bring down the US economy very quickly under a Biden White House. Why? Because if they wait, or if they try to drag out the collapse and the worst happens a few years down the road, Biden and the globalists will get the blame. They MUST crash the old world order now so that Trump and conservatives can be saddled with the consequences.

  The strategy seems to be this:

  • Demonize conservatives as much as possible as quickly as possible so that our purge from social platforms can be rationalized.

  • When we are incapable of defending ourselves in the public sphere because we have been removed from the internet, the establishment and leftists can blame us for everything going wrong.

  • The public would have no access to any other points of view or contradictory facts and evidence because the alternative media will be gone.

  • We become the monsters, the bogeymen and the source of all American suffering.

  We didn’t fall into the trap of supporting martial law measures during the BLM riots, so this must be Plan B.

  Will their plan work? I doubt it. Just as the globalist rollout of the pandemic lockdowns and medical tyranny is failing to gain traction in the US as huge numbers of people refuse to take the questionable vaccines, I suspect millions upon millions of Americans are already savvy to the propaganda schemes of the establishment and will not buy in. But, that doesn’t mean the elites won’t try it anyway.

  In early November in Issue #47 of my newsletter, The Wild Bunch Dispatch, I war gamed the Biden scenario extensively and concluded that if he was to enter the White House it would have to be followed by a massive erasure of conservative media platforms from the internet. I stated that:

  “If Biden does indeed enter the White House and take control of the presidency, expect certain consequences right away: A complete full spectrum censorship campaign of conservative news sources will be undertaken by tech companies and government. There is no way Biden and the democrats could keep control of the situation while conservatives are able to share information in real time. Do not be surprised if web providers suddenly start kicking conservative sites off their servers, just as Bitchute (a YouTube alternative) was kicked off their server for 24 hours on election night.”

  This is already happening, and Biden hasn’t even stepped foot into the role of “commander and chief” yet. The coordinated effort by Big Tech to remove Parler, a Twitter alternative, from the web completely was not all that surprising. Luckily, Parler will be back up and running by the end of the month, but the censorship campaign is only going to get worse from here on. Biden WILL support and defend the censorship efforts by Big Tech and the fascist marriage between government and the corporate world will be complete.

  To summarize, the globalists have to silence us before they can effectively demonize us. The truth is on our side; facts and logic are on our side. They can’t win the war of ideas if we are allowed to speak; this is why they are so desperate to silence us.

  Sweeping gun control measures will be issued by Biden, but only after the conservative purge from the internet is close to finished. If conservatives are isolated from one another in terms of communication, this makes it harder to organize a defense against aggressive gun confiscation. Biden will most likely try to exploit Red Flag gun laws first, this would allow federal agencies to declare anyone to be “a threat to public safety” without due process, and have their guns taken away preemptively.

  There is an obvious outcome to all of these actions and I don’t think it’s far fetched to suggest that conservative counties and states will demand secession. At the very least, conservatives are going to continue to relocate to red states and red counties, just so they can continue to do business and make a living without government interference. There’s no way that most conservatives controlled states or counties are going to submit to federal lockdown mandates or medical passports, and economies in conservative regions are going to remain stable because of this while blue states are going to crumble.

  Biden will seek to retaliate against conservative controlled areas of the country in response.

  There comes a point when it is impossible for those that value freedom, logic and reason to live side-by-side with those that are irrationally obsessed with control. The American constitutional framework in particular was designed to prevent collectivism from overriding individual liberties, but if the system is sabotaged through subversion and the Bill of Rights is violated, then maintaining the system is no longer plausible.

  The best option for a number of reasons is to separate. Secession is often referred to as “running away” from a cultural problem, but this is an ignorant way of looking at it.

  We are reaching a stage right now in the US where it will be virtually impossible to voice political concerns without risking retribution. If you are a conservative, you will be targeted.

  If conservatives and moderates migrate away from leftist controlled areas and congregate in red states or red counties, then it will be difficult for leftists to attack them for voicing their views. If your employer is a conservative, then he’s not going to care if a leftist mob demands you be fired. If you own a business in a conservative community, then the people that live there will continue as your customers regardless of what leftists say about you.

  Conservatives and moderates MUST start to physically separate from the political left. We must remove ourselves from the blood sucking parasites that have attached themselves to us. This allows us to remain free to think and speak as we like, and it takes all power away from leftists to hurt us by disrupting our means of making a living.

  Secession is a more extreme measure, but it WILL become necessary if leftists refuse to accept that we are no longer participating in their games of fear and subterfuge. Leftists are collectivist by nature, and collectivists see people as property. Walking away is not an option in their minds. So, though we might successfully separate, this would only be the beginning of the battle.

  The important thing is to first make sure that conservatives KNOW that there are places they can go where their civil rights are valued and defended. If conservatives feel completely isolated and alone, many will give up, go dark and pray they are not discovered. This is unacceptable.

  The advantage of secession is clear; by separating, conservatives force the enemy to come to them, on ground they have prepared. The leftists will be the aggressors by default. They will try to present the situation otherwise, but it won’t matter. We will have the moral high ground as well as the superior strategic position.

  There are multiple narratives that will be used to demonize the secession movement beyond the terrorism angle. In particular, I think the government and the media will try to tie secession to “foreign entities”. In other words, they will claim the secession movement is being funded or supported by Russia, or some other foreign power. This is what almost every government in history has done when faced with a viable secession or rebellion that could threaten their control – They accuse the people that want to separate of being agents for evil outsiders.

  It doesn’t matter.

  Conservatives cannot live with leftists, their cultism and zealotry has made it impossible. And, we will not live under a globalist tyranny built around their reset agenda. Separation allows us to consolidate for defense, and protects us economically. It is the only way to ensure that we remain free.

  The globalists and the leftists will try to stop us; they can’t help themselves. They are insane, after all. This will lead to a war many of us have been expecting for quite some time. At the very least, with separation and secession we will be in the best possible position to stop them. If we remain isolated from each other, the fight will be over before it even begins.

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 23:40

• After Two Weeks Of Sleeping On Cold Marble, Congress Boots National Guard To Local Parking Garages
  After Two Weeks Of Sleeping On Cold Marble, Congress Boots National Guard To Local Parking Garages

  After two weeks of sleepless nights protecting Washington DC from an alleged inauguration threat that never materialized, thousands of National Guardsmen were booted from Congressional grounds on Thursday, where they were forced to sleep on marble floors, and have instead been forced to take their rest breaks in nearby parking garages, according to Politico.

  

  The unexplained move comes after ‘dozens’ of lawmakers posed for photo ops with the troops.

  “Yesterday dozens of senators and congressmen walked down our lines taking photos, shaking our hands and thanking us for our service. Within 24 hours, they had no further use for us and banished us to the corner of a parking garage. We feel incredibly betrayed,” said one Guardsman, who said their unit was abruptly kicked out of the Dirksen Senate Office building into a nearby parking garage with no internet reception, one electrical outlet, and a two-stall bathroom for 5,000 troops.

  

  Here’s a video from the parking garage where 5,000 members of the National Guard who were guarding the Capitol are being forced to stay. pic.twitter.com/bREUxt1tRi

  — Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 22, 2021

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

  All National Guard troops were told to vacate the Capitol and nearby congressional buildings on Thursday, and to set up mobile command centers outside or in nearby hotels, another Guardsman confirmed. They were told to take their rest breaks during their 12-hour shifts outside and in parking garages, the person said.

  Prominent lawmakers from both parties took to Twitter to decry the decision and call for answers after POLITICO first reported the news Thursday night. Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Majority Leader, tweeted: “If this is true, it’s outrageous. I will get to the bottom of this.” –Politico

  This is so wrong on every level. Would they allow their sons and daughters to sleep in a cold parking lot? There is no reason for them to be there. @SenateGOP @SenateDems

  — Code of Vets ™ (@codeofvets) January 22, 2021

  In response to the report, several lawmakers have expressed (or feigned) outrage, with several offering the use of their offices to Guardsmen.

  This is absolutely unacceptable and despicable treatment of our brave and dedicated National Guard who answered the call to serve.

  We need to demand answers now and this needs to be fixed immediately. https://t.co/FyNUpFYJyX

  — Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) January 22, 2021

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

  If the guardsmen need space, we all have empty office space right now. I’ll offer mine up in a heartbeat. I’m talking to colleagues now to identify more space.
  https://t.co/y9G8MTruao

  — Martin Heinrich (@MartinHeinrich) January 22, 2021

  Yeah this is not okay.

  My office is free this week to any service members who’d like to use it for a break or take nap on the couch. We’ll stock up on snacks for you all too.

  (We’re in the middle of moving offices and it’s a bit messy so don’t judge, but make yourself at home!) https://t.co/JyEvC4kg6o

  — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 22, 2021

  According to some Guardsmen who spoke with Politico, there was no clear reason given for the eviction – though one said it that it may have been over a complaint that some troops were not wearing masks, though said that wasn’t the case.

  “We have strict guidance that masks are to be worn at all times unless soldiers are eating and drinking.”

  Another Guardsman speculated that “There really may be an important reason for us to vacate and it just hasn’t been well communicated yet.“

  The troops are particularly concerned about being packed in tight quarters with limited bathroom access during a pandemic. At least 100 Guardsmen have tested positive for Covid, according to two Guardsmen. Some are quarantining in hotels.

  A spokesperson previously declined to provide a specific number for troops who have tested positive for Covid. –Politico

  According to Guard spokesman Matt Murphy, “As Congress is in session and increased foot traffic and business is being conducted, Capitol Police asked the troops to move their rest area,” adding “They were temporarily relocated to the Thurgood Marshall Judicial Center garage with heat and restroom facilities. We remain an agile and flexible force to provide for the safety and security of the Capitol and its surrounding areas.”

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 23:20

• Huge Interest In Pizza-Making Robot As COVID Accelerates "Social Distancing Kitchens"
  Huge Interest In Pizza-Making Robot As COVID Accelerates “Social Distancing Kitchens”

  COVID-19 will accelerate technological change that will bring the rise of robotics and artificial intelligence to many industries.

  In particular, the restaurant industry, and how one Seattle startup is automating pizza kitchens. 

  The Picnic Pizza System was rolled out at 2019’s CES technology conference in Las Vegas. The robotic pizza-maker fully automates the process of making a pizza. It can make hundreds of customized pizzas, each with different toppings, along with different sizes. 

  

  Precision automation allows for consistency in the pizza-making process and minimal food waste, consider food prices are skyrocketing to several year highs. 

  Picnic CEO Clayton Wood told KING-TV Seattle that the coronavirus pandemic might have been the catalyst to spur the restaurant industry to begin automating kitchens. 

  “There’s a unique labor problem in that you can’t have people working shoulder to shoulder in a kitchen, so if you want to produce volumes of food like you do for delivery, you’ve got to produce those orders quickly and with consistency,” Wood said. 

  

  Since the pandemic, Picnic has received large investments, allowing the startup to increase its pizza-making robot’s production. The first robot was shipped last week. 

  Wood said, “we’ve received a lot of interest from all over the foodservice sector, with large and small customers including pizza restaurants, corporate food services, ghost kitchens, food trucks, and convenience stores.”

  He also said that operators’ real benefit is not just “labor savings” but also consistency in the product, adding that it allows commercial kitchens to social distance. 

  However, he did say the robot is not intended to displace jobs but designed to support restaurants and workers in delivery and carry out.

  “It’s a ‘co-bot’ where people still work alongside the machine,” Wood said.

  Under the guise of the virus pandemic, the restaurant industry will have to adapt to strict social distancing measures enforced by governments, and one way to do this is through automating how food is prepared in kitchens. This means millions of jobs will be taken over by robots in this decade. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 23:00

• Build Back Bitter
  Build Back Bitter

  Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

  It’s over everyone, you can sleep easy again – the party of peace, tolerance, and reconciliation is back in power. Amen. And Awomen.

  They claim they want to heal and unify the nation.

  But clearly the only way to do so is to create enemies lists and silence anyone with dissenting opinions.

  For example, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked,

  “Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future?”

  Robert Reich, Labor Secretary under Clinton, and adviser to Obama, Tweeted,

  “When this nightmare is over, we need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission [to] name every official, politician, executive and media mogul whose greed and cowardice enabled this catastrophe.”

  Chris Hayes, an MSNBC host agreed saying, 

  “The most humane and reasonable way to deal with all these people, if we survive this, is some kind of truth and reconciliation commission.”

  And Dick Costolo, the former CEO of Twitter, said,

  “Me-first capitalists … are going to be the first people lined up against the wall and shot in the revolution. I’ll happily provide video commentary.”

  Clearly social media companies like Twitter are a big part of the efforts to unify the nation.

  

  Twitter deleted 70,000 accounts using the trespassing of the Capitol as an excuse.

  Amazon Web Services removed the alternative social media site Parler from its servers, while Apple and Google deleted Parler from their app stores.

  Facebook and Reddit joined the purge, feverishly removing content that they don’t want their users to see.

  Stripe, PayPal, and Visa announced they would stop processing payments to certain politicians and non-profits guilty of thought crimes.

  Yesterday I read in the completely fair and objective media that simply acknowleding this tech purge makes one a conspiracy theorist.

  Axios news wrote a segment titled, Right wing’s new conspiracy: “The silencing”.

  They went on to say that only crazy conspiracy theorists believe that there are efforts to silence conservative voices.

  In other words, if you believe what you can see with your own eyes, you’re a conspiracy theorist.

  Most recently, for example, Harvard has purged Congresswoman Elise Stefanik from its advisory board.

  Stefanik’s crime? She publicly questioned voting irregularities in the 2020 election.

  Now, some people may think that she’s a terrible person because of her beliefs. And in fairness it’s Harvard’s right to choose whoever they want for their board.

  But now there’s a petition from the woke Harvard mob to revoke her degree, effectively erasing her existence from the institution.

  They want to cancel her. Yet even merely acknowledging that this is happening now makes you a conspiracy theorist according to the media.

  The left’s cries of “de-fund the police” have turned to “fund the secret police,” as lawmakers reintroduce “domestic terror” bills to create new units under the Department of Homeland Security to monitor American “extremism”.

  But the #assassinatetrump and #killtrump hashtags that Twitter has allowed since 2016— that’s totally fine free speech!

  During the summer BLM riots, looting Target stores and burning down police stations were acts of courage.

  They even literally declared an independent autonomous zone and took over government buildings. Yet no one in the media ever used the words insurrection, sedition, or treason.

  AOC praised these mostly peaceful protests and said the entire point of them is “to make people feel uncomfortable.”

  But if you feel the slightest bit uncomfortable that 25,000 troops are in the nation’s capital, along with tanks and attack helicopters, then you’re a (you guessed it!) conspiracy theorist.

  Remember, though, ignorance is strength, so we should probably just obey the experts.

  Trust in Social Security to provide retirement. Trust the Federal Reserve to improve the economy. Trust the media to tell the truth. Trust that the tech companies will continue to allow your free speech.

  Or… as an alternative… make your own Plan B.

  *  *  *

  On another note… We think gold could DOUBLE and silver could increase by up to 5 TIMES in the next few years. That’s why we published a new, 50-page long Ultimate Guide on Gold & Silver that you can download here.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 22:40

• Aramco's Carbon Emissions Could Be "Nearly Double" What The Company Discloses
  Aramco’s Carbon Emissions Could Be “Nearly Double” What The Company Discloses

  It was no secret that leading up to Saudi Arabian Oil Co.’s IPO in 2019 that the company touted its low emissions compared to other producers.

  Chief Executive Officer Amin Nasser said while the company was doing its roadshows: “Not because our crude is cleaner than other crudes globally. It’s because of our standards. Even though our numbers are great, climate change is critical for the world.”

  But now, it appears the company may have “failed to provide a complete picture”, according to a new Bloomberg report. The report says that Aramco fails to account for emissions generated from many of its refineries and petrochemical plants. 

  Inclusive of the omissions, Bloomberg estimates that the company’s carbon footprint would “nearly double”, and that Aramco would add as much as 55 million metric tons of CO2 to its annual tally. 

  Now that investors “need to be able to put a price on the climate risks that they are running in their portfolios,” as one commodity researcher put it, the carbon footprint numbers can easily turn into a “red flag”. 

  When Bloomberg reached Aramco for questioning, the company replied: “We have a clear and deliberate path to increase the scope and details of [emissions] disclosure.” It said its current number “reflects emissions from those assets where Aramco has the accountability and ability to manage and control emissions.”

  

  The company gets away with its current disclosures by pointing to the process of extracting the oil in Saudi Arabia. It will often cite studies that show that extraction of Saudi oil generates the second lowest amount of emissions in the world.

  But this fails to capture the emissions that are generated from refining the crude, a crucial process for making the “black gunk” into sellable products like jet fuel or gasoline. The company instead only chooses to report emissions from facilities it wholly owns and that are inside of the kingdom.

  It can use tricky accounting to obscure the numbers because many of its refineries are joint ventures, overseas, or both. When Bloomberg accounted for those emissions, it showed a “range for 2019 emissions between 75 million tons and 113 million tons.” The company, in response, said “We do not comment on emissions on an asset-by-asset basis.”

  Those numbers would put Aramco near emissions parity with names like Exxon Mobil, despite the fact that Exxon extracted and refined about a third of what Aramco did in 2019. This means Aramco is cleaner, but not to the degree the company has led on. 
  

  Many companies, including Exxon and Aramco, often have more detailed forecasts for emissions internally than they disclose. But most of the time, figures for individual assets and properties stay under the radar unless prompted by a government agency, the report notes:

  The Aramco-owned Motiva refinery in Port Arthur, Texas, for example, reports annual emissions to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It has a capacity to refine more than 600,000 barrels per day and produced 5.4 million tons of emissions in 2019. Those figures weren’t included in the company’s 2019 data, since Motiva is located outside Saudi Arabia.

  Meanwhile, the ESG bug is catching up not only with U.S. investors, but also in Saudi Arabia, where its exchange recently announced plans to launch an ESG index. 

  While investors are looking for more environmentally friendly investments, Aramco is on the verge of doubling “its refining network’s capacity to handle as much as 10 million barrels a day by 2030.”

  Bloomberg notes that “much of those emissions wouldn’t have been disclosed under the company’s past reporting practices”.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 22:20

• Honduran Caravan Blocked By Government Forces; Migrants Plan Protest Against 'Narco-Dictator' President
  Honduran Caravan Blocked By Government Forces; Migrants Plan Protest Against ‘Narco-Dictator’ President

  A caravan of Honduran migrants were stopped by the region’s security forces, denying an estimated 8,000 Hondurans an opportunity to make a northbound run for the US border in the hopes that the Biden administration would welcome them with open arms.

  

  The caravan was repelled by a coordinated, multi-national military operation which included Honudran forces, according to Reuters. Guatemalan security sent  who sent over 4,500 Hondurans – including more than 600 children, back to Honduras over the last week.

  

  According to the report, the migrants are blaming Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who has also come under fire from US prosecutors over accusations of links to drug cartels. Angry caravan participants will be holding a protest at the capital Tegucigalpa on Friday.

  Among them was 18-year-old Isaac Portillo, who said he felt so desperate upon his forced return to Honduras that he contemplated suicide.

  Like other returned migrants, Portillo’s despair quickly turned to anger. He plans to join a march on the capital Tegucigalpa on Friday – only one week after he tried to flee his shattered country.

  “We’re going to oust this narco-dictator,” he said. “I already have my group ready.” –Reuters

  Earlier this month, US prosecutors accused Hernandez of taking bribes from drug traffickers, which comes after his brother was convicted of drug trafficking last year in a US court.

  

  Hernandez claims the accusations have originated from drug traffickers who are angry at his government’s recent crackdown on criminal networks.

  The protesters aren’t buying it, however, and have been using social media such as WhatsApp, Telegram and Facebook to call for Hernandez’s ouster.

  The angst over the caravan comes amid a perfect storm of a pandemic-driven economic contraction, and what many are calling a poor government response to back-to-back hurricanes in November that caused nearly $2 billion in damages – forcing more than 90,000 people to evacuate to emergency storm shelters.

  “All I wanted to do was find work (abroad) so I could help my family and put my little sister back in school,” said the 18-year-old Portillo, who says his family received zero support from the government after the hurricanes.

  His father had already lost his job as a security guard when pandemic-related restrictions devastated the economy and his 14-year-old sister had to abandon her studies as the family sank deeper into poverty.

  After being deported by Guatemalan authorities this week, Portillo once again found himself living under the bridge where he and his family sought refuge after their home was destroyed in November’s floods. After he said the government threatened to evict them, the family fled again, this time to a relative’s home. –Reuters

  According to Tonatiuh Guillen, the former head of Mexico’s immigration institute, suggested that ongoing frustration over the stoppage of caravans could boil over.

  “It’s a pressure cooker.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 22:00

• Japan PM Denies Report Claiming 'Doomed' Olympics Will Be Canceled
  Japan PM Denies Report Claiming ‘Doomed’ Olympics Will Be Canceled

  Update (2150ET): Japan has denied the Times report, as Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga saying on Friday that he is ‘determined to realize the Tokyo Olympics,’ according to Reuters. Suga told parliament that he would work closely with the IOC and Tokyo.

  *  *  *

  Senior members of the Japanese government have privately concluded that the Tokyo Olympics won’t happen this year due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and efforts have now shifted on securing the Games for the 2032 Olympics – the next available opportunity, according to The Times, whose source added that the winter virus spike ‘tipped the balance’ and forced Japan into a state of emergency.

  

  According to a senior member of the ruling coalition, there is agreement that the Games, already postponed a year, are doomed. The aim now is to find a face-saving way of announcing the cancellation that leaves open the possibility of Tokyo playing host at a later date. “No one wants to be the first to say so but the consensus is that it’s too difficult,” the source said. “Personally, I don’t think it’s going to happen.” -The Times

  That said, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Japanese Government continue to maintain publicly that the Games can proceed – as Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga told parliament this week that “We will have full anti-infection measures in place and proceed with preparation and with a determination to achieve the Games that can deliver hope and courage throughout the world.”

  If the Olympics are indeed canceled, it would be a financial disaster for Japan, after the country spent at least $25 billion on preparations for the event – with around 75% of that coming from public funds.

  The aim now is to maintain the façade of battling determinedly to go ahead in the hope that when they are inevitably cancelled the 2032 Games will be given to Tokyo out of sympathy.

  Paris is due to host the Games in 2024 and Los Angeles has been chosen as the venue for 2028. A decision on which city will stage the Olympics in 2032 is expected to be taken by 2025. -The Times

  “Suga is not emotionally invested in the Games,” the source told The Times, adding “But they want to show that they are ready to go, so that they will get another chance in 11 years. In these circumstances, no one could really object to that.”

  The Olympics have only been canceled three times in the past; 1916, 1940 and 1944, all due to world wars. The Tokyo games were originally slated for 2020, only to be moved to 2021 after Australia and Canada announced they would not send athletes amid the pandemic.

  “If someone like President Biden was to say that US athletes cannot go, then we could say, ‘Well, now it is impossible’,” said the senior source.

  The current position of the IOC is to hold a televised Tokyo Olympics with no spectators – only athletes, which would allow the Committee to maintain its lucrative broadcast rights. The Japanese government, however, would lose out on ticket sales – causing former Primer Minister Yoshiro Mori to rule out the televised-only option.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 21:49

• JPMorgan Tries To Slam Bitcoin Again, Fails Spectacularly
  JPMorgan Tries To Slam Bitcoin Again, Fails Spectacularly

  In its third attempt to talk down bitcoin in the past two months (see here for attempt #1, and  attempts #2), and one which may be succeeding for the time being with bitcoin sliding below $30,000 on Thursday night, erasing all of its YTD gains…

  

  … JPMorgan has published a report aimed at all those bitcoin investors who buy the cryptocurrency for its “diversification” benefits. And in what may come as very bad news for anyone who is buying bitcoin on the assumption that it will serve as a hedge to massively overvalued risk assets, the report published by head of cross-asset strategy John Normand, finds that not only is bitcoin “the least reliable hedge during periods of acute market stress) but because of its popularity among momentum chasing retail investors (who just refuse to HODL), it actually accentuates broad market drawdowns. Which, of course, is obvious to anyone who saw what bitcoin did during the March crash when it lost half its value in days.

  Before we go into the details of the report, JPMorgan first gives bitcoin its due (something which its CEO refused to do back in 2017 when he warned that any JPM employee caught trading bitcoin would be fired). As Normand writes, “whether cryptocurrencies are judged eventually as a financial innovation or a speculative bubble, Bitcoin has already achieved the fastest-ever price appreciation of any must-have asset to which it is often compared (chart 1), such as Gold (1970s), Japanese Equities (1980s), Tech stocks (1990s), Chinese Equities (2000s), Commodities (2000s) and FANG stocks (2010s).”

  

  Each of these predecessors began with a compelling narrative and a tagline (“honest money” for Gold, “Japanese economic miracle” for Nikkei, “dot-com revolution” for Nasdaq, “a billion Chinese consumers” for China Equities, “supercycle” for Commodities and “secular growth” for FANGs), and each delivered extraordinary price momentum that challenged standard valuation models at that time. Each also delivered at least one, high-volatility price crash during the price discovery process that reversed more than half the market’s previous gain. Amusingly, while the JPM strategist is basically calling all these phenomena bubbles, he amusingly admits, that “several of these markets (Gold, Nasdaq, Chinese Equities, FANGs) were later vindicated via further all-time highs.”

  Needless to say, so has bitcoin which rose above $40,000 just a few days ago, and despite its recent “crash”, it still trading at a level that was a never before seen all time high… some three weeks ago.

  So, as Normand rhetorically asks, why bother considering hedging with an asset as unconventional and high-volatility as cryptocurrencies?

  He gives a few reasons. One is that “extraordinary monetary and fiscal stimulus over the past year has created one of the broadest and earliest valuation problems of the past 25 years (chart 2), which creates general concerns about portfolio vulnerability to a macro or policy shock.” This can be seen in the chart below showing the near record number of markets whose valuations are more than one std deviation about their long-term average.

  

  In short, JPM is conceding that stocks, and other risk assets, which have market value of over $100 trillion are a bubble, one which can be pricked by any number of “spoilers.” These spoilers range from somewhat familiar ones such as an inability to tame COVID, a destabilizing rise in inflation, a debt-related aftershock, significant regulatory tightening, renewed US-China or US-North Korea conflicts; to the as-yet unseen ones such as an economically debilitating cyberattack or an economically- significant climate catastrophe in a large economy. Another reason to hedge with bitcoin is that the collapse in DM Bond yields to negative levels in Japan and Europe and to only 1% in the US has limited their role as a defensive hedges in global portfolios and forced investors to focus on a range of second-best substitutes across Equities and FICC (Quality stocks, EM Bonds FX hedged, USD vs EM FX, JPY vs any currency, Gold), with cryptocurrencies considered by some to be the private and digital alternative to Gold.

  

  Amusingly, even in a report which seeks to debunks bitcoin’s diversification abilities, the JPM analyst writes that “Bitcoin improves long-term portfolio efficiency, but its contribution will probably diminish as its mainstreaming increases its correlation with cyclical assets. And crypto continues to rank as the least reliable hedge during periods of acute market stress. “

  Sidestepping the fact that anyone who bought bitcoin and held over the past several years is now exorbitantly rich (and with zero concerns about bitcoin’s diversification capabilities), Normand then observes that developments “over the past year and particularly during the COVID-19 recession, have confirmed this view on the distinction between long-term efficiency and short-term risk management. As a stand-alone asset, cryptocurrencies remain several times more volatile than core asset markets, with 3M realized volatility of 90% compared to about 20% on US Equities and Gold” (chart 3 above).

  But herein lies the problem, because when coupled with extraordinary returns in some years, crypto has often generated a much higher Sharpe ratio on average than core markets like Equities or hedge assets like Commodities in general and Gold specifically (chart 7).

  

  Obviously, these averages when cryptos makes tremendous gains, obscure stretches like 2019-20, when crypto proves less efficient than its nearest competitor Gold. Thus, according to JPM the debate over whether Bitcoin or Gold can deliver superior volatility-adjusted returns remains unresolved, unlike some other quite reliable relationships informed by decades of performance trends. Amusingly, according to JPM, US High Yield Credit, for example, “is almost always more efficient than Equities for taking exposure to the US corporate earnings cycle (chart 8), while EM Corporates (CEMBI) and Sovereigns (EMBIG) almost always dominate Local Currency Bonds (GBI-EM in USD terms) for trading EM cycles. And, of course, those who trade any of these non-bitcoin assets would likely end up paying JPM a hefty commission on these trades, whereas purchase of bitcoin tend to make the likes of Coinbase richer. Which, a cynical person, may say is the reason behind JPM’s continued bashing of cryptos.

  But we digress. So in its latest attempt to denigrate bitcoin, JPM then goes on to point out that far from a viable risk hedge, “the mainstreaming of cryptocurrencies – particularly with retail investors – appears to be raising its correlation with all cyclical assets (Equities, Credit, Commodities, the EM complex). If sustained, this development could erode diversification value over time.”

  True… but said “mainstreaming” of crypto will also push its price higher. Much higher, especially considering just how narrow its penetration is among both institutional investors and the broader investing public. So if one is asked if they would be willing to stick with a few harrowing roller-coaster rides – with zero diversification to such other bubble assets as stocks – if the endgame is bitcoin above $100,000, we are confident that absolutely everyone would respond affirmatively.

  What is even more amusing, is that in the very next sentence the JPM strategist seems to observe a fact that refutes his own conclusion, to wit:

  Table 1 refreshes correlations amongst cryptocurrencies (proxied by Bitcoin), major asset classes and conventional portfolio hedges (Treasuries, TIPS, Gold and Yen). Measured over a five year sample (top half of table), cryptocurrencies’ co-movement with all markets remains low and seems to highlight their potential diversification value. Indeed, Bitcoin’s correlation coefficients range from 0 to 0.2 and would seem to position it better than the Yen or Gold for hedging purposes.

  Which is odd since the whole purpose of the JPM paper is to show that bitcoin is not a good hedge and yet, lo and behold, it turns out to be the best hedge, even if over the past year these correlations have doubled or tripled, coinciding with surging interest in access products such as the Grayscale BTC Fund (chart 10). And yet, even after their rise, JPM still finds that “many pairwise correlations remain moderate (around 0.4)”, which again confirms that bitcoin is arguably the best hedge around. Still this is “concerning” to Normand who notes that “this trend bears watching.” Sure… as does bitcoin’s ascent from 0 to $40,000 in just a few short years, making billionaires out of all its early adopters.

  

  Perhaps realizing that he is not helping his own argument, Normand then cuts to the chase and asks if bitcoin will act as a defensive asset and rise (or remain flat) when stocks selloff. Not surprisingly, he finally finds something that “validates” his thesis:

  For tactical investors focused on risks that could crystalize over the next year, the better test of hedge effectiveness is whether a defensive or quasi-defensive asset rallies when Equities experience a material drawdown of perhaps 10% on Global Equities. On this measure, Bitcoin ranks 7th out of 10 alternatives, including: US Treasuries, USD vs EM Currencies, JPY vs USD, CHF vs EUR, Gold, S&P Quality stocks vs Value, EM Local Currency Bonds and UG High Grade. The first five in this list (Treasuries through Gold) are the most conventional and could be backtested further over at least two decades. The last two (EM Bonds with an FX hedge, US High Grade Credit) are potential, emerging hedges on a view that the COVID recession has sponsored two regime changes that alter these asset classes’ correlation with Equities during a crisis. One is that many EM central banks (though of moderate-debt economies) will cut interest rates, and the other is the Fed will buy High Grade Credit. The risk-return properties of these two markets will not approximate what Treasuries delivered when yields were higher and therefore offered greater offsets to declining stock markets during a crisis. But the behavior of EM Bonds and HG Credit could still change enough post-COVID to qualify them as potential diversifiers in a world with few good options.

  Here, finally, Normand has successfully goalseeked a chart that fits his narrative, and notes that “for each of these assets, chart 13, chart 14 and table 2 show returns and success rates (the percentage of Equity drawdowns in which the hedge rallied) during the 20 largest Global Equity corrections of the past decade. Bitcoin ranks as the worst in terms of median returns (-5%) and the third worst in terms of success rate (42%).”

  

  Ok so bitcoin sells off as much as or more than stocks do during risk off periods. But why is that any news? And why does JPM even care about bitcoin’s diversification abilities, when instead one should look at it from a very different lens: bitcoin – and all crypto – are merely extremely volatile, ultra-high beta assets which rise much more than stocks during times of massive liquidity injection and drop at or near the pace that stocks drop when liquidity is withdrawn. Over the long run, this means that bitcoin will always win. There is no advanced calculus that one needs to figure this out.

  In fact, the best explanation of what is going on – and one that JPMorgan will never admit – came from Howard Wang, a former Bridgewater analyst, who put is simply: “Bitcoin Is A Giant Bubble… But The Global Fiat System Is An Even Bigger Bubble.” In fact, Wang’s short note is far more relevant than Normand’s meandering ramblings. Here’s what he said:

  Investors are forced to hold $18 trillion of negative yielding debt while $trillions are being printed all around the world. Investors are drowning and are grabbing onto cryptocurrencies as a lifeline.

  While the sustained low yields will increase prices and suppress expected returns across all markets, many investors will choose the unknown expected returns of risky assets over the guaranteed losses in bonds. Like panicked prey chased by predators, investors prefer to hide in markets that either have no fundamental metrics, like Bitcoin, or assets with growth stories that leave ample room to imagination, like Tesla.

  In the short-term, there is still a lot of dry powder from stimulus checks and some institutions are also making the leap into the crypto space. So this Bitcoin party could continue as long as rates remain low and the printing press hot.

  Bitcoin is the flip side of the same coin as fiat currencies, pun intended. Its long-term fate depends on the future of our fiat system. Since the 1980s, deflationary pressures have suppressed interest rates and ultimately necessitated money printing around the world. As long as this trend continues, investors will run away from guaranteed losses in government bonds. Capital will flee up the risk spectrum, pushing up prices, dropping yields and producing asset bubbles along the way.

  As long as the world is flooded with money and safe assets offer poor compensation, Bitcoin will be relevant. Volatility and asset bubbles will be a fact of life. Calling the tops of these bubbles will be difficult because the fiat currency yard stick by which we measure prices is itself in a bubble.

  That’s all one really needs to know, and any attempts to talk down bitcoin – as JPMorgan has been steadfastly doing for the past few months, whether with hopes of buying some lower or merely talking bitcoin holders out of the asset and transferring them to more conventional holdings where JPM can charge a commission – will prove futile as long as central banks keep rates at zero and inject hundreds of billions of liquidity (while massively diluting existing fiat) into the system. It’s as simple as that.

  Actually, buying bitcoin does provide one extra, and absolutely critical, benefit: as even JPMorgan admits, it is the perfect hedge to the financial collapse that always follows such periods of unprecedented monetary experimentation and runaway money printing:

  Relative to any other asset class or portfolio hedge, cryptocurrencies would uniquely protect portfolios against a simultaneous loss of faith in a country’s currency and its payments system, because they are produced and they circulate outside conventional and regulated channels (chart 6).

  

  And, as Normand concludes: “as insurance (or a lottery ticket) against dystopia, some exposure to these assets could be always justified irrespective of liquidity and volatility concerns.“

  Well, in this insane world where everyone should be seeking insurance against “dystopia”, we would be delighted to own as much of the cryptocurrency as we possibly can, “irrespective of liquidity and volatility concerns”. So just like your boss back in 2017, thanks for making the decisive case for bitcoin yet again, John.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 21:40

• Federal Court Blocks Obamacare Mandate Forcing Doctors To Perform Transgender Surgery
  Federal Court Blocks Obamacare Mandate Forcing Doctors To Perform Transgender Surgery

  Authored by Janita Kan via The Epoch Times,

  A federal court has ruled to protect some doctors and health care providers from being penalized for refusing to perform gender transition procedures on the grounds of religious belief.

  

  In a decision a day before Joe Biden took the oath of office, United States District Court Chief Judge Peter D. Welte from North Dakota granted a request to block the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from enforcing an Obamacare mandate that compels medical professionals and healthcare providers to perform gender transition services.

  In 2016, the HHS issued a rule interpreting Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which prohibits certain forms of discrimination in healthcare, including sex discrimination.

  The rule prohibited insurers and third party administrations from offering or administer health plans with gender-transition exclusions. The regulation also prohibited a healthcare provider from refusing to offer medical services for gender transitions if that provider offered comparable services to others.

  The rule did not provide an exemption for religious grounds, arguing that Title IX’s religious exemptions only apply to an educational context. The department at the time also argued that “a blanket religious exemption could result in a denial or delay in the provision of health care to individuals and in discouraging individuals from seeking necessary care.”

  The department instead explained that it would consider religious exemptions on an individualized case-by-case basis for claims under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

  An order of Catholic nuns, a Catholic university, and Catholic healthcare organizations challenged the mandate under the RFRA, while the state of North Dakota joined the lawsuit to challenge the mandate under a federal law known as the Administrative Procedure Act that governs rulemaking by administrative agencies.

  The mandate was previously put on hold by a federal judge in North Dakota and was struck down in 2019 by another federal court in Texas. Under the Trump administration, HHS passed a new rule aimed at walking back the mandate. However, the 2020 rule was blocked by separate challenges in other courts.

  Welte said in his decision that the plaintiffs have shown “an entitlement” for injunctive relief, saying that a violation under the RFRA is comparable to the deprivation of a First Amendment right.

  “The Catholic healthcare entities’ refusal to perform or cover gender-transition procedures is predicated on an exercise of their religious beliefs protected by the First Amendment,” Welte said (pdf).

  “Absent an injunction, [plantiffs] will either be ‘forced to violate their sincerely held religious beliefs’ by performing and covering gender-transition procedures ‘or to incur severe monetary penalties for refusing to comply,’” he added.

  Attorney Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket, a religious organization representing the plaintiffs, said the court’s decision “recognizes our medical heroes’ right to practice medicine in line with their conscience and without politically motivated interference from government bureaucrats.”

  “These religious doctors and hospitals provide top-notch medical care to all patients for everything from cancer to the common cold,” Goodrich said in a statement.

  “All they’re asking is that they be allowed to continue serving their patients as they’ve done for decades, without being forced to perform controversial, medically unsupported procedures that are against their religious beliefs and potentially harmful to their patients. The Constitution and federal law require no less.”

  During his campaign, Biden had vowed to push LGBTQ rights as part of his agenda, including coverage for care related to gender transitioning and surgery. He signed an executive order on his first day as president to prevent discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual discrimination.

  Xavier Becerra, who has been tapped by Biden to lead the HHS, had previously argued in favor of using taxpayers’ money to provide transgender individuals in North Carolina with coverage for gender transitioning surgery and treatment.

  Some religious liberty advocates and people of faith are worried that the religious freedom protections implemented by the Trump administration could be rolled back under a Biden administration.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 21:20

• American Hotels Experienced Worst Year Ever
  American Hotels Experienced Worst Year Ever

  According to STR, Inc, a hotel industry market data firm, 2020 was absolutely the worst year on record for hotels as industrywide profits fell to zero, as the virus pandemic and resulting government-enforced social distancing measures kept travelers at home. 

  STR’s latest report said the US hotel occupancy rate was 44% for the year, down from 66% in 2019. This was the lowest occupancy rate on record. In an earlier STR report, we noted weeks ago that the industry had one billion unsold room nights for the first time, surpassing the record of 786 million in 2009.

  Even though S&P Global Ratings warned a few months back that the hotel industry’s recovery may not occur until 2023, STR now believes a recovery in occupancy rates back to 2019 levels may not occur until 2024. 

  Best Western CEO David Kong recently told CNN that “If we don’t get a vaccine soon and business doesn’t return, it’s going to get much worse.”

  With the vaccine rollout slower than anticipated, along with a rampant virus, leisure travel will most likely remain depressed in the first quarter of 2021. 

  Commercial-real estate experts at Trepp outlined last month that the overall credit performance of commercial real estate loans tied to hotels continues to show “pandemic related stress.” 

  Even with the industry crushed by the pandemic, stimulus, vaccine hope, and the reopening trade have backstopped BBB- tranche of the CMBX Series 9 index (overly exposed to malls and hotels) from falling lower. 

  

  There’s no real timetable to say when corporate travelers will start booking hotel rooms again, considering the proliferation of work-at-home and Zoom calls. There could be a permanent decline in traveling due to the virus pandemic, resulting in an unprecedented wave of hotel foreclosures. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 21:00

• The Coming New Order
  The Coming New Order

  Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

  For many years, a handful of people have postulated that those who control industry, finance and governments are essentially the same people – a cabal of sorts that have, over generations, solidified their relationships in order to gain greater wealth and power, whilst systematically making things ever more difficult for the free market to exist.

  But why should this be? Surely, corporate leaders are more ardently capitalist than anyone else?

  Well, on the surface, that might appear to make sense, but once a significant position of power has been achieved, those who have achieved it recognize that, since they’ve already reached the top, the primary concern changes. From then on, the primary concern becomes the assurance that no others are able to climb so high as they have.

  

  At that point, they realise that their foremost effort needs to be a push toward corporatism – the merger of power between government and business.

  This is a natural marriage. The political world is a parasitic one. It relies on a continual flow of funding. The world of big business is a study in exclusivity – the ability to make it impossible for pretenders to the throne to arise. So, big business provides the cash; government provides protective legislation that ensures preference for those at the top.

  In most cases, this second half of the equation does not mean a monopoly for just one corporation, but a monopoly for a cabal – an elite group of corporations.

  This corporatist relationship has deep roots in the US, going back over one hundred years. To this day, those elite families who took control of oil, steel, banking, motor vehicles and other industries a century ago, soon created a takeover of higher learning (universities), health (Big Pharma) and “Defense” (the military-industrial complex).

  Through legislation, the US was then transformed to ensure that all these interests would be catered to, creating generations of both control and profit.

  Of course, “profit” should not be an evil word, but under crony capitalism, it becomes an abomination – a distortion of the free market and the death of laissez faire economics.

  Certainly, this sort of collectivism is not what Karl Marx had in mind when he daydreamed about a workers’ paradise in which business leaders retained all the risk and responsibility of creating and building businesses, whilst the workers had the final word as to how the revenue would be distributed to the workers themselves.

  Mister Marx failed in being objective enough to understand that if the business creator took all the risk and responsibility but gave up the ability to decide what happened to the revenue, he’d never bother to open a business. Even a shoeshine boy would reject such a notion and elect to go on the dole, rather than work.

  Mister Marx sought more to bring down those who were successful than to raise up those who were not, yet he unwittingly created a new idea – corporate collectivism – in which the very people he sought to debase used the appeal of collectivist rhetoric to diminish both the freedoms and wealth of the average worker.

  On the surface, this might appear to be a hard sell – to get the hoi polloi into the net – but in fact, it’s quite easy and has perennially been effective.

  Hitler’s New Order was such a construct – the promise to return Germany to greatness and the German people to prosperity through increasingly draconian laws, warfare and an economic revolving door between government and industry.

  Of course, a major influx of capital was required – billions of dollars – and this was eagerly provided by US industry and banks. Heads of New York banks not only funded Nazi industry; families such as the Fords, Rockefellers, Morgans, etc., sat on the boards of German corporations.

  The Nazi effort failed, as they underestimated the Russian will to fight to the death. (Eighty percent of all German Army deaths were due to the Russian campaign.)

  But those in New York were able to regroup and be first in the queue for the restructuring of German industry after the war and, ultimately, profited handsomely.

  But most significantly, the idea of corporatist collectivism did not die. Even before the war, the same group of families and corporations had drawn up the plan for Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal.

  Mister Roosevelt was a dyed-in-the-wool Wall Street man and a director of New York banks. In the 1930s and early 1940s, he created, as president, a revolving door that favoured large corporations, whilst the average American was consciously kept at the subsistence level through government entitlements.

  The scam worked. Shortsighted Americans not only were grateful; they deified him for it.

  Likewise, John Kennedy’s New Frontier sought to revitalize the concept, as did Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society: Give the little people entitlements that keep them little. Tax smaller businesses and create a flow of tax dollars to the elite industries, who, in turn, provide monetary favours to the political class.

  The Green New Deal is merely the latest corporate collectivist scheme on the list.

  Corporate collectivism can be defined as a system in which the few who hold the legal monopolies of finance and industry gain an overriding control over all others, and in so doing, systematically extract wealth from them.

  Today, this system has become so refined that, although the average American has a flat screen TV and an expensive smartphone, he cannot raise $400 to cover an emergency that occurs in his life. He is, for all practical purposes, continually bankrupt, but still functioning in a zombie-like existence of continual dependency.

  This, on the surface, may not seem all that dangerous, but those who cannot buy their way out of a small emergency are easily controlled. Just create an emergency such as an uber-virus and that fact will be illuminated quickly.

  In order to maximise compliance in a population, maximise their dependence.

  As stated above, this effort has been in play for generations. But it is now reaching a crescendo. It’s now up to speed in most of the former Free World and those who hold the strings are ready for a major step forward in corporate collectivism.

  In the coming year, we shall see dramatic changes appearing at a dizzying rate. Capital controls, migration controls, internal movement controls, tax increases, confiscation of assets and the removal of “inalienable” rights will all be coming into effect – so quickly that before the populace can even grasp the latest restrictions, new ones will be heaped on.

  As this unfolds, we shall witness the erosion of the nation-state. Controls will come from global authorities, such as the UN, the IMF and the WEF. Organisations that have no formal authority over nations will increasingly be calling the shots and people will wonder how this is possible. Elected officials will increasingly become mere bagmen, doing the bidding of an unelected ruling class.

  The changes that take place will be not unlike a blanket that is thrown over humanity.

  The question then will be whether to, a) give in to this force, b) to fight it and most likely fall victim to it, or c) seek a means to fall outside the perimeter of the blanket.

  *  *  *

  Unfortunately most people have no idea what really happens when a government goes out of control, let alone how to prepare… The coming economic and political crisis is going to be much worse, much longer, and very different than what we’ve seen in the past. That’s exactly why New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 20:40

• Sequoia To Pay Interested Employees In Bitcoin
  Sequoia To Pay Interested Employees In Bitcoin

  With increasingly more institutions converting some (or in the case of MicroStrategy, most) of their cash equivalents into bitcoin, one key spoke of an all-bitcoin corporate ecosystem remained elusive: actual payment to employees in bitcoin. That changed today when Sequoia Holdings, not the hedge fund but the “employee-owned provider of high-end software development and engineering services centered on improving the analytic, collection, collaboration and sharing of data”, announced that it is now giving employees the option to receive a portion of their salary in cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin.

  “We’re excited to offer the members of our team this new benefit,” said T. Richard Stroupe, Jr., co-founder and CEO of Sequoia. “Many of our employees are enthusiastic supporters of cryptocurrency, and we’re happy to help them gain exposure to this trillion-dollar asset class.”

  Under the new program, Sequoia employees may elect to defer a portion of their salary into Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, or the Ethereum platform’s ether. The company is partnering with a third-party payroll processing firm to withhold taxes and convert the remainder into cryptocurrency, which will be held in a digital wallet administered by the payroll processor.

  The mechanism is similar to how an employee would defer a portion of his or her salary toward a 401(k) retirement savings plan. In this case, though, the deferral is after tax.

  Russell Okung, an offensive tackle for the Carolina Panthers of the National Football League, recently made headlines for becoming the first professional football player to receive a portion of his salary in Bitcoin, in much the same way that Sequoia employees may elect to.

  “Cryptocurrency has emerged as an important alternative to traditional investments like stocks and bonds,” Stroupe said. “We’re proud to give the members of our team the ability to easily invest in cryptocurrency and build their savings.”

  Of course, any employees who chose to be paid in bitcoin are urged to have nerves of steel because while the cryptocurrency has exploded in the past year, it has suffered a sharp drop in the past few days, which for those with little patience could serve to quickly tame any enthusiasm of continued payment in the cryptocurrency.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 20:20

• Argentine Central Bank's Sudden Dollar Shortage Sparks Fears Of Mass Corporate Credit Crisis
  Argentine Central Bank’s Sudden Dollar Shortage Sparks Fears Of Mass Corporate Credit Crisis

  Despite Emerging Markets’ recent surge higher on the heels of a dumping dollar and massive global liquidity injections, at least one country is facing crisis rather than crescendo.

  MSCI Emerging Market stocks have soared…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  YPF, a 99-year-old oil company that some have called Argentina’s flaghship company, is threatening a large-scale default on its bonds after the central bank refused to let YPF buy the full amount of dollars it needed to pay notes coming due in March.

  “The central bank’s message is pretty clear,” said Santiago Barros Moss, a TPCG analyst in Buenos Aires.

  “There just aren’t enough dollars in Argentina for corporates right now.”

  The last few months have seen the peso collapse (despite a weaker USDollar) to 86/USD – a record low – making the dollar-debt payments for Argentina’s corporations exceedingly expensive.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And that – along with the fact that global oil markets have collapsed – led YPF to send a press release in the dead of night laying out a plan to saddle creditors with losses in a debt exchange.

  Implicit in its statement, as Bloomberg reports, was a threat that traders immediately understood – failure to reach a restructuring deal could lead to a flat-out suspension of debt payments – and they began frantically unloading the shale driller’s bonds the next morning. Today, some two weeks later, the securities trade as low as 56 cents on the dollar.

  “The central bank’s decision really put YPF between a rock and a hard place,” said Lorena Reich, a corporate-debt analyst at Lucror Analytics in Buenos Aires.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Argentina’s cash crunch couldn’t come at a worse time for YPF, which was already facing a drop in demand because of the pandemic.

  The task is even more urgent as the South American winter approaches with YPF unable to meet domestic gas demand, meaning Argentina will have to boost imports – and fork over precious hard currency – in the middle of a global spike in prices.

  But, as Bloomberg notes, the central bank’s refusal to sell YPF the dollars it needs to pay its obligations, despite the company’s earlier efforts to refinance its short-term debt, is a bad sign for all overseas corporate bonds from Argentina, according to the financial services firm TPCG.

  The concern is that if the country’s flagship company isn’t eligible to buy dollars at the official exchange rate as the bank seeks to hold onto hard-currency reserves, no one else will be either.

  And this, among other reasons, is why The Fed must keep injecting dollars into the world… or face this kind of crisis from DMs as well as EMs.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 19:40

• Senate Dems File Ethics Complaint Against Cruz, Hawley For Objecting To Electoral Results
  Senate Dems File Ethics Complaint Against Cruz, Hawley For Objecting To Electoral Results

  Congressional Democrats – who objected to the electoral results for the last three GOP presidents – have filed an ethics complaint against GOP Senators. Ted Cruz (TX) and Josh Hawley (MO) for objecting to the Electoral College results.

  

  “The Senate Ethics Committee should investigate their conduct to fully understand their role. The actions of which we know demand an investigation and a determination whether disciplinary action is warranted. Until then, a cloud of uncertainty will hang over them and over this body,” wrote Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), Ron Wyden (OR), Tima Smith (MN), Richard Blumenthal (CT), Mazie Hirono (HI), Tim Kaine (VA) and Sherrod Brown (OH).

  The complaint wants the Ethics Committee to investigate whether Cruz and Hawley failed to “[p]ut loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department,” or if they engaged in “improper conduct reflecting on the Senate” linked to the January 6 Capitol ‘riot.’

  The Democratic senators also outlined several questions they believed should be probed as part of an Ethics Committee investigation including if they were in touch with coordinators for the rally, if they encouraged any “insurrectionist” acts or if they “engaged in criminal conduct, or unethical or improper behavior.”

  “While it was within Senators’ rights to object to the electors, the conduct of Senators Cruz and Hawley, and potentially others, went beyond that,” they wrote in the letter to Ethics Committee leadership. 

  Cruz and Hawley, two potential 2024 presidential contenders, have denounced the mob that breached the Capitol but they’ve also stood by their decisions to object to the Electoral College results from Arizona and Pennsylvania, respectively. –The Hill

  During the counting of electoral votes, Cruz objected to Arizona’s results, while Hawley objected to Pennsylvania’s results following the Capitol attack, when a group of Trump supporters and at least one prominent member of BLM breached the Capitol building and occupied it for a brief period of time before leaving on their own.

  The Democratic Senators are also asking the Ethics Committee to “offer recommendations for strong disciplinary action, including up to expulsion or censure, if warranted by the facts uncovered.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 19:20

• McConnell Lays Out Trump Impeachment Trial Timeline As GOP Rep Files Articles Against Biden
  McConnell Lays Out Trump Impeachment Trial Timeline As GOP Rep Files Articles Against Biden

  While the left is split between wanting to hammer the final nail in Trump’s coffin (through the Senate impeachment trial) and tending to its aggressive agenda of new laws, spending, and government control, U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) issued a statement today regarding his proposed timeline for the first phases of an impeachment trial of former president Trump.

  “I have sent a proposed timeline for the first phases of the upcoming impeachment trial to Leader Schumer and look forward to continuing to discuss it with him.

  “Senate Republicans are strongly united behind the principle that the institution of the Senate, the office of the presidency, and former President Trump himself all deserve a full and fair process that respects his rights and the serious factual, legal, and constitutional questions at stake. Given the unprecedented speed of the House’s process, our proposed timeline for the initial phases includes a modest and reasonable amount of additional time for both sides to assemble their arguments before the Senate would begin to hear them.

  “At this time of strong political passions, Senate Republicans believe it is absolutely imperative that we do not allow a half-baked process to short-circuit the due process that former President Trump deserves or damage the Senate or the presidency.”

  

  Specifically, Leader McConnell shared the following proposed pre-trial timeline with the Republican Conference today:

  When the articles arrive, the House Managers would exhibit (read) the articles to the Senate, Senators would be sworn in the Members as the Court of Impeachment, and would issue a summons to former President Trump.  While we do not know what day the Managers will choose, Leader McConnell has asked for this to occur on Thursday, January 28. 

  Former President Trump would have one week from that day to answer the articles of impeachment (February 4).  The House’s pre-trial brief would also be due then.

  The President would then have one week from the day he submits his answer to submit his pre-trial brief (February 11).  That means former president Trump has fourteen total days from when we issue the summons to write his pre-trial brief.  The House would also submit its replication on this date.

  The House would then have two days to submit their rebuttal pre-trial brief (February 13).  

  This approach tracks the structure of the Clinton and Trump pre-trial processes. 

  The periods between due dates are longer than in 1999 or 2020, but this is necessary because of the House’s unprecedented timeline.

  So far we have not seen any response from Senate Democrat Leader Schumer, but we do note the timing is ironic as (in what appears to be more PR stunt than anything else) freshman Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced via Twitter video Thursday that she’s filed articles of impeachment on President Joe Biden.

  I just filed Articles of Impeachment on President @JoeBiden. pic.twitter.com/mcwEEkKiHL

  — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) January 21, 2021

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

  As SaraACarter.com’s Jennie Taer reports, Rep. Greene earlier pledged on Newsmax on January 13 to do so on the first day of Biden’s presidency, as reported.

  “We cannot have a President of the United States that is willing to abuse the power of the office of the presidency and be easily bought off by foreign governments, foreign Chinese energy companies, Ukrainian energy companies. So on January 21st, I will be filing articles of impeachment on Joe Biden,” said Rep. Greene.

  “On behalf of the American people – on January 21st I will be filing articles of impeachment on Joe Biden.”

  “We have to make sure our leaders are held accountable,” says @mtgreenee. https://t.co/VlT7z8drtO pic.twitter.com/aOh9GOdN1E

  — Newsmax (@newsmax) January 14, 2021

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

  As w3e noted, while this is unlikely to proceed, that did not stop Democratic Reps such as Al Green from incessantly posting articles during Trump’s term (as early as May 2017).

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 19:11

• Intel Released Earnings Early Because Hacker "Stole Financially Sensitive Information" From Its Website
  Intel Released Earnings Early Because Hacker “Stole Financially Sensitive Information” From Its Website

  Something unexpected happened at exactly 3:47pm this afternoon: that’s when wire services like Bloomberg reported Intel’s Q4 financial results, some 13 minutes ahead of the scheduled release time.

  

  Some speculated that the early release was a fat finger from an overzealous intern who sent the news to Businesswire a few minutes early. Others, such as us, joked that Intel just couldn’t contain its excitement at the impressive earnings report which sent the formerly beaten down stock surging to its June highs.

  INTC really couldn’t wait to share the good news

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 21, 2021

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

  Turns out it was neither, because according to the FT, Intel said it was the victim of a hacker who stole financially sensitive information from its corporate website on Thursday, prompting the company to release its earnings statement ahead of schedule.

  CFO George Davis told the Financial Times that the chipmaker believed an attacker had obtained advanced details about a strong earnings report it was due to publish after the market closed; upon discovery of the problem, Intel published its formal earnings announcement with the official release coming out six minutes before the market closed.

  “An infographic was hacked off of our PR newsroom site,” Mr Davis said. “We put [our earnings] out as soon as we were aware.”

  The CFO said that the leak was the result of an illicit action that had not involved any unintentional disclosure by the company itself.

  An Intel spokesperson added: “We were notified that our infographic was circulating outside the company. I do not believe it was published. We are continuing to investigate this matter.”

  Actually it was published, and are speculating, it appears that the reason Bloomberg managed to report the company’s results even before the 6 minute early release is because it managed to scrape the hacked Intel’s inforgraphic at 348pm, which laid out the company’s key highlights.

  

  As noted earlier, the earnings revealed an unexpectedly strong bounce in Intel’s sales of chips for PCs as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, as more people bought laptops to work and study from home, as well as more powerful gaming PCs. Specifically, the volume of PC chips Intel sold jumped 33% in the quarter, a period in which tech research group IDC said the number of machines shipped globally had risen by 26 per cent, to cap the strongest year for the PC industry in a decade.

  Although Intel’s revenue slipped 1 per cent in the fourth quarter, to $20bn, that was $2.5bn ahead of Wall Street expectations. Revenue from PC chips rose 9 per cent, to $10.9bn.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 19:00

• 2021: More Troubles Likely
  2021: More Troubles Likely

  Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

  Most people expect that the economy of 2021 will be an improvement from 2020. I don’t think so. Perhaps COVID-19 will be somewhat better, but other aspects of the economy will likely be worse.

  Back in November 2020, I showed a chart illustrating the path that energy consumption seems to be on. The sharp downturn in energy consumption has occurred partly because the cost of oil, gas and coal production tends to rise, since the portion that is least expensive to extract and ship tends to be removed first.

  At the same time, prices that energy producers are able to charge their customers don’t rise enough to compensate for their higher costs. Ultimate customers are ordinary wage earners, and their wages are not escalating as rapidly as fossil fuel production and delivery costs. It is the low selling price of fossil fuels, relative to the rising cost of production, that causes a collapse in the production of fossil fuels. This is the crisis we are now facing.

  

  Figure 1. Estimate by Gail Tverberg of World Energy Consumption from 1820 to 2050. Amounts for earliest years based on estimates in Vaclav Smil’s book Energy Transitions: History, Requirements and Prospectsand BP’s 2020 Statistical Review of World Energy for the years 1965 to 2019. Energy consumption for 2020 is estimated to be 5% below that for 2019. Energy for years after 2020 is assumed to fall by 6.6% per year, so that the amount reaches a level similar to renewables only by 2050. Amounts shown include more use of local energy products (wood and animal dung) than BP includes.

  With lower energy consumption, many things tend to go wrong at once: The rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Protests and uprisings become more common. The poorer citizens and those already in poor health become more vulnerable to communicable diseases. Governments feel a need to control their populations, partly to keep down protests and partly to prevent the further spread of disease.

  If we look at the situation shown on Figure 1 on a per capita basis, the graph doesn’t look quite as steep, because lower energy consumption tends to bring down population. This reduction in population can come from many different causes, including illnesses, fewer babies born, less access to medical care, inadequate clean water and starvation.

  

  Figure 2. Amounts shown in Figure 1, divided by population estimates by Angus Maddison for earliest years and by 2019 United Nations population estimates for years to 2020. Future population estimated to be falling half as quickly as energy supply is falling in Figure 1. World population drops to 2.8 billion by 2050.

  What Is Ahead for 2021?

  In many ways, it is good that we really don’t know what is ahead for 2021. All aspects of GDP production require energy consumption. A huge drop in energy consumption is likely to mean disruption in the world economy of varying types for many years to come. If the situation is likely to be bad, many of us don’t really want to know how bad.

  We know that many civilizations have had the same problem that the world does today. It usually goes by the name “Collapse” or “Overshoot and Collapse.” The problem is that the population becomes too large for the resource base. At the same time, available resources may degrade (soils erode or lose fertility, mines deplete, fossil fuels become harder to extract). Eventually, the economy becomes so weakened that any minor disturbance – attack from an outside army, or shift in weather patterns, or communicable disease that raises the death rate a bit – threatens to bring down the whole system. I see our current economic problem as much more of an energy problem than a COVID-19 problem.

  We know that when earlier civilizations collapsed, the downfall tended not to happen all at once. Based on an analysis by Peter Turchin and Sergey Nefedov in their book, Secular Cycles, economies tended to first hit a period of stagflation, for perhaps 40 or 50 years. In a way, today’s economy has been in a period of stagflation since the 1970s, when it became apparent that oil was becoming more difficult to extract. To hide the problem, increasing debt was issued at ever-lower interest rates.

  According to Turchin and Nefedov, the stagflation stage eventually moves into a steeper “crisis” period, marked by overturned governments, debt defaults, and falling population. In the examples analyzed by Turchin and Nefedov, this crisis portion of the cycle took 20 to 50 years. It seems to me that the world economy reached the beginning of the crisis period in 2020 when lockdowns in response to the novel coronavirus pushed the weakened world economy down further.

  The examples examined by Turchin and Nefedov occurred in the time period before fossil fuels were widely used. It may very well be that the current collapse takes place more rapidly than those in the past, because of dependency on international supply lines and an international banking system. The world economy is also very dependent on electricity–something that may not last. Thus, there seems to be a chance that the crisis phase may last a shorter length of time than 20 to 50 years. It likely won’t last only a year or two, however. The economy can be expected to fall apart, but somewhat slowly. The big questions are, “How slowly?” “Can some parts continue for years, while others disappear quickly?”

  Some Kinds of Things to Expect in 2021 (and beyond)

  [1] More overturned governments and attempts at overturned governments.

  With increasing wage disparity, there tend to be more and more unhappy workers at the bottom end of the wage distribution. At the same time, there are likely to be people who are unhappy with the need for high taxes to try to fix the problems of the people at the bottom end of the wage distribution. Either of these groups can attempt to overturn their government if the government’s handling of current problems is not to the group’s liking.

  [2] More debt defaults.

  During the stagflation period that the world economy has been through, more and more debt has been added at ever-lower interest rates. Much of this huge amount of debt relates to property that is no longer of much use (airplanes without passengers; office buildings that are no longer needed because people now work at home; restaurants without enough patrons; factories without enough orders). Governments will try to avoid defaults as long as possible, but eventually, the unreasonableness of this situation will prevail. The impact of defaults can be expected to affect many parts of the economy, including banks, insurance companies and pension plans.

  [3] Extraordinarily slow progress in defeating COVID-19.

  There seems to be a significant chance that COVID-19 is lab-made. In fact, the many variations of COVID-19 may also be lab made. Researchers around the world have been studying “Gain of Function” in viruses for more than 20 years, allowing the researchers to “tweak” viruses in whatever way they desire. There seem to be several variations on the original virus now. A suicidal/homicidal researcher could decide to “take out” as many other people as possible, by creating yet another variation on COVID-19.

  To make matters worse, immunity to coronaviruses in general doesn’t seem to be very long lasting. An October 2020 article says, 35-year study hints that coronavirus immunity doesn’t last long. Analyzing other corona viruses, it concluded that immunity tends to disappear quite quickly, leading to an annual cycle of illnesses such as colds. There seems to be a substantial chance that COVID-19 will return on an annual basis. If vaccines generate a similar immunity pattern, we will be facing an issue of needing new vaccines, every year, as we do with flu.

  [4] Cutbacks on education of many kinds.

  Many people getting advanced degrees find that the time and expense did not lead to an adequate financial reward afterwards. At the same time, universities find that there are not many grants to support faculty, outside of the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering or Math) fields. With this combination of problems, universities with limited budgets make the financial decision to reduce or eliminate programs with reduced student interest and no outside funding.

  At the same time, if local school districts find themselves short of funds, they may choose to use distance learning, simply to save money. This type of cutback could affect grade school children, especially in poor areas.

  [5] Increasing loss of the top layers of governments.

  It takes money/energy to support extra layers of government. The UK is now completely out of the European Union. We can expect to see more changes of this type. The UK may dissolve into smaller regions. Other parts of the EU may leave. This problem could affect many countries around the world, such as China or countries of the Middle East.

  [6] Less globalization; more competition among countries.

  Every country is struggling with the problem of not enough jobs that pay well. This is really an energy-related problem. Instead of co-operating, countries will tend to increasingly compete, in the hope that their country can somehow get a larger share of the higher-paying jobs. Tariffs will continue to be popular.

  [7] More empty shelves in stores.

  In 2020, we discovered that supply lines can break, making it impossible to purchase products a person expects. In fact, new governmental rules can have the same impact, for example, if a country bans travel to its country. We should expect more of this in 2021, and in the years ahead.

  [8] More electrical outages, especially in locations where reliance on intermittent wind and solar for electricity is high.

  In most places in the world, oil products were available before electricity. On the way down, we should expect to see the reverse of this pattern: Electricity will disappear first because it is hardest to maintain a constant supply. Oil will be available, at least as long as is electricity.

  There is a popular belief that we will “run out of oil,” and that renewable electricity can be a solution. I do not think that intermittent electricity can be a solution for anything. It works poorly. At most, it acts as a temporary extender to fossil fuel-provided electricity.

  [9] Possible hyperinflation, as countries issue more and more debt and no longer trust each other.

  I often say that I expect oil and energy prices to stay low, but this doesn’t really hold if many countries around the world issue more and more government debt as a way to try to keep businesses from failing, debt from defaulting, and stock market prices inflated. There is a danger that all prices will inflate, and that sellers of products will no longer accept the hyperinflated currency that countries around the world are trying to provide.

  My concern is that international trade will break down to a significant extent as hyperinflation of all currencies becomes a problem. The higher prices of oil and other energy products won’t really lead to any more production because prices of all goods and services will be inflating at the same time; fossil fuel producers will not get any special benefit from these higher prices.

  If a significant loss of trade occurs, there will be even more empty shelves because there is very little any one country can make on its own. Without adequate goods, population loss may be very high.

  [10] New ways of countries trying to fight with each other.

  When there are not enough resources to go around, historically, wars have been fought. I expect wars will continue to be fought, but the approaches will “look different” than in the past. They may involve tariffs on imported goods. They may involve the use of laboratory-made viruses. They may involve attacking the internet of another country, or its electrical distribution system. There may be no officially declared war. Strange things may simply take place that no one understands, without realizing that the country is being attacked.

  Conclusion

  We seem to be headed for very bumpy waters in the years ahead, including 2021. Our real problem is an energy problem that we do not have a solution for.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 18:40

• Suddenly Optimistic Fauci Sees Pandemic "Plateauing," Feels "Liberated" Under Biden Admin
  Suddenly Optimistic Fauci Sees Pandemic “Plateauing,” Feels “Liberated” Under Biden Admin

  Summary:

  • Washington DC revives indoor dining after inauguration
  • French Prez warns permanent immunity should not be assumed
  • Biden says US cases plateauing, as Biden Admin “liberates”
  • EU leaders call for more lockdowns, curfews
  • Even Dr. Fauci has agreed that it appears US cases are “plateauing”
  • UK blocking entry fri  ifal ris 
  • Goldman data shows COVID hospitalizations may be trending lower
  • US cases, hospitalizations decline; deaths at highs
  • Hungary first in EU to approve Russian vaccine
  • UAE also approves Russian vax
  • Dr. Fauci confirms US commitment to Gates-backed vaccine program
  • Ireland latest in Europe to extend lockdown
  • Saudi Arabia, UAE complain of vaccine supply delays
  • UK suffers deadliest day yet

  * * *

  Update (1415ET): We’ve seen a flurry of new coronavirus news reported published early this afternoon, beginning with a slight ray of hope for Washington DC residents after a difficult week. On Friday, the inauguration-related “pause” on dining in public will be lifted, allowing Americans to eat indoors, so long as the capacity is 25% of total.

  Elsewhere, vaccine skepticism is once again the name of the game in France on Thursday, where President Emmanuel Macron warned French politicians and the French people not to assume that the virus will simply disappear once vaccinations are complete.

  In other news, a reporter grilling Joe Biden about the US’s weak vaccination targets elicited a frustrated response from Biden, who raged “Give me a Break!” at the reporter in question. Here’s how that went down.

  REPORTER: “You set the goal at 100 million vaccines, is that high enough? Should you set the bar higher? That’s basically where the US is right now.” BIDEN: “When I announced it, you all said that it’s not possible. Come on. Give me a break, man”.

  As if the press hasn’t already fawned over Biden enough…but we digress. In other news, Biden insisted that wearing masks until April may help save 50K lives, another number apparently pulled out of a hat.

  Finally, Dr. Fauci said Thursday that it looks like new cases in the USA might actually be plateauing, despite the holiday surge we were promised by him a few months ago. But where is this more optimistic frame of mind based on? Well, the diminutive doctor admitted that he feels “liberated” by Biden.

  NEW: Dr. Fauci on TRUMP vs. BIDEN approach to science:

  “The idea that you can get up here and…let the science speak, it is somewhat of a liberating feeling.” pic.twitter.com/HKBuu7gEL7

  — John Kruzel (@johnkruzel) January 21, 2021

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

  The data would appear to bear that out.

  

  Finally, in Europe, where travel bans, curfews and lockdown extensions continue (even as Bavaria bucks the trend in Europe) the UK is now banning arrivals from Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Across the continent, EU leaders are agreeing that lockdown measures need to be strengthened, despite the growing body of evidence that they do little to stop the spread of the virus, according to a massive peer-reviewed study that hit recently.

  They’re even agreeing that across the Continent, all leisure and business travel must be curbed, at least for now. In the Netherlands, PM Mark Rutte has unsurprisingly managed to convince residents that a travel ban is ready,

  And so much for all the mutant strains that policy makers have used to justify new lockdowns in the US, because Bloomberg’s data shows cases are now falling in the vast majority of the US. In 42 US states, the seven-day case average has fallen more than 10% from a week earlier, while the other four had more modest drops, according to Covid Tracking Project data. Overall, the US seven-day average is down 20% from a week ago, to 192,825, because the drop is much greater in some states, down 39% in Missouri, for instance.

  * * *

  Yesterday was a mixed bag for the US on the COVID front: After the US topped 400K COVID deaths earlier this year, the US saw a new daily record number of deaths to coincide with Biden’s inauguration. Meanwhile, the WHO finally acknowledged that the “conspiracy theorists” were right about the COVID “case-demic”, and that Ct overmagnification during PCR testing might be producing many false positives.

  

  On Monday, it appears more evidence is beginning to emerge that COVID hospitalizations in the US are seeing a trajectory-shift which should feed through to lower mortality numbers in the weeks ahead, according to models produced by analysts at Goldman Sachs.

  

  An analysis of how vaccinations are impacting hospitalizations shows that there is a correlation between growing vaccination numbers, and lower hospitalizations.

  Before introducing a second chart, the Goldman team writes that it “analyzed hospitalizations for the 25 largest states (by population) representing 88% of all US hospitalizations. We find there has been a 55% correlation between the vaccinations as of the beginning of the year and the YTD decline in hospitalizations. This further supports the connection between recent vaccinations and the decline in hospitalizations.”

  

  As the COVID Tracking Project data show, daily cases have continued to move lower in all four regions of the country, while nationally hospitalizations have started to dip (a trend that, as Goldman’s charts suggest, may be extended).

  

  It’s just the latest sign that Wall Street truly believes that we have reached “the beginning of the end” of COVID…whether that actually turns out to be accurate, however, is another story.

  Meanwhile, after Biden officially ordered the US to halt its departure from the WHO yesterday and rejoin its Covax vaccine-sharing program spearheaded by Bill Gates, Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared at an early morning meeting Thursday where he reaffirmed America’s commitment to the WHO.

  Dr. Fauci, who will now lead the US delegation, said “I am honored to announce that the United States will remain a member of the World Health Organization.” His words marked the first public statement by a member of Biden’s administration to an international audience – and a sign of the priority that the new president has made of fighting COVID-19 both at home and with world partners.

  Meanwhile, over in the EU, Viktor Orban’s Hungary has become the first EU country to grant approval to “Sputnik V”, the COVID vaccine developed by the Gameleya Institute and Russia’s Sovereign Wealth Fund. Orban’s regime coupled the approval with a complaint that it has been unable to procure enough (western-made) vaccines from Brussels, and so has been forced to look elsewhere. The UAE also approved the vaccine for emergency use on Thursday.

  Here’s some more COVID news from overnight and Thursday morning:

  Thailand approved AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine for emergency use, making way for the country to begin inoculating its 67MM people as it endures an increase in coronavirus cases (Source: Bloomberg).

  Saudi Arabia and Kuwait said they would reschedule vaccine appointments because of supply delays from Pfizer. Lebanon extended its nationwide lockdown, which began last week, for another two weeks (Source: Bloomberg).

  Ireland has become the latest European country to extend its lockdown, which will continue “well into February” before the rules are “reviewed”, Prime Minister Micheal Martin said (Source: Bloomberg).

  * * *

  Finally, in the UK, the mutant COVID strain appears to be causing major strife as early evidence shows the strict lockdowns – England’s third, which citizens are starting to rebel against – haven’t had much near-term impact on reducing case numbers. The UK suffered its deadliest day yet, with 1.8K deaths recorded in 24 hours, as Boris Johnson’s chief scientific adviser warned some hospitals now look “like a war zone.”

  Moreover

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 18:35

• China Appeals To "Kind Angels" Of Biden Administration, Blames Trump For "Burning Bridges"
  China Appeals To “Kind Angels” Of Biden Administration, Blames Trump For “Burning Bridges”

  China is hoping for a rapid ‘reset’ of sorts with Washington now with President Joe Biden in the White House. After state media headlines out of China on Tuesday into Wednesday said “Good Riddance Mr. Trump” — as Xinhua wrote, Thursday’s tone out of the foreign ministry was markedly different.

  While essentially placing sole blame on Trump and his top officials, foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said in the latest press briefing remarks that “kind angels can triumph over evil forces” in America.

  “In the past years, the Trump administration, especially (former Secretary of State Mike) Pompeo, has laid too many mines that need to be removed, burned too many bridges that need to be rebuilt, damaged too many roads that need to be repaired,” Hua began.

  

  “I believe if both countries put in the effort, the kind angels can triumph over evil forces,” she told a daily briefing Thursday. Her word choice was then featured across state media headlines.

  Speaking specifically on Biden’s inaugural speech Wednesday, Hua added:

  “President Biden also mentioned in his inauguration speech that Americans have much to heal, much to restore. This is exactly what China-U.S. relations need.”

  However, there’s little doubt that China was miffed at the fact that Taiwan’s de facto ambassador to Washington had been officially invited to attend and was present for the inauguration. 

  Related to growing tensions centered on both Taiwan and Hong Kong, China had slapped sanctions on a who’s who of top outgoing Trump administration officials on Wednesday. Significantly, 28 Trump admin figures will be permanently barred from travel or doing business either on the Chinese mainland or Hong Kong.

  Eschewing “Wolf Warrior” rhetoric (at least for now), China strikes an optimistic note – “I believe if both countries put in the effort, the kind angels can triumph over evil forces,”-Hua Chunying (Foreign Ministry spokeswoman) https://t.co/pFWtX3yeC1

  — W. Gyude Moore (@gyude_moore) January 21, 2021

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

  “China announces decision to sanction 28 U.S. figures who it alleged to have severely violated China’s sovereignty, including officials in the Trump administration, according to a statement from the Chinese foreign ministry,” Bloomberg reported shortly after Biden took the oath of office Wednesday.

  When asked about the dramatic act of ‘revenge’ against the Trump people, Biden’s administration called the move “unproductive and cynical,” according to Reuters. But it’s also very likely that many within the new administration are quietly gleeful over the severe restrictions regarding doing any business in China or Hong Kong by the targeted Trump officials.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Stung By Chip Shortage, VW Loses Production Of "Tens Of Thousands" Of Vehicles In China
  Stung By Chip Shortage, VW Loses Production Of “Tens Of Thousands” Of Vehicles In China

  Volkswagen has been the latest automaker to be hit hard by the semiconductor shortage that is sweeping its way through the auto industry. 

  The company has reportedly lost “tens of thousands” of vehicles in production in China as a result, according to Bloomberg. 

  VW’s China head, Stephan Wollenstein, commented Wednesday: “It was hurting us already in December and we lost some 10,000 cars since then simply because we lost 50,000 cars in production in December because of some chips.”

  

  For VW, the impact has been felt the most in vehicles that use the automaker’s Electronic Stability Program, “a system of sensors that works with a car’s Anti-lock Braking System to prevent the wheels seizing up after an unexpected swerve.”

  “You see how vulnerable our industries are if only one chip is missing. This will unfortunately continue in the first quarter,” Wollenstein continued. 

  China is the world’s largest auto market and a critical market for VW, who has about 40% of its vehicle operations in the country. In China, VW delivered 3.85 million cars in 2020, down 9.1% from the year prior as a result of the pandemic. 

  2021 was thought to be a year where many automakers could play catch-up, but the chip shortage could stand in the way of an easy recovery for some automakers. Recall, we reported just days ago that the ongoing global chip shortage was wreaking havoc with the auto industry, which has become far more reliant on semiconductors due to “smart cars”, than it ever has been.

  

  Last Tuesday, it was reported that Toyota has stopped its factory lines in Guangzhou, China as a result of lack of semiconductors. This came just hours after the company said it would have to cut production of its Tundra, being manufactured in Texas, by 40% for the same reason.

  “The [Chinese factory] suspension could result in as much as a 30% cut in January’s output depending on how long it drags on,” Bloomberg noted early Tuesday morning. The company has told some of its suppliers that the halt could last about 4 days. 

  Meanwhile, Toyota was unable to provide concrete information as to when production would restart. The Japanese automaker operates the Guangzhou factory with Guangzhou Automobile.

  Toyota spokesman Scott Vazin told the Chicago Tribune last week: “This is absolutely an industry issue. We are evaluating the supply constraint of semiconductors and developing countermeasures to minimize the impact to production.”

  Kristin Dziczek, vice president of industry at the Center for Automotive Research, commented: “There have been warning signs about his for months.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/21/2021 – 01:00

• Biden Can Now Launch The Nukes And Unleash World War III Whenever He Feels Like It
  Biden Can Now Launch The Nukes And Unleash World War III Whenever He Feels Like It

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  During the Trump administration, I pointed to a problem with the American presidential system: it provides presidents with essentially unchecked power when it comes to launching a nuclear holocaust. Presidents can initiate nuclear war whenever they like. They need not be acting in a defensive capacity. This should strike any sane person as a rather insane policy, and as a huge hole in the so-called checks and balances on which the US political system is allegedly premised. 

  

  Because of the Washington Beltway hysteria over Trump, the Congress—possibly for the first time—considered measures to rein in the president in this regard. It’s a shame it required Trump Derangement Syndrome to make this an issue, but we should take what we can get when it comes to admitting some of the grave threats to common sensical governance that plague the American national security state. 

  Naturally, these lukewarm attempts at reform failed, likely because the Pentagon was surely opposed to them. While the president’s power is essentially unrestrained in this manner, the loosey goosey approach to controlling launching power also empowers the Pentagon. Surely, the Pentagon’s generals wanted to make sure they can have a big role in launching WWIII on a whim as well. 

  Moreover, Trump supporters opposed the idea as well. When I published the 2020 article on the problem of unchecked presidential power in this regard, I was savaged by Trump supporters in social media for allegedly being a “never Trumper” and failing to understand that the power of the president must never be limited in any way, lest it get in the way of Trump “owning the libs.” Now that Trump is an ex-president, however, both Washington and the hero-worshipping Trump backers will completely forget about the issue. As far as Washington is concerned, the nuke codes are now being controlled by one of their own. And few Trump supporters ever cared about limiting presidential power, anyway. 

  So, the power to incinerate a billion or more human beings over morning coffee remains in the power of the president. This morning, Biden supporters on Twitter were ecstatic over the video of the nuclear “football”—the device which enables the president to launch the nukes—was handed over to Biden:

  Football incoming. pic.twitter.com/Ww4wz1GbIE

  — Mike DeBonis (@mikedebonis) January 20, 2021

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

  But this should be little comfort to anyone who’s paying attention, especially given the launch codes are now under the thumb of a man who may not even know what year it is. 

  

  But regardless of who is president, the fact is the only thing that stands between a president and his launching of nuclear missiles is his own moral compass. Anyone who isn’t hopelessly naïve about politicians and political institutions will find this deeply disturbing.

  A Brief History of the Nuclear Launch Process

  But why has there been no significant effort to develop some sort of check or veto to this process? Part of this lies in the fact the US military establishment maintains a posture very much in favor of erring on the side of aggression rather than restraint. In the early days of the nuclear-armed Cold War, there were essentially no safeguards in place. A man claiming to be the president, if he had access to the right people, could theoretically call for a nuclear strike, and there was no set way of remotely verifying his identity.

  A more robust process was put in place by President Kennedy:

  Although its origins remain highly classified, the Football can be traced back to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Privately, John F. Kennedy believed that nuclear weapons were, as he put it, “only good for deterring.” He also felt it was “insane that two men, sitting on opposite sides of the world, should be able to decide to bring an end to civilization.” Horrified by the doctrine known as MAD (mutually assured destruction), JFK ordered locks to be placed on nuclear weapons and demanded alternatives to the “all or nothing” nuclear war plan.

  Kennedy began asking questions about how a nuclear strike might actually take place, and specifically asked:

  • “What would I say to the Joint War Room to launch an immediate nuclear strike?”

  • “How would the person who received my instructions verify them?”

  Kennedy felt that it was important to ensure that only the president—whose identity could somehow be verified—could authorize a strike.

  According to some critics of the Pentagon, however, the military was committed to making it easy to launch the missiles. The Air Force has even been accused of using “00000000” as a code that could enable the launch of a nuclear missile. According to Foreign Policy:

  Bruce Blair, a nuclear security expert and former launch officer…[and] now a scholar and author at Princeton University, first raised the idea in a piece published in 2004. He accused the Air Force of circumventing President John F. Kennedy’s 1962 order to install extra security codes to safeguard against accidental or unauthorized launch by putting them in place, but making them painfully simple to the missile launch officers who manned underground bunkers. Doing so, Blair said, effectively eliminated the codes’ usefulness.

  Blair contends this easy-code protocol persisted for at least a decade, including the period when he was a launch officer.

  For its part, the Air Force denies using the specific code “00000000.” Nonetheless, the prolaunch posture of the Pentagon has long been evident. As noted by Jeffrey Lewis at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies:

  Bruce is correct about the major historical narrative at stake – the United States Air Force, particularly Strategic Air Command, generally resisted the introduction of technical safeguards out of concerns that such measures might make it more difficult to use the weapons in the event of a conflict….Like many other practices of the period…the Air Force’s emphasis on readiness at the expense of safety at that time seems, admittedly with the benefit of hindsight, unwise in the extreme.

  Other potential sources of human error or sabotage have surfaced over the years as well.

  Military personnel close to President Clinton have claimed that he misplaced the so-called biscuit, the card on which nuclear launch codes are printed. Presidents have often carried them in a coat pocket. But they can be misplaced. According to one of the men who carried the football:

  “[Clinton] thought he just placed them upstairs,” Patterson recalled. “We called upstairs, we started a search around the White House for the codes, and he finally confessed that he in fact misplaced them. He couldn’t recall when he had last seen them.”

  Other cases have reputedly occurred. President Carter allegedly “left his biscuit in a suit that got sent to the dry cleaners.”

  One instance that has been confirmed, however, is when Ronald Reagan’s codes were left discarded and unattended following his attempted assassination:

  During the chaos that followed the shooting, the military aide was separated from the president, and did not accompany him to the George Washington University hospital. In the moments before Reagan was wheeled into the operating theater, he was stripped of his clothes and other possessions. The Biscuit was later found abandoned, unceremoniously dumped in a hospital plastic bag.

  While mere loss of the biscuit does not trigger any sort of launch, it is not difficult to predict how access to the codes could be abused by someone else in a chaotic wartime situation. Scholars have suggested several potential problems with verification and authorization.

  For example, what if a president refused to launch missiles in opposition to the emphatic urgings of his subordinates? Could he then be incapacitated by his subordinates and his launch codes used under the authorization of another person?

  It is unknown how this would play out. According to Ron Rosenbaum in How the End Begins: The Road to a Nuclear World War III,

  the whole question of nuclear command authority, and of who takes control of that authority if the president is killed in a nuclear attack, has frustrated experts and politicians for decades. Yale Law School professor Akhil Reed Amar has called the confusing succession problem “a disaster waiting to happen.”

  This suggests problems whether a president is killed, thought to be killed, or is unreachable for a period. If the vice president assumes office and the original president later resurfaces, who then controls the nuclear weapons? Conspirators could also attempt to actively wrest control of launch authorization from presidents through deception. This could include having the president declared incapacitated for reasons of insanity under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. But Rosenbaum writes:

  By then we’d be in coup territory, or inside an episode of 24. And what is sanity or insanity? What if the president refuses to carry out the deterrent threat of genocidal retaliation once it’s failed to deter a strike on us? Can those around him force the president to give them the Gold Codes and in effect give the launch order? Who determines who is sane and who is insane?

  This strategy, of course, could be used by either side: a prolaunch vice president might ally with a secretary of defense to declare an antilaunch president mentally incompetent. Or, anti-launch underlings could seek to declare the president insane so as to prevent a launch.

  Either way, its clear that this is uncharted territory and well outside the bounds of any orderly process of checks and balances on executive power.

  Problems extend down the chain of command as well. In 1973, launch officer Major Harold Hering asked his superiors for clarification on how he could know if the president giving the order was sane. The military brass had no answer. Instead, Hering was forced out of the Air Force. Although the military likes to claim personnel are required only to follow legal orders—i.e., not planet-destroying orders issued by insane people—all that really mattered was that Hering be willing to launch missiles without question.

  The fact of the matter is that there is no way to confirm a president has consulted any facts on the necessity of nuclear war, or that the president is in his (or her) right mind when ordering a nuclear strike.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 23:45

• Ship Crossing Pacific Loses 750 Containers In The Ocean After Hitting Storm
  Ship Crossing Pacific Loses 750 Containers In The Ocean After Hitting Storm

  Last December, we reported that an unlucky containership – the ultra-large ONE Apus – suffered a historic incident when it lost a record number of containers overboard as it sailed across the Pacific Ocean towards Long Beach after hitting severe weather; the ship lost some 1,816 container units, of which 64 are were Dangerous Goods containers.

  

  It now appears that this was just the start of a unfortunate series of incidents because as Maritime Executive reports, heavy weather in the North Pacific was again blamed for the loss of containers aboard one of Maersk’s containerships. This was the third container loss incident recently reported in the Pacific.

  Maersk said that approximately 750 containers were lost overboard from the Maersk Essen, a 148,723 dwt vessel with a capacity of 13,100 TEU. The loss occurred on January 16, but the line did not supply details on the vessel’s location. The vessel had departed Xiamen, China on December 26 and was due to arrive off Los Angeles on January 22; the ship operates on Maersk’s TP6 Asia/US West Coast route and as such would have made calls in Vietnam, Hong Kong, and Yantian, China before arriving in Xiamen.

  

  Cargo claims consultancy WK Webster is saying in its initial casualty report, that “it is very likely that some containers will have collapsed or have been damaged in the affected stacks, but remain on board. These containers will need to be removed or repositioned.” Webster reports that it is making arrangements for surveyors to be in place in order to investigate the cause of the incident and to attend to any cargo surveys. They are urging anyone who might have had cargo aboard to make contact to protect their position.

  “We view this as a very serious situation which will be investigated promptly and thoroughly,” Maersk said in its statement. They reported that all of the crew was safe and that a detailed cargo assessment is ongoing. In addition, the US Coast Guard, flag state and relevant authorities have been notified.

  The Maersk Essen is proceeding to Los Angeles on its scheduled route. Maersk’s vessel tracking system shows that the vessel was scheduled to be on the terminal in Los Angeles from January 28 to February 5 before departing for Yokohama, Japan.

  

  As noted above, there have been several other incidents in recent month also on the North Pacific. On November 30, the ultra-large containership ONE Apus lost approximately 1,800 containers overboard and damaged scores more during reports of severe weather approximately 1,600 nautical miles northwest of Hawaii. In that incident, the vessel reversed course and sailed to Kobe, Japan, where the recovery operation is still ongoing.

  In another recent incident, at the beginning of November, the ONE Aquila also suffered a container loss in the North Pacific. One Line did not provide details on the number of containers, but WK Webster in its casualty report said that it believed the number exceeded 100 containers. That vessel diverted to Washington state to offload damaged containers and reposition lose containers before proceeding to Long Beach, California.

  These recent events are counter to a report issued by the World Shipping Council last summer that said the incidents of containers lost overboard has been on the decline and is a small percentage of the total annual volume. The WSC reported that the three-year moving average was declining, amounting to an average annual loss of 779 containers overboard between 2017 and 2019.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 23:25

• The Deep State's Stealthy, Subversive, Silent Coup To Ensure Nothing Changes
  The Deep State’s Stealthy, Subversive, Silent Coup To Ensure Nothing Changes

  Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “You have such a fervent, passionate, evangelical faith in this country…why in the name of God don’t you have any faith in the system of government you’re so hell-bent to protect? You want to defend the United States of America, then defend it with the tools it supplies you with—its Constitution. You ask for a mandate, General, from a ballot box. You don’t steal it after midnight, when the country has its back turned.”

  – Seven Days in May (1964)

  No doubt about it: the coup d’etat was successful.

  

  That January 6 attempt by so-called insurrectionists to overturn the election results was not the real coup, however. Those who answered President Trump’s call to march on the Capitol were merely the fall guys, manipulated into creating the perfect crisis for the Deep State—a.k.a. the Police State a.k.a. the Military Industrial Complex a.k.a. the Techno-Corporate State a.k.a. the Surveillance State—to swoop in and take control.

  It took no time at all for the switch to be thrown and the nation’s capital to be placed under a military lockdown, online speech forums restricted, and individuals with subversive or controversial viewpoints ferreted out, investigated, shamed and/or shunned.

  This new order didn’t emerge into being this week, or this month, or even this year, however.

  Indeed, the real coup happened when our government “of the people, by the people, for the people” was overthrown by a profit-driven, militaristic, techno-corporate state that is in cahoots with a government “of the rich, by the elite, for the corporations.”

  We’ve been mired in this swamp for decades now.

  Every successive president starting with Franklin D. Roosevelt has been bought lock, stock and barrel and made to dance to the Deep State’s tune.

  Enter Donald Trump, the candidate who swore to drain the swamp in Washington DC. Instead of putting an end to the corruption, however, Trump paved the way for lobbyists, corporations, the military industrial complex, and the Deep State to feast on the carcass of the dying American republic.

  Joe Biden will be no different: his job is to keep the Deep State in power.

  Step away from the cult of personality politics and you’ll find that beneath the power suits, they’re all alike.

  Follow the money.  It always points the way.

  As Bertram Gross noted in Friendly Fascism: The New Face of Power in America, “evil now wears a friendlier face than ever before in American history.”

  Writing in 1980, Gross predicted a future in which he saw:

  …a new despotism creeping slowly across America. Faceless oligarchs sit at command posts of a corporate-government complex that has been slowly evolving over many decades. In efforts to enlarge their own powers and privileges, they are willing to have others suffer the intended or unintended consequences of their institutional or personal greed. For Americans, these consequences include chronic inflation, recurring recession, open and hidden unemployment, the poisoning of air, water, soil and bodies, and, more important, the subversion of our constitution. More broadly, consequences include widespread intervention in international politics through economic manipulation, covert action, or military invasion…

  This stealthy, creeping, silent coup that Gross prophesied is the same danger that writer Rod Serling envisioned in the 1964 political thriller Seven Days in May, a clear warning to beware of martial law packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.

  Incredibly enough, almost 60 years later, we find ourselves hostages to a government run more by military doctrine and corporate greed than by the rule of law established in the Constitution. Indeed, proving once again that fact and fiction are not dissimilar, today’s current events could well have been lifted straight out of Seven Days in May, which takes viewers into eerily familiar terrain.

  The premise is straightforward.

  With the Cold War at its height, an unpopular U.S. President signs a momentous nuclear disarmament treaty with the Soviet Union. Believing that the treaty constitutes an unacceptable threat to the security of the United States and certain that he knows what is best for the nation, General James Mattoon Scott (played by Burt Lancaster), the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and presidential hopeful, plans a military takeover of the national government.  When Gen. Scott’s aide, Col. Casey (Kirk Douglas), discovers the planned military coup, he goes to the President with the information. The race for command of the U.S. government begins, with the clock ticking off the hours until the military plotters plan to overthrow the President.

  Needless to say, while on the big screen, the military coup is foiled and the republic is saved in a matter of hours, in the real world, the plot thickens and spreads out over the past half century.

  We’ve been losing our freedoms so incrementally for so long—sold to us in the name of national security and global peace, maintained by way of martial law disguised as law and order, and enforced by a standing army of militarized police and a political elite determined to maintain their powers at all costs—that it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it all started going downhill, but we’ve been on that fast-moving, downward trajectory for some time now.

  The question is no longer whether the U.S. government will be preyed upon and taken over by the military industrial complex. That’s a done deal, but martial law disguised as national security is only one small part of the greater deception we’ve been fooled into believing is for our own good.

  How do you get a nation to docilely accept a police state? How do you persuade a populace to accept metal detectors and pat downs in their schools, bag searches in their train stations, tanks and military weaponry used by their small town police forces, surveillance cameras in their traffic lights, police strip searches on their public roads, unwarranted blood draws at drunk driving checkpoints, whole body scanners in their airports, and government agents monitoring their communications?

  Try to ram such a state of affairs down the throats of the populace, and you might find yourself with a rebellion on your hands. Instead, you bombard them with constant color-coded alerts, terrorize them with shootings and bomb threats in malls, schools, and sports arenas, desensitize them with a steady diet of police violence, and sell the whole package to them as being for their best interests.

  This present military occupation of the nation’s capital by 25,000 troops as part of the so-called “peaceful” transfer of power from one administration to the next is telling.

  This is not the language of a free people. This is the language of force.

  Still, you can’t say we weren’t warned.

  Back in 2008, an Army War College report revealed that “widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” The 44-page report went on to warn that potential causes for such civil unrest could include another terrorist attack, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”

  In 2009, reports by the Department of Homeland Security surfaced that labelled right-wing and left-wing activists and military veterans as extremists (a.k.a. terrorists) and called on the government to subject such targeted individuals to full-fledged pre-crime surveillance. Almost a decade later, after spending billions to fight terrorism, the DHS concluded that the greater threat is not ISIS but domestic right-wing extremism.

  Meanwhile, the police have been transformed into extensions of the military while the nation itself has been transformed into a battlefield. This is what a state of undeclared martial law looks like, when you can be arrested, tasered, shot, brutalized and in some cases killed merely for not complying with a government agent’s order or not complying fast enough. This hasn’t just been happening in crime-ridden inner cities. It’s been happening all across the country.

  And then you’ve got the government, which has been steadily amassing an arsenal of military weapons for use domestically and equipping and training their “troops” for war. Even government agencies with largely administrative functions such as the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Smithsonian have been acquiring body armor, riot helmets and shields, cannon launchers and police firearms and ammunition. In fact, there are now at least 120,000 armed federal agents carrying such weapons who possess the power to arrest.

  Rounding out this profit-driven campaign to turn American citizens into enemy combatants (and America into a battlefield) is a technology sector that has been colluding with the government to create a Big Brother that is all-knowing, all-seeing and inescapable. It’s not just the drones, fusion centers, license plate readers, stingray devices and the NSA that you have to worry about. You’re also being tracked by the black boxes in your cars, your cell phone, smart devices in your home, grocery loyalty cards, social media accounts, credit cards, streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon, and e-book reader accounts.

  So you see, January 6 and its aftermath provided the government and its corporate technocrats the perfect excuse to show off all of the powers they’ve been amassing so assiduously over the years.

  Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats.

  I’m referring to “government” with a capital “G,” the entrenched Deep State that is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and has set itself beyond the reach of the law.

  I’m referring to the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.

  This is the hidden face of a government that has no respect for the freedom of its citizenry.

  Brace yourself.

  There is something being concocted in the dens of power, far beyond the public eye, and it doesn’t bode well for the future of this country.

  Anytime you have an entire nation so mesmerized by the antics of the political ruling class that they are oblivious to all else, you’d better beware.

  Anytime you have a government that operates in the shadows, speaks in a language of force, and rules by fiat, you’d better beware.

  And anytime you have a government so far removed from its people as to ensure that they are never seen, heard or heeded by those elected to represent them, you’d better beware.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we are at our most vulnerable right now.

  All of those dastardly seeds we have allowed the government to sow under the guise of national security are bearing demon fruit.

  The gravest threat facing us as a nation is not extremism but despotism, exercised by a ruling class whose only allegiance is to power and money.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 23:05

• Twitter, Facebook And YouTube Allow Incendiary Anti-MAGA Video To Remain On Platforms
  Twitter, Facebook And YouTube Allow Incendiary Anti-MAGA Video To Remain On Platforms

  While Silicon Valley tech giants spent the last two weeks purging President Trump and tens of thousands of his followers over ‘dangerous conspiracy theories’ and ‘inciting violence’ during the so-called “Capitol insurrection” on January 6, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube have yet to remove a video by far-left Russiagate conspiracy theorist Dan Winslow which is the definition of incitement.

  “They are hidden among us, disguised behind regular jobs,” Winslow warns. “They are your children’s teachers. They work at supermarkets, malls, doctor’s offices, and many are police officers and soldiers.”

  

  The video, which has over 4 million Twitter views in two days, calls for “an army of citizen detectives” to identify Trump supporters – who he calls Trump’s ‘army of domestic terrorists,’ – who should be reported to authorities.

  This is so dangerous it’s hard to sum up in a tweet. It puts a target on the head of every conservative, calls for war and propagandizes to form a vigilante group that would narc on neighbors. If Hitler or Stalin we’re alive today, they’d proudly use your video. Sick and evil.

  — Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) January 19, 2021

  The video, which one would think clearly violates Silicon Valley’s arbitrary rules against incitement and hate speech, continues to be viewable on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Would big tech allow a conservative video claiming Biden voters are left-wing terrorists who need to be watched to remain on their platforms?

  Winslow’s video appears to be designed to stoke maximum division between Americans (which, as we were told for four years during ‘Russiagate’ and have known for decades, is straight out of the Kremlin’s playbook).

  As Caitlin Johnstone noted on Tuesday, and is worth repeating:

  “On or before January 20th, Donald Trump will no longer be the Commander-in-Chief: he will lose control of the Army, Navy, Airforce, Marines, Special Forces and America’s nuclear arsenal,” Winslow’s voice begins ominously. “On January 20th Donald Trump will become Commander-in-Chief of a different army: this army.”

  Viewers are then shown footage from Trump rallies while being told that they are looking at “radical extreme conservatives, also known as domestic terrorists”.

  “They are hidden among us, disguised behind regular jobs,” Winslow warns.

  “They are your children’s teachers. They work at supermarkets, malls, doctor’s offices, and many are police officers and soldiers.”

  Winslow talks about white supremacists and the Capitol riot, warning that Trump will continue escalating violence and fomenting a civil war in America.

  “We have to fight back,” Winslow declares.

  “In this new war, the battlefield has changes. Computers can be more valuable than guns. And this is what we need now more than ever: an army of citizen detectives. I’m proposing we form a citizen army. Our weapons will be computers and cellphones. We, who are monitoring extremists on the internet and reporting our findings to authorities. Remember, before the Navy Seals killed Osama Bin Laden, he had to be found. He was found by a CIA analyst working on a computer thousands of miles away. It’s up to you.”

  * * *

  In addition to the usual suspects on the left using Winslow’s video to incite a new witch hunt, the Biden Administration is now focusing on ‘Domestic Terrorism’ as a key priority. And as Johnstone also notes, and which is worth repeating, these people are batshit crazy.

  Johnstone continues:

  This is as insane and scary as I have ever seen these people get, and I was in the thick of peak Russiagate hysteria. An aggressively manufactured push to get an army of citizens spying on each other calls to mind the Stasi informants of East Germany, the patriotism-fueled digital “digging” of the QAnon psyop, and the NatSec LARPing of Louise Mensch Twitter, all rolled into one great big ball of crazy.

  Veteran CIA officer and former deputy DNI Sue Gordon calls for a “9/11 Commission kind of activity” to apply “lessons that we learned in the fight against foreign terrorism” to battle domestic extremism https://t.co/Dor0GMZmfm pic.twitter.com/MGmdNoMZ1f

  — Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) January 19, 2021

  This comes out as we are being bombarded with mass media punditry from literal CIA veterans like Sue Gordon and Elissa Slotkin forcefully hammering home the message that domestic terror is the new frontier for combating violent extremism, meaning of course that new Patriot Act-like solutions will be needed. Winslow himself spent six years traveling and doing research for a novel about a former CIA operative, and if some government agency didn’t recruit him during that period they clearly should have.

  This will get frightening if it keeps up. Just as a relatively low-profile lefty blogger I routinely get liberals online falsely claiming I’m a Russian agent and saying they’ll report me to the FBI, and that’s without an aggressive campaign urging them to join a powerful digital army. The fact that Winslow stays very vague about what he means by “Trump’s new army” and constantly conflates rank-and-file Trump supporters with white supremacist terrorists means people are effectively being pointed at all Trump supporters, especially when normal Trump rallies are what he points to in the video. If this takes off it can very quickly lead to a volunteer army of power-worshipping snitches against literally anyone who is critical of US foreign policy or the Democratic Party, whether they actually support Trump or not.

  * * *

  Does Winslow want actual civil war?

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 22:45

• Luongo: Epitaph For A Post-Trump America
  Luongo: Epitaph For A Post-Trump America

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  I’m relieved Donald Trump is no longer President. In fact, I’m downright ecstatic. This is the best I’ve felt in weeks.

  Trump was four years of faint hope, failed promises and false narratives.

  

  Oh, don’t get me wrong he was also entertaining as hell, did many things I fundamentally agreed with and accelerated the collapse of the biggest, most corrupt organization ever created in human history.

  He made a mockery of the media, stood tall until the final days of his presidency against a self-congratulatory bureaucracy and forced out into the open the depths of the depravity of our ruling class.

  I friggin’ love the guy for that.

  But I’m also over it. It’s time to move on.

  Today I feel no nostalgia for Trump or America 1.0.

  I refuse to go into the same hysterical theatrics the Left did four years ago. Biden’s the president. The restoration is complete. He was selected no different than every president other than Trump since Reagan.

  I have as much emotion for him as I had for Bush the Lesser, Clinton the Rapist or Obama the Enigma.

  He’s just a placeholder for a system I no longer have any affinity for. Trump always represented a big two-fingers up to that system, which too many conservatives helped Trump prop up for four years.

  One of my patrons posted a stray thought in our community on Slack that sums things up perfectly:

  “Just think if Trump had won fairly and the “steal” hadn’t happened. We’d have had another 4 inept years of placeholding and false hope.

  What a godsend that the steal happened as it has decoupled the people from the political establishments and freed them. Ok, so the Great Reset’s happening but who cares?

  Everybody knows about it.

  Necessity is the mother of invention and as long as people “feel” free then they aren’t free. That’s how it’s worked up until now. The decoupling had to happen somehow.”

  This is the law of unintended consequences writ large. Today should be looked at with relief for the clarity of vision we have for the future. It will suck, but at least there is symmetry.

  In the end they stole the election to regain control and doing so set the stage for a wholesale rejection of their authority.

  Too many conservatives still believed in the Myth of America. That should stop today.

  The lead up to the inauguration with all of the pearl clutching, troop movements, breathless headlines portending a violent assault on the Capitol was the height of political theater.

  And they know this. There’s no putting that genie back in the bottle.

  This is a picture that encapsulates everything wrong with post-Trump America. Symbols of America but no Americans.

  

  Military and pols everywhere but no governed giving their consent.

  Image systems matter folks and the world is watching the U.S. transition from a Republic into an Autocracy.

  I guess Gil Scott Heron was wrong, the revolution will be televised after all.

  The two weeks since the staged assault on the Capitol saw Trump pile-driven in the ground by a vengeful GOP leadership while obviously having his arm twisted behind the scenes.

  People who should know better can’t see through their own coping.

  What did they think trust-fund Donald was going to do? Fall on his sword for a whistleblower/journalist? Trump is, after all, still just Trump.

  This was the plan. Trump needed to finally be defeated. His followers humiliated. There was never going to be an Assange pardon.

  There was never going to be a big declassification.

  He was never allowed to burn the place down.

  If any of that was going to happen it would have happened ages ago.

  And this is why I’m happy Trump is gone. Because did you really want to live through another four years of pathetic virtue signaling, bureaucratic inertia, media lies and shameful pandering?

  No, today the collapse of the U.S. will be on the watch of the people who orchestrated it. It won’t have the consent of a majority of the people, but if we were really honest with ourselves that’s how it was under Obama, Bush the Lesser and Clinton.

  Trump was a guy who made things interesting but he also ensured we would be disabused of any notion of dissidence.

  Today is the day Trump supporters can finally grow up. He wasn’t Orange Jesus sent to save America from itself. There was never a plan.

  Trump was just a guy in over his head doing something no President did since Calvin Coolidge, giving a shit about what America means for Americans.

  That’s why he had to be destroyed and that’s why we ultimately have to put him behind us.

  As the U.S. sinks and what’s left of the legal protections we’ve enjoyed are taken away under the guise of ‘domestic terrorism’ we are also, strangely, free.

  That’s why I’m ecstatic a man more fit for Andrew Cuomo’s COVID Death Parlors is president today rather than Trump.

  Everyone’s eyes are now open. A fungus is president.

  Absent the false hope of Trump people are now free to conclude what I always have — politics got us into this, politics will not get us out.

  We can finally put the childish Red vs. Blue behind us.

  That false duality is gone. The GOP is dead. The Democrats are ready to knife each other climbing to the pinnacle. They both hate us.

  The Capitol knows it is under siege, not from right-wing militias and neo-Nazis but from their own fear of our not feeling anything for them anymore…

  … except maybe pity.

  So, raise a glass to Trump, wish him well, accept his limitations. The Empire is back with a vengeance. The Brave New Post-Trump World is here.

  And that has never been a more exhilarating thought.

  *  *  *

  Join My Patreon if you truly value freedom.

  Donate to the podcast via crypto:
  BTC: 3GSkAe8PhENyMWQb7orjtnJK9VX8mMf7Zf
  BCH: qq9pvwq26d8fjfk0f6k5mmnn09vzkmeh3sffxd6ryt
  DCR: DsV2x4kJ4gWCPSpHmS4czbLz2fJNqms78oE
  DASH: XjWQKXJuxYzaNV6WMC4zhuQ43uBw8mN4Va
  XLM: GC4S6XUG6CGI7DLKFTLCUKIKYS3BHYE56AF7BQRIWX5EZM355JQYDRHD

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 22:25

• Generations Of Globalist Ghouls Collaborate On "Manifesto" For Post-Trump Economic "Reset"
  Generations Of Globalist Ghouls Collaborate On “Manifesto” For Post-Trump Economic “Reset”

  Proponents of the QAnon “conspiracy theory,” which the NYT can’t seem to stop writing about, are going to love seeing this.

  A memo that has reportedly been circulating among policymakers on both sides of the aisle for weeks was finally released to the press on Tuesday when Dealbook editor and CNBC “Squawk Box” host Andrew Ross Sorkin got the scoop: a memo penned by a group of senior-level bureaucrats, including – who else? – Henry Kissinger and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has provided a kind of “blueprint” for the Biden Administration to undo all of President Trump’s trade-war tactics and other policies that didn’t exactly help promote free trade.

  As Trump recounted in his farewell video published earlier Tuesday afternoon, his administration dramatically altered the American trade landscape, pulling the US out of the TPP, renegotiating Nafta into the USMCA, and – most consequentially, at things would turn out – the trade war with China, which inspired waves of hysterical lobbying by the Chamber of Commerce and special-interest groups from Big Tech to Wal-Mart and other major retailers, and others.

  

  So, as Biden prepares his first 100-day blitz of policy directives, many of the architects of the globalist system created by groups like the Trilateral Commission are joining with a gaggle of former cabinet-level officials (both Dems and GOP) along with the CEO of one of America’s largest banks, former British Labour Party Prime Minister Tony Blair and – who else? – Henry Kissinger, have essentially penned a manifesto that is being circulated among lawmakers, along with top-level officials in the cabinet and the West Wing, to help restore the globalist system that Trump helped to disrupt.

  Who better to leak the story to than Andrew Sorkin, who first brought up the existence of the memo during an interview during Tuesday morning’s episode of “Squawk Box” on CNBC during a conversation with Harvard economist Austan Goolsbee.

  “The problem the critics of @JoeBiden‘s program have is that we tried the approach they’re describing. What they want Joe Biden to do is what Donald Trump has been doing for 4 years and it’s a failure. It’s a failed presidency,” says @Austan_Goolsbee on the Biden economic plan. pic.twitter.com/VQLw4GJwEP

  — Squawk Box (@SquawkCNBC) January 19, 2021

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

  According to Sorkin’s column, “the memo comes from an under-the-radar group of global boldfaced names that act as a private advisory committee to JPMorgan Chase. They include Tony Blair, the former British prime minister; Condoleezza Rice and Henry Kissinger, two former secretaries of state; Robert Gates, the former secretary of defense; Alex Gorsky, chief executive of Johnson & Johnson; Bernard Arnault, chairman of LVMH; and Joseph C. Tsai, executive vice chairman of Alibaba, among others.”

  The group, which even Sorkin concedes is exclusively staffed with members of the “globalist part of the globalist establishment that fell out of favor during the Trump years, typically meets once a year in a far-flung location with JPMorgan’s chief, Jamie Dimon.”

  Dimon hasn’t shied away from sharing his idealistic political prescriptions for saving American capitalism from itself. Most of these screeds, published in recent annual letters to the bank’s shareholders, mostly focus on the need to raise taxes on the rich and make the American education system more meritocratic, among other proposed “reforms”.  Though whenever a rich person says they support raising taxes on the rich, one almost can’t help but feel skeptical.

  These discussions are usually kept quiet, filtering out through the shadowy nexus where corporate interest meets public policy meets Capitol Hill. But “given the precarious state of the world during a pandemic and change in leadership in Washington, the group put its views on paper in hopes of persuading policymakers to address what it sees as the most pressing priorities.”

  Though Sorkin didn’t share the memo, he described it as “a manifesto or sorts”. Without explicitly saying so, it advocates for a “reset” – a return to the pre-Trump days, essentially turning back the clock to a time before Trump dumped the TPP, retooled Nafta and started the aggressive trade war/economic confrontation of China.

  Why? Because, as Tony Blair explains to Sorkin at one point, “enlightened self-interest” – ie working closely with other countries to build better products and more efficient supply chains etc – actually helps lift all boats. In other words, backing down from the trade confrontation with China and other Trump policy rollbacks would actually help put “America First”.

  Without saying it in so many words, the group argues that engaging in policy and commerce with other countries isn’t a sign of weakness or against the interests of the country. In many ways, it is actually “America First.” “The purpose of cooperation is not to put someone else’s interest before those of your own country,” Mr. Blair told me about the discussions among the group. “Enlightened self-interest is best satisfied by people working together.” On this point, Mr. Gates, who was the secretary of defense under President George W. Bush, added that the government has failed to “bring home to the American people why international cooperation and engagement on the international front and the relationships with our allies, why that all serves Americas self-interest.”

  In an example of just how out-of-touch this memo’s authors apparently are, it argues that the COVID-19 outbreak is an example of the shortcomings of those who are skeptical of the globalist system.

  “The near-total absence of American leadership, coupled with the nationalist approach of too many countries, have come at the expense of a strategically coherent, international response to the pandemic,” the paper contends. Mr. Blair said that, while everyone involved in the group didn’t agree on every point in the document, it reflected the broad consensus.

  Even as Mike Pompeo labels China’s treatment of the Uyghers a “genocide”, the paper argues for greater cooperation on everything from saving the climate to “issues of global health”.

  The memo calls for a return to engaging with China, especially on climate issues and global health, while acknowledging the “significant challenge” the country poses. “The best outcome for US-China relations is likely managed competition — an accommodation that avoids military conflict while allowing for limited cooperation,” it reads. “It is impractical to think that supply chains and manufacturing can be moved simply, affordably or comprehensively out of China.”

  Sorkin acknowledges that Trump-aligned voters, as well as many on the Democratic Party’s left flank, might have serious problems with the memo, given the fact that it was written by the very architects of the free-trade system that hollowed out American factories.

  The document also calls for placing renewed importance on the G7 and G20. It urges the creation of “trusted supply chains” and places responsibility on the business community to engage with policymakers “from the point-of-view of the public interest, not simply narrow business interests.”

  Some will fairly question the group’s intentions. After all, a message being delivered by the nation’s biggest bank – and a group of chief executives and former senior policymakers – may only encourage the idea that there is a supersecret cabal of puppeteers steering policy.

  The idea that the Biden administration might take this group’s advice might be considered anathema to his supporters on the far left just as much as it is to his opponents on the far right.

  Tony Blair says he understands why people are skeptical, or even furious at, the globalist elite. But they’re not so bad, he says. In reality, the system they’re advocating is simply “common sense”. Dimon says that involving the business community and other stakeholders can help undo some of the mistakes of the past.

  Mr. Blair said he understood the skepticism of the motives of the global elite. “Politically this is my view: You’ve had genuine grievances, which populism has exploited, but too much of those opposed to populism have simply stood for better management of the status quo,” he said. Mr. Dimon said that one of the few ways that the status quo, and the inequality it created, can be undone is if his peers start advocating for policies that may be against their own short-term business interests.

  “I’d like to criticize business for a second,” he said in an interview, describing how he had witnessed some executives lobby for their business or themselves, knowingly at the expense of society. “I’ve been to a lot of meetings with presidents and prime ministers and senators and congressmen, and the selfishness and parochialism with the business folks is just absolutely outrageous.”

  “The first thing businesses should do is separate their company’s interests from what’s in the interest of the country,” he added.

  As an example, he took a shot at the private equity industry, which happens to provide some his bank’s biggest clients. “I mean, we still have carried interest in this country?” he said, questioning the special, lower tax rate that private equity executives enjoy. “When you look at those things, I feel like the American public says, ‘It’s a swamp.’ And they’re saying ‘I’m not getting my piece of it,’ you know?”

  Mr. Dimon said that, ultimately, many of the big challenges the country faces during and after the pandemic will require private-sector investment from around the world, and gaining the trust of the public is crucial.

  “It’s unlikely to be fixed without business, particularly when you get around to things like work skills, property and building infrastructure,” he said.

  Sorkin’s column ends with an analogy, reportedly sourced to Dimon, about FDR overcoming his hostilities with big business to build the War Production Board and staff it with captains of industry like Walter Chrysler.

  If nothing else, the memo and the slick way it was leaked to the press after making the rounds in Washington, is a harbinger of how business will be done in the Biden area, as the same old foreign policy and economy wonks from the Clinton, Bush and Obama years reemerge like the living dead.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 22:05

• PBOC Injects The Most Liquidity In Four Months
  PBOC Injects The Most Liquidity In Four Months

  China’s central bank added the most cash to the financial system via open-market operations since Sept. 22 as companies finalize some tax payments, according to Bloomberg’s John Liu.

  The People’s Bank of China added a net 248 billion yuan of seven-day reverse repurchase agreements, a day after a similar move involving 278 billion yuan, which in turn followed 75 billion yuan.

  

  The operation is intended to offset the impact of tax payments and ensure that liquidity in the banking system is reasonably ample, the PBOC said in a statement on Wednesday.

  Meanwhile, money markets rates are climbing, with the benchmark seven-day repo rate on Wednesday increasing for the sixth session to 2.55%, in line for the highest since Nov. 13. Chinese companies need to wrap up certain tax payments for last quarter, such as corporate income taxes.

  “The big injection today will help banks soothe liquidity tightness caused by the tax payments,” said Xing Zhaopeng, an economist at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group.

  “We estimate the size of tax payments to be about 700 billion yuan, and the impact will last three to four days from January 19 to 22.”

  The yield on government bonds due in a decade fell as much as 2 basis points before trading little changed at 3.16%.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 22:01

• Rabobank On President Biden: Now What
  Rabobank On President Biden: Now What

  By Philip Marey, senior US strategist at Rabobank

  Summary

  • Today, Joe Biden was inaugurated as President of the United States. In his first ten days in office, President Biden is expected to sign a flurry of executive actions aimed at Covid-19, the economy and climatechange.
  • The two Democratic victories in the Georgia run-off elections have opened the door to expansive fiscal policy in the next two years. For the near-term, Biden has proposed the American Rescue Plan. For the remainder of his term he is expected to announce a Recovery Plan next month. According to our calculations, Biden’s plans would provide a boost to economic growth, also in the long run.
  • However, the question is how much of his plans can be realized, given the minimal Democratic majority in the Senate. It would take only one centrist democratic senator to block a Biden initiative. Consequently, the internal divisions in the Democratic party will come to the forefront in the coming two years. In this sense, Biden’s style may be more reminiscent of that of a prime minister trying to hold together a broad and shaky coalition.
  • Under a Biden administration foreign and trade policy will remain focused on meeting the challenge of China as the main rival of the US. However, Biden is likely to return to a multilateral approach.
  • The contested elections have left the United States with legitimacy issues regarding Biden’s presidency.In fact, a majority of Republican voters does not even believe Biden is the legitimate president of the United States.While we expect Biden’s policies to boost economic growth, we do not expect them to end the vicious cycle of polarization and social unrest that is undermining the country

  Introduction

  Today, Joe Biden was inaugurated as President of the United States. In his first ten days in office, President Biden is expected to sign a flurry of executive actions aimed at Covid-19, the economy and climate change.Biden intends to sign orders expanding testing for Covid-19, protecting workers from the pandemic and establishing public health standards. He also wants to mandate the use of face masks on federal property and for interstate travel on airlines, trains and transit systems.Biden is also expected to keep in place restrictions on evictions and foreclosures and to extend a suspension of interest-free student loan payments.Biden wants to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord and put an end to the Keystone XL pipeline.The reversal of the deregulation of the Trump year swill have an early start.

  Biden’s growth impulse

  The two Democratic victories in the Senate run-off elections in Georgia on January 5 have opened the door to expansive fiscal policy in the next two years. In the near term, this means a substantial additional Covid relief package. But it also means an expansive fiscal policy in the next two years, aimed at stimulating economic growth. Biden wants to invest more in education, R&D, and infrastructure. The Democrats want to pay for this partly through higher taxes. The budget deficit is likely to increase further. But our calculations show that Biden’s plans could provide a substantial impulse to economic growth, also in the long run. Biden’s fiscal policy initiatives are split up in a near-term covid relief plan (American Rescue Plan) and a medium-to-long term plan (“Recovery Plan”). He presented the first on January 14 and is expected to release the second in February.

  The American Rescue Plan

  While it took Congress relatively little time to agree on the well over $2 trillion CARES Act back in March last year, it took until December to come up with a $900 billion follow-up. However, the two Democratic victories in the Senate run-off elections in Georgia on January 5 have opened the door to more covid relief.On January 14, Biden presented his American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion package that includes additional direct payments of $1400 to Americans (in addition to the $600 from the December package), an increase in federal unemployment benefits to $400 (from $300) per week and an extension through September(from March), and increasing the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour(from $7.25 since 2009). The rescue package can be divided in three large chunks: $1 trillion in direct relief to households, $440 billion for small businesses and communities that were hit particularly hard by the pandemic, and $415 billion for virus response. At present, it is uncertain how much of this plan will be approved by the Senate. For example, there is doubt about the effectiveness of sending people checks without knowing if they really need it. Not only Republicans have their doubts, but also a centrist Democratic senator such as Joe Manchin.

  The American Recovery Plan

  As for the coming years, Biden is expected to present a Recovery Plan in February. Biden is expected to invest more in education, R&D, and infrastructure. Even if only part of Biden’s plans materialize -the Democratic majority in the Senate is minimal-, we expect a boost to GDP growth in 2021 and beyond.While there may be some common ground between Democrats and Republicans on infrastructure, for a large part they are thinking about different forms of infrastructure. While Republicans may be willing to spend federal money on highways, bridges and airports, Democrats are thinking of green infrastructure facilitating clean energy and electric vehicles.

  Although markets are focusing on Biden’s spending spree, we should not forget that tax hikes are also part of his plans. They may not be at the top of his list given the covid crisis, but once the economy regains momentum tax hikes may come back to the surface. Meanwhile, we should not lose sight of the fact that not all businesses and households have suffered due to the covid outbreak. Some have actually done quite well, so they should be able to absorb a higher tax rate.During her Senate confirmation hearings for the position of Treasury Secretary, on January 19, Janet Yellen said that the Biden team does not immediately plan to pursue tax increases, but would consider them as part of a later package that focuses on long-term investments.

  Getting plans realized

  The question is how many of Biden’s plans are going to be realized. After all, the Democratic majority in the Senate is minimal. The Republicans have 50 seats and the Democrats 48. However, independent senators Bernie Sanders and Angus King caucus with the Democrats and the Vice-President is the tie-breaker in case of a 50-50 outcome. This means that Kamala Harris is going to be busy and is likely to spend a lot of time on Capitol Hill. Her main contact may very well be Joe Manchin, who is considered to be the most conservative Democratic senator. He will be able to block the more leftist plans of the Democrats on his own. So we cannot simply assume that Biden can realize all his plans just because the Democrats have majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate. In the next two years the differences within the Democratic Party will come to the forefront, instead of the differences between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party as in the last four years. How many of Biden’s plans are going to be realized no longer depends on Senate Republicans after the Georgia elections, but on centrist Senate Democrats.In this sense, Biden’s style may be more reminiscent of that of a prime minister trying to hold together a broad and shaky coalition,ranging from centrists to democratic socialists.

  

  Increasing polarization

  While Biden’s economic plans are expected to boost the economy, they will probably not reduce the polarization in politics and society. The ever increasing polarization of US politics and society has reached a level that poses a serious threat to the stability of the country. The question is now: is this the culmination of the civil unrest in the United States, or is this just another warning signal that the country is heading toward something worse? If we look at the underlying mechanism of polarization, it appears tobe self-reinforcing. New events or information will be interpreted through two different filters, such as CNN and Fox. What’s more, economic policies aimed at income redistribution will not appease Trump supporters, as we explained in Economy or identity. The Trump vote is not about the economy, it’s about identity. Biden’s plans do not offer a solution to these anxieties. If the US does not find an off-ramp from this route of increasing polarization, we are only going to see a further escalation of civil unrest.

  In fact, a majority of Republican voters does not even believe Biden is the legitimate president of the United States.As we argued in Election meltdown, this was going to be the case no matter who would be sworn in. With Trump claiming in advance that the elections were rigged and the Democrats spurring their voters to go to the polls to avoid all kinds of nightmare scenarios, how much trust in the election outcome were voters supposed to have if their side would lose? Meanwhile, foreign adversaries such as the Russians, Chinese and Iranians, are likely to amplify the mutual distrust through cyber warfare. As we concluded in Civil unrest, no matter who would have won the elections, the turbulence in US politics and society is not likely to pass. This was only the beginning.

  

  Return to multilateralism

  When it comes to foreign policy, trade policy and international climate policy the Biden administration intends to return to the multilateral approach of the Obama years. Multilateralism does not necessarily mean that the US will go soft on all its rivals and enemies. Rather it means that it will not go at them alone, but instead (re)build coalitions.During his Senate confirmation hearing for the job of Secretary of State, on January 19, Antony Blinken said that he will work to revitalize damaged American diplomacy and build a united front to counter the challenges posed by Russia, China and Iran.However, we should note that America’s leadership of the free world has credibility issues after four years of Trump’s go at it alone approach. What’s more, America’s moral leadership has also lost credibility after the insurrection. In fact, it is already being exploited by America’s adversaries.

  During his Senate confirmation hearing Blinken said that there was no doubt China posed the most significant challenge to the US of any nation, and believed there was a very strong foundation to build a bipartisan policy to stand up to Beijing. While the US is heavily polarized on domestic topics, there is a broad consensus on China. According to the Pew Center, the percentage of survey respondents who say they have an unfavorable opinion of China has risen in the last 15 years from a minority to a majority. And this is true of Democrats and Republicans, even though Republicans always score higher than Democrats on this topic. So there is some common ground abroad for Democrats and Republicans. However, on other issues, such as international climate agreements, Biden  – feeling pressure from left wing Democrats – will be at odds with the Republicans.

  

  Conclusion

  Biden has an ambitious agenda, but he has only two years with the certainty of a Democratic majority in the Senate. If the Republicans flip just one seat in the November 2022 midterms, it will all be over by January 2023 and the Republican Senate will shoot down most if not all of Biden’s remaining plans. And during these first two years he only has a minimal majority in the Senate, which means that just one centrist Democratic senator can block an initiative. What’s more, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives has been reduced. Meanwhile, the country is heavily divided and a majority of Republican voters does not even believe Biden is the legitimate president of the United States. Biden’s plans do not address the anxieties that fuel this divide. So while we expect Biden’s policies to boost economic growth, we do not expect them to end the vicious cycle of polarization and social unrest that is undermining the United States

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 21:45

• Biden To Keep Up Trump's Venezuela Regime-Change Policy
  Biden To Keep Up Trump’s Venezuela Regime-Change Policy

  The Biden administration has said it will continue to formally recognize Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido as president of Venezuela, despite Nicolás Maduro clearly being the actual leader of the socialist country.

  Biden’s nominee for secretary of state Anthony Blinken told Senators on Tuesday that Guaido will be the recognized leader, a policy which began in January 2019 when the opposition leader dubbed himself ‘Interim President’ and also ‘Acting President’ at the encouragement of Washington during Trump admin attempts to foment a military and popular uprising against Maduro.

  

  During his remarks Blinken also indicated the new administration will keep up the sanctions. “We need an effective policy that can restore Venezuela to democracy, starting with free and fair elections,” he said.

  He said Biden will seek “more effectively target” economic punitive measures in efforts to make Maduro step aside and allow Juan Guaido to take up position, according to Reuters. 

  Blinkin further said he believes the US should not enter into negotiations with Maduro for the end of sanctions or some kind of relief, but instead vowed that Caracas must “really feel the pain”.

  Blinken says he agrees with Sen. Rubio, still supports failed coup leader Juan Guaido and regime change in Venezuela.

  “Maybe we need to look at how we more effectively target the sanctions we have so regime enablers really feel the pain” pic.twitter.com/qtYDm0hn0O

  — Kevin Gosztola (@kgosztola) January 19, 2021

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

  Currently the OPEC nation is gaining help from Iran and Russia in circumventing a US oil and fuel blockade. US sanctions aim to prevent crude being exported out and gasoline being imported for domestic use (Venezuela’s derelict refineries have been incapable of processing enough fuel to keep up domestic demand).

  While Guaido is also recognized as president by over a dozen US allies, the majority of countries – including powerful Russia and China – do not. He’s long claimed Maduro’s 2018 reelection was “rigged” – something which the US has also maintained.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 21:25

• "Even Libertarians": John Brennan Issues 'List' Of Ideologies Biden Intel Community Should Go After
  “Even Libertarians”: John Brennan Issues ‘List’ Of Ideologies Biden Intel Community Should Go After

  Well this is alarming and ominous to say the least… Former CIA Director John Brennan told MSNBC in an interview on inauguration day that the intelligence community under newly sworn in President Biden is “moving in laser-like fashion” to try and uncover dangerous plots against the country.

  Naturally, there’s been much of this worrisome commentary about what political ideologies should be targeted and monitored coming out of NatSec hawks in the wake of the Capitol Hill mayhem of January 6. But this is the first time such a broad array of groups have been so bluntly lumped into a Pro-Trump “insurgency” by an influential media pundit and former spook. Brennan expressly said they are “violent” and remain a domestic threat.

  He said in the MSNBC interview without the least concern for violation of Americans’ rights that intelligence agencies should look into “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians…”.

  .@JohnBrennan: Biden intel community “are moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about” the pro-Trump “insurgency” that harbors “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians” pic.twitter.com/SjVXWhPhR8

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 20, 2021

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

  He said these belief systems have come together under the umbrella of a supposed pro-Trump movement capable of committing violence. 

  Ah yes, “even libertarians”… 

  “I had white knuckles because of the nature of the threats,” he began by recalling his days as CIA Director. We’ve seen “the growth of this polarization in the United States and domestic violence and White supremacist groups,” he continued.

  Comparing this “threat” to a foreign insurgency which the US has lately battled overseas, he said it—

  “brings together an unholy alliance of religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.”

  

  He added: “And unfortunately I think there’s been this momentum that generated as a result of unfortunately the demagogic rhetoric of people that’s just departed government, but also those who continue in the halls of Congress and so I really do think that the law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence, and even the defense officials are doing everything possible to root out what seems to be a very very serious and insidious threat to our democracy and our republic.”

  Interestingly, Brennan spoke as if these groups are already being looked into and spotlighted by US intelligence under Biden. “Even Libertarians,” apparently.

  John Brennan, the former communist, who committed treason while he was Obama’s CIA director by knowingly arming Al Qaeda, considers libertarians dangerous. Cool.

  — Dave Smith (@ComicDaveSmith) January 20, 2021

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

  Increasingly, it looks like Inauguration Day for intelligence insiders like Brennan represents “Deep State back on top” in America.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 21:05

• Tesla Investigating Model 3 Fire In Shanghai After Collision Causes Battery Short Circuit
  Tesla Investigating Model 3 Fire In Shanghai After Collision Causes Battery Short Circuit

  Tesla is reportedly cooperating with a fire department in Shanghai in trying to find the cause of what is being calling a “Model 3 fire incident” that took place on Wednesday night.

  

  A Model 3 caught fire in an underground garage after a “collision below the vehicle” may have caused a battery short circuit, according to reports from Bloomberg and Shine. Stop us if you’ve heard this one before.

  Both Tesla and the owner acknowledge that a collision under the vehicle may have been the cause of the battery catching fire.

  

  The fire took place in Qibao, Minhang District and photos of the vehicle show a burnt Model 3 surrounded by foam used by firefighters. The car “was parked close to the entrance of the garage,” the report notes. 

  Recall, mysterious fires popping up in China – in addition to sudden unintended acceleration and consumer complaints – were two of the reasons we cited in our recent piece suggesting that Elon Musk’s Chinese fairy tale could eventually come to an end. 

  As we noted then, so far Musk has been able to sidestep some ugly press in China, including out of control Tesla vehicles, forced recalls, constant price cuts and disgruntled customers. So far, Musk is holding it together in China.

  Incidents like this one won’t help. We look forward to hearing the result of Tesla’s totally unbiased investigation. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 20:45

• "Perfect Storm…Not Of Our Doing" – Fauci-Led Biden Team Suddenly Stunned By Virus Surge Created By Fauci-Led Trump Team
  “Perfect Storm…Not Of Our Doing” – Fauci-Led Biden Team Suddenly Stunned By Virus Surge Created By Fauci-Led Trump Team

  Even before President Biden was officially sworn in, corporate American was already rearing to have his back. Earlier this week, Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel told the press that his company was on track to produce 100MM COVID vaccine doses by the end of Biden’s first 100 days, as expected, while a top Amazon exec sent Biden a letter asking if there was anything Amazon could do to help with the vaccine rollout (meanwhile, a “logistical hiccup” by McKesson forced the rescheduling of 23K injections).

  Did we not need assistance two weeks ago? https://t.co/3oZb378mae

  — David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) January 20, 2021

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

  Now, after Wall Street already declared “the beginning of the end” of the COVID pandemic, Bloomberg News is pitching in with a little CYA, publishing a report claiming Biden’s Dr. Fauci led White House COVID team is now seeing that the outlook for the US pandemic is worse than they had believed…presumably because the Trump COVID team (also led by Dr. Fauci) kept them in the dark.

  

  The Biden team, Bloomberg says, is “increasingly worried the coronavirus pandemic is spiraling out of control – imperiling his promise to contain the outbreak – as cases and deaths mount, vaccinations lag and a more-transmissible strain emerges in the US.”

  The way the editors framed the issue, they made it sound as if any potential surge in cases later in the year – for whatever reason, even something totally unforeseen like more viral mutations (the other day, brazilian media warned of a new hyper-infectious strain emerging in the Amazon) – would be President Trump’s fault, not Biden’s and the Democrats.

  As they learned more about the federal response to the pandemic, Biden’s transition team grew alarmed at a lack of coordination with states, the people said. Biden himself has warned of a “dark winter” and has flatly said the pandemic will worsen before it improves.

  The stakes are escalating. U.S. hospitalizations are at near-record levels, and daily cases and deaths have doubled since Election Day on Nov. 3. While blame has fallen on the Trump administration for its failure to develop a national testing or vaccination strategy or encourage widespread mask-wearing, Biden’s team – which keeps adding new experts – now inherits the job of containing the pandemic.

  On Thursday, Biden will sign executive actions to “move aggressively to change the course of the Covid-19 crisis and safely re-open schools and businesses, including by taking action to mitigate spread through expanding testing, protecting workers, and establishing clear public health standards,” according to a memo by Ron Klain, the White House chief of staff. After taking office on Wednesday, one of Biden’s first acts was expected to be an order requiring face masks on federal property.

  But why does Bloomberg feel the need to engage in this type of defensive cover? Well, presumably because some of the “experts” (who perhaps have been afraid to speak up and question the official narrative on masks, lockdowns and vaccines) truly are concerned that none of the palliatives actually work – though they probably wouldn’t tell you that if you asked them

  But the risk of explosive new strains, including a UK variant known as B.1.1.7, threatens to upend it all and leave Biden at the end of his first 100 days with a pandemic that has worsened, instead of improved. There’s concern among his team that the scope of the problem he’s inherited is far worse than anticipated, posing a political risk to Biden’s White House.

  […]

  The most alarming developments have come over the past month. Some Biden advisers, who asked not to be identified discussing internal conversations, said it isn’t vaccine logistics that worry them most, but the new strain of the virus, which is more contagious. The US already has a perilously high baseline caseload – about 230,000 new infections a day, of late – that could quickly become unmanageable as the mutant strain takes hold.

  “This administration is inheriting such a horrible problem, not of their making,” said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and a member of the coronavirus advisory board for Biden’s transition. “This is a perfect storm.”

  Some twitter users apparently saw through Bloomberg’s CYA operation on behalf of the new administration, and mocked it accordingly.

  But . . . but I was told we just needed a President with a “(D)” after his name and the whole problem would be SOLVED INSTANTLY!!!!!

  — Sleep Is For Wusses Ego (@MyAlteredEgo) January 20, 2021

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

  I thought his mask mandate was going to save the day?!?

  — Mike Wilson (@wagon_hunter) January 20, 2021

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

  With the excuses on day 1! wow

  — Divo Crockett (@Divo_Crockett) January 20, 2021

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

  Meanwhile, earlier today, a top Israeli health official announced that the Pfizer vaccine, which the country has used to carry out one of the most comprehensive vaccination programs in the world, is only 50% effective, roughly half the 95% that the “Phase 3 trial data” suggested.

  Even with Israel apparently well on its way to herd immunity (or so they say) the country has moved to extend its lockdown once again, this time until the end of the month. Like the Biden White House scientists reportedly told Bloomberg, their biggest fear is that the mutations – which these same experts said just months ago showed no evidence of being a problem – will make the virus more deadly, more infectious, or more difficult to contain with the vaccines, as we continue to head into a future full of unknowns.

  But just remember…whatever happens over the next year…it’s still Donald Trump’s fault.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 20:25

• Biden Signs First 17 Executive Actions Starting With Mask Mandate, "Racial Equality" & Rejoining Paris Accord
  Biden Signs First 17 Executive Actions Starting With Mask Mandate, “Racial Equality” & Rejoining Paris Accord

  Update (1810ET): Biden has finished signing his first 15 executive orders and 2 executive agency directives, according to a White House pool reporter with the Washington Post.

  Biden has finished signing the 15 executive orders and two agency directives, per a White House official.

  — Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) January 20, 2021

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

  These include orders for the US to rejoin the WHO, the Paris Accord, a commitment to racia equality, a federal mask “challenge” mandate. Taking only a couple of minutes to speak to reporters in the Oval, Biden listed the three orders he would sign first and answered a question about a letter he was left by his predecessor Donald Trump, calling it “very generous.”

  * * *

  Update (1745ET): Biden officially kicked off his one-day blitz of executive orders and executive actions, as expected, by signing them in front of an eager crowd of media, which has been following him around all day on his first day in office.

  Biden kicked off the flurry of what are expected to be 17 or more individual executive action items by requiring masks on all federal grounds, while asking agencies to extend moratoriums on evictions and on federal student loan payments. He also signed an order overturning Trump’s travel ban order.

  Another order asks Americans to don face coverings for 100 days while reviving a global health unit in the National Security Council that was allowed to go dormant during the Trump administration to oversee America’s pandemic preparedness and response. Biden will also begin to reverse steps taken by former President Trump to withdraw from the WHO by sending Dr. Fauci to speak at the international group’s executive board meeting on Thursday.

  “As you’ve heard [Biden] say, the pandemic will continue to get worse before it gets better,” Jeff Zients, the incoming White House coronavirus czar, told reporters on a call previewing the administration’s actions. “This is clearly a national emergency and we will treat it as such.”

  Biden also signed an EO to stop construction of border wall-work ordered under President Trump, even as Fox News reported that the contract with the construction company was already paid out.

  Here’s a video from Sky News showing Biden as he starts the flurry of orders, with signings expected to continue until the first White House press briefing to be held at 1900ET.

  US President Joe Biden has signed three executive orders 👇

  The first requires people to wear face masks in federal buildings, the second dedicates economic support to “underserved communities” and the third sees the US rejoin the Paris Climate Accord.https://t.co/MoBTXLUniG pic.twitter.com/D0yof3MnbY

  — Sky News (@SkyNews) January 20, 2021

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

  Here’s the schedule for the rest of the day after that:

  1900ET: News briefing to be held by new press secretary Jen Psaki
  2030ET:  ‘Celebrate America Primetime Special’ begins on US TV to replace traditional inaugural ball
  2050ET: Joe Biden to speak
  2115ET: Kamala Harris to speak
  2155ET: President and First Lady to appear on Blue Room Balcony on South Lawn to watch fireworks

   

   

   

   

   

   

  With just hours to go before his swearing-in, Joe Biden and his team have already started Wednesday with a blitz of announcements for Executive Orders that will be issued immediately.

  

  Following at least a week’s worth of media leaks teasing all the Biden “Day One” action items (Rejoin the Paris Accords, Keystone Pipeline, Halt the departure from the WTO, But mostly the massive immigration package that could create paths to citizenship for millions of illegal migrants), Biden is moving ahead with no fewer than 17 executive actions targeting Trump’s various policies.

  CNN reports there will be a total of 17 executive actions, at least 15 of those will be executive orders targeting a range of issues, while Biden pushes his immigration package and a raft of immigration legislation. Of these 17 actions, 9 will involve reversals of Trump-era policies.

  His very first action will an executive order mandating masks be worn by all on federal property.

  

  And after holding a COVID victim’s memorial event on Tuesday evening, timed to maximally undermine Trump, who was at a private farewell ceremony at Joint Base Andrews

  The FT reports that the barrage of orders also includes a “100-day masking challenge” to promote the wearing of face masks across the US, with a guest appearance by Dr. Anthony Fauci, who will (shocker of the century) serve as the media face of the challenge.

  As expected, Biden will also roll back the Trump travel ban on citizens of certain Muslim -majority countries introduced at the very beginning of the Trump Administration, which survived a bitter court battle that infamously occupied plenty of headline space during the first half of 2017. It also sent protesters rushing to airports around the country as some travelers were caught up in the chaos.

  “It was rooted in xenophobia and religious animus and president-elect Biden has been clear that we will not turn our back on our values with discriminatory bans on entry to the United States,” Jake Sullivan, Biden’s pick for national security adviser, said of the Muslim ban recently during a briefing.

  Biden will sign the EOs and other memoranda in the Oval Office on Wednesday afternoon, his incoming press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters.

  Psaki confirmed that, as we have previously reported, Biden plans to accompany his slate of EOs with a comprehensive immigration package that will be sent to Congress straightaway, where it will need to be passed by the (Democrat-controlled) House and Senate.

  We have also noted previously that the day one orders will be part of a “10-day blitz” of orders, upon which we have previously reported, they will target the “four overlapping and compounding crises”: COVID-19, the economy, climate change and racial inequality.

  “In his first 10 days in office, President-elect Biden will take decisive action to address these four crises, prevent other urgent and irreversible harms, and restore America’s place in the world,” Klain wrote at the time.

  Other ’10-day blitz’ items include presidential directives on safely reopening schools and businesses, after Democrats spent much of last year insisting they remain closed.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 20:12

• "We Want Revenge": Antifa Anarchists Activate After Biden Inaugurated
  “We Want Revenge”: Antifa Anarchists Activate After Biden Inaugurated

  Update (2031ET): Someone on Twitter points out that Antifa.com is being redirected to whitehouse.gov. Watch below: 

  @POTUS why does the #antifa website redirect to the @whitehouse webpage. pic.twitter.com/iiwZUFTYdD

  — jonathansilveira (@johnnysilveira) January 21, 2021

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

  * * *

  Update (2021ET): While the mainstream media and the federal government drummed up imminent threats of right-wing violence during the presidential inauguration at state capitol buildings, nothing happened that was significant in reporting. 

  

  Meanwhile, after the Biden inauguration, leftist groups, such as Antifa, are causing chaos in multiple cities. 

  * * *

  Update (2034ET): Antifa is marching in multiple cities. The latest is Seattle, according to AntifaWatch. 

  

  “Some property damage, likely ENDD, they are headed Northbound,” AntifaWatch said, quoting a police scanner.

  “Some property damage, likely ENDD, they are headed Northbound” – police scanner pic.twitter.com/JzTYEsHLg8

  — AntifaWatch (@AntifaWatch2) January 21, 2021

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

  Chaos appears to be unfolding. 

  

  Antifa is burning an American flag. 

  OTG footage of the flag burning from @BGOnTheScene. Hope he’s disguised wellpic.twitter.com/4IgF5QyuIK

  — AntifaWatch (@AntifaWatch2) January 21, 2021

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

  Antifa is on the move in Seattle’s downtown district. 

  JUST IN – Antifa on the move in Seattle a little over 8 hours since Joe Biden was inaugurated.pic.twitter.com/pjrQES9aUs

  — Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) January 21, 2021

  “An Amazon Go store is graffitied and window smashed in downtown Seattle,” tweeted Brendan Gutenschwager. 

  An Amazon Go store is graffitied and window smashed in downtown Seattle #Seattle #SeattleProtests #J20 pic.twitter.com/6upWS3pO8V

  — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) January 21, 2021

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

  Seattle Police confirm multiple businesses were vandalized by Antifa. 

  Police are monitoring a group in #DowntownSeattle. Multiple sites have been vandalized. One arrest made for property damage. pic.twitter.com/oLfIsGt5Af

  — Seattle Police Dept. (@SeattlePD) January 21, 2021

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

  * * *

  Update (2018ET): Portland’s KATU News says Portland Police are arresting protesters at the “J-20 march.”

  

  * * *

  A group of violent demonstrators gathered in Southeast Portland on Wednesday afternoon, hours after President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were sworn in at the US Capitol. The leftist anti-government group appeared displeased with the new administration as they attacked the building of the Democratic Party of Oregon.

  Local news KGW reports the group of at least 100 people, dressed in all black, marched through Portland. 

  KGW’s Mike Benner posted a series of tweets showing the chaos unfolding in Portland as there was “significant damage at the Democratic Party of Oregon bldg at 9th & Everett.” 

  Significant damage at the Democratic Party of Oregon bldg at 9th & Everett pic.twitter.com/uZGBvhkJcc

  — Mike Benner (@MikeBennerKGW) January 20, 2021

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

  Videos Benners posted shows group members, dressed in all black, are likely radical leftist, Antifa. 

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

  Sound of breaking glass at what appear to be democratic offices at 9th & Everett pic.twitter.com/rgxipVVgjx

  — Mike Benner (@MikeBennerKGW) January 20, 2021

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

  Inauguration Day in Portland. A group of about 100 people dressed in black march thru Southeast Portland pic.twitter.com/cGhVhdTwGW

  — Mike Benner (@MikeBennerKGW) January 20, 2021

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

  Despite President Biden pleading for national unity in his Inaugural Address today, demonstrators in Portland held up signs that read:

  “We are ungovernable” and “A new world from the ashes.” 

  

  Conservative journalist Andy Ngo tweeted “shocking footage of Antifa” smashing the Democratic Party of Oregon building. So much for unity… 

  Portland: Watch shocking footage of #antifa smashing up the Democratic Party of Oregon headquarters. They bring weapons while their comrades use umbrellas to block surveillance video. Video by @Julio_Rosas11. #PortlandRiots pic.twitter.com/KdNNRgIEV0

  — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) January 20, 2021

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

  Another local news station, KATU, said the protest in Portland this afternoon is called the “J20 protest.”

  “We Don’t Want Biden – We Want Revenge!” another banner read. 

  

  Already, there have been reports that some of the demonstrators have attacked police officers. 

  “The group of roughly 100 people started marching north shortly after 3 p.m. and reached the Democratic Party of Oregon’s Portland headquarters shortly before 4 p.m.,” said KATU.

  “Members of this group have been observed damaging the building. Anyone involved in criminal behavior, including vandalism and graffittiing is subject to arrest or citation,” Portland Police Bureau tweeted.

  More demonstrations are planned for this evening, according to police. 

  We are aware of 3 planned events that could impact traffic in surrounding areas. PPB will monitor for any public safety issues and to ensure those involved can freely express their 1st Amendment rights in a peaceful manner. pic.twitter.com/1JaHTt1GBO

  — Portland Police (@PortlandPolice) January 20, 2021

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

  Besides Portland, so-called Antifa mobs were seen burning American flags outside Colorado’s Capitol building. The Sun describes the group as a “militant left-wing-group.” 

  

  Reports keep pouring in as Antifa groups assemble in other cities. Twitter user Jason Whitman said an Antifa march was spotted at the Ohio Capitol building this afternoon. 

  

  With reports of leftist anti-government groups, or possibly Antifa as some claim, are on a path of destruction in multiple cities following the Biden inauguration. There are reports Antifa is planning to attack Trump supporters this week. 

  The militant leftist group seeks to dismantle the federal government; it comes at the president calls for national unity. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 20:05

• MSM Calls For "New Definition Of Free Speech"
  MSM Calls For “New Definition Of Free Speech”

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  Part of the main duty of OffGuardian is to troll through the masses of media output and try and pick up patterns. Sometimes the patterns are subtle, a gentle urging behind the paragraphs. Sometimes they’re more like a sledgehammer to the face.

  This has been face-hammer week. In fact, it’s been a face-hammer year.

  

  From “flatten the curve” to “the new normal” to “the great reset”, it’s not been hard to spot the messaging going on since the start of the “pandemic”. And that distinct lack of disguise has carried over into other topics, too.

  We pointed out, a few days ago, the sudden over-use of the phrase “domestic terrorism” preparing us for what is, almost certainly, going to be a truly horrendous piece of new legislation once Biden is in office.

  Well, the buzz-phrase doing the rounds in the wake of Donald Trump being banned from the internet is “the new definition of free speech”…and variations on that theme.

  Firstly, and papers on both sides of the Atlantic want to be very clear about this, Donald Trump being banned simultaneously from every major social network is not in any way inhibiting his free speech.

  Indeed none of the tens of thousands of people banned from twitter et al. have had their free speech infringed either. Neither have any of the proprietors – or users – of the Parler app which the tech giants bullied out of existence.

  Free Speech is totally intact no matter how many people are banned or deplatformed, the media all agree on that (even the allegedly pro-free speech think tanks).

  They also agree that maybe…it shouldn’t be. Maybe “free speech” is too dangerous in our modern era, and needs a “new definition”.

  That’s what Ian Dunt writing in Politics.co.uk thinks, anyway, arguing it’s time to have a “grown-up debate” about free speech.

  The Financial Times agrees, asking about the “limits of free-speech in the internet era”.

  Thomas Edsall, in the New York Times, wonders aloud if Trump’s “lies” have made free speech a “threat to democracy”.

  The Conversation, a UK-based journal often at the cutting edge of the truly terrifying ideas, has three different articles about redefining or limiting free speech, all published within 4 days of each other.

  There’s Free speech is not guaranteed if it harms others, a drab piece of dishonest apologia which argues Trump wasn’t silenced, because he could make a speech which the media would cover…without also mentioning that the media has, en masse, literally refused to broadcast several of Trump’s speeches in the last couple of months.

  The conclusion could have been written by an algorithm analysing The Guardian’s twitter feed:

  the suggestion Trump has been censored is simply wrong. It misleads the public into believing all “free speech” claims have equal merit. They do not. We must work to ensure harmful speech is regulated in order to ensure broad participation in the public discourse that is essential to our lives — and to our democracy.

  Then there’s Free speech in America: is the US approach fit for purpose in the age of social media?, a virtual carbon copy of the first, which states:

  The attack on the Capitol exposed, in stark terms, the dangers of disinformation in the digital age. It provides an opportunity to reflect on the extent to which certain elements of America’s free speech tradition may no longer be fit for purpose.

  And finally, my personal favourite, Why ‘free speech’ needs a new definition in the age of the internet and Trump tweets in which author Peter Ives warns of the “weaponising of free speech” and concludes:

  Trump’s angry mob was not just incited by his single speech on Jan. 6, but had been fomenting for a long time online. The faith in reason held by Mill and Kant was premised on the printing press; free speech should be re-examined in the context of the internet and social media.

  Ives clearly thinks he’s enlightened and liberal and educated, after all he drops references to Kant AND Mills (that’s right TWO famous philosophers), but he’s really not. He’s just an elitist arguing working class people are too dumb to be allowed to speak, or even hear ideas that might get them all riled-up and distract them from their menial labour.

  To season these stale ideas with a sprinkling of fear-porn, NBC News is reporting that the FBI didn’t report their “concerns” over possible violence at the Capitol, because they were worried about free speech. (See, if the FBI hadn’t been protecting people’s free speech, that riot may not have happened!)

  And on top of all of that, there’s the emotional manipulation angle, where authors pretend to be sad or exasperated or any of the emotions they used to have.

  In the Irish Independent, Emma Kelly says that “free speech” doesn’t include “hate speech” (she’s never exactly clear what part of “go home in peace love” was hate speech though).

  In The Hill, Joe Ferullo is almost in tears that the first amendment has been ruined by the right-wing press continuously “shouting fire in a crowded theatre”, citing the famous Oliver Wendell Holmes quote, which so many use to “qualify” the idea of free speech, without realising it hands over power to destroy it completely.

  Up until you can show me the hard-and-fast legal definitions of “shout”, “fire”, “crowded” and “theatre”, this open-ended qualification is nothing but a blank canvas, free to be interpreted as loosely – or stringently – as any lawmaker or judiciary feels is necessary.

  As an example:

  Twitter is certainly bigger and more populated than a theatre, and spreading anti-vaccination/anti-war/pro-Russia/”Covid denial” news [delete as appropriate] is certainly going to cause more panic than one single building being on fire. Isn’t it?

  It’s this potential abuse of incredibly loose terminologies which will be used to “redefine” free speech.

  “Offensive”, “misinformation”, “hate speech” and others will be repeated. A lot.

  Expressions which have no solid definition under law, and are already being shown to mean nothing to the media talking heads who repeat them ad nauseum.

  If “go home in peace and love”, can become “inciting violence”, absolutely everything can be made to mean absolutely anything.

  The more they “redefine” words, the further we move into an Orwellian world where all meaning is entirely lost.

  And what would our newly defined “free speech” really mean in such a world?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 19:45

• China Mocks "Doomsday Clown" Pompeo After 'Genocide' Designation For Uighur Persecution
  China Mocks “Doomsday Clown” Pompeo After ‘Genocide’ Designation For Uighur Persecution

  On Tuesday, the last day of the Trump administration, then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pulled the trigger on a long debated topic and policy proposal in Washington – namely to officially label Chinese persecution of the country’s Uighur minority as “genocide”.

  Predictably Beijing was quick to voice its outrage. But with the Trump administration now out the door China let some colorful words fly. China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying called Pompeo a “doomsday clown” while charging him with spreading blatant lies.

  I have determined that the People’s Republic of China is committing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, China, targeting Uyghur Muslims and members of other ethnic and religious minority groups.

  — Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 19, 2021

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

  She further said the US genocide designation slapped on China is based on “outright sensational pseudo-propositions and a malicious farce concocted by individual anti-China and anti-Communist forces represented by Pompeo,” as quoted in the Associated Press.

  “In our view, Pompeo’s so-called designation is a piece of wastepaper. This American politician, who is notorious for lying and deceiving, is turning himself into a doomsday clown and joke of the century with his last madness and lies of the century,” Hua added.

  Pompeo’s Tuesday declaration had underscored that future Biden policies are likely to only embolden China. It was significant eleventh-hour declaration against Beijing using the strongest language thus far on the issue.

  

  “If the Chinese Communist Party is allowed to commit genocide and crimes against humanity against its own people, imagine what it will be emboldened to do to the free world, in the not-so-distant future,” Pompeo said in the statement. 

  Meanwhile, any Biden reversals on Trump’s targeted sanctions on Chinese officials especially early in his administration – particularly related to the Hong Kong issue – will make the Democratic administration look “soft”. But this is precisely what such statements as Pompeo’s latest were designed to do.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 19:25

• Humpday Humor: 15 Ways To Cope When You Don't Like The President
  Humpday Humor: 15 Ways To Cope When You Don’t Like The President

  Via Babylon Bee,

  It can be tough to live in a country where you don’t like the president. Luckily, our friends on the left have shown us how to handle this situation with grace and class over the past four years.

  

  Here are 15 easy ways to cope when you don’t like the president:

  1. Put on a neon vest and shriek at the sky.

  2. Accuse him of colluding with a foreign adversary with no evidence while sleeping with a Chinese spy.

  3. Impeach him at least 73 times.

  4. Riot in every major city, set fires, and loot for weeks on end for like 6 months going strong – but whatever you do, DO NOT riot at the Capitol or you’re a traitor.

  5. Make every late-night show joke some variation of  ‘your president bad.’

  6. Have all comedians stop doing comedy and instead spend every waking minute tweeting at the president with some sort of expletive-laden Braveheart speech. Get Stephen King to do it too.

  7. Immediately assume half the country is secretly Nazis.

  8. When dining out, scream at all the other diners that we now live under a dictator between bites.

  9. Take 12 months worth of hormonal birth control at once and scream into your camera.

  10. Get a permanent face mask with ‘stay 6 feet away’ printed on it.

  11. Keep all of your friends and family that agree with you close enough to hear the echo in the room.

  12. Research every actor and musician to make sure they all align perfectly with everything you believe before enjoying any of their art.

  13. Tell everyone that diversity only counts if it’s for your side.

  14. Keep the news on 24 hours a day and never leave the house. Always be on Twitter and your phone. Make sure you know everything the president is doing at all times.

  15.  Weep uncontrollably until 2024.

  Scream it with us.

  Ready?

  1… 2… 3…

  NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 19:06

• Watch Live: Biden Administration Holds First White House Press Briefing
  Watch Live: Biden Administration Holds First White House Press Briefing

  The White House press corps probably hasn’t been this happy since Nov. 7, 2016.

  Hours after Wednesday’s socially-distanced inauguration, which featured a field of flags and a small number of VIPs, ended, President Joe Biden is about to hold his first press briefing in office.

  After Wednesday’s inauguration and a stopover to meet with Congressional leaders for the first time, President-elect Biden received an escort to the White House at 1500ET. After that, Biden signed a flurry of executive orders and implemented other presidential actions, which were first officially announced Wednesday morning.

  Now, incoming Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki will no doubt give the press pool members and opportunity to ask questions about all the great new policies being unilaterally ordered by Joe Biden (in a manner reminiscent of President Trump’s EOs, which Dems once slammed as bypassing Congress), and how much better they are than the policies adopted by Trump and his administration.

  In her first tweet form the @PressSec account, Psaki asked the public to tweet questions at her, promising to answer a few in a video earlier in the week.

  The White House is the People’s House, so I’m asking for YOU to reply with your questions. I’ll answer you in a video this week. Can’t wait to hear from you!

  — Jen Psaki (@PressSec) January 20, 2021

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

  Biden will also swear in “day one presidential appointees” in a virtual ceremony Wednesday evening.

  The public should probably expect briefings from Psaki, Biden, Harris and members of the administration (including, of course, Dr. Fauci) every day for at least the next 10 days as Biden prepares his opening blitz of policies intended to undo President Trump’s legacy.

  Watch the briefing live below. It’s slated to start at 1900ET.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 18:55

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Nord Stream 2 Completion "At Risk" After Fresh Trump Admin Sanctions, Gazprom Admits
  Nord Stream 2 Completion “At Risk” After Fresh Trump Admin Sanctions, Gazprom Admits

  Coming on Trump’s last full day in office, the US has slapped yet more sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 Russia to Germany natural gas pipeline as part of ongoing efforts to prevent its completion, specifically targeting a ship in involved in its final leg of construction.

  The Russian pipe-laying ship “Fortuna” and its owner will be subject to new sanctions according to a declaration by the US Treasury on Tuesday, specifically under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). Additionally the oil tanker Maksim Gorky and two Russian firms, KVT-Rus and Rustanker, were blacklisted.

  

  “The United States is not afraid to hold accountable those who continue to aid and abet this tool of Russian coercion,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said of the new measures in his last statements while on the job in the Trump administration.

  The new measures come as Gazprom has estimated that only 6% of the pipeline remains till completion. This is equal to about 150kim, which Russia has vowed to see through to finish.

  While prior US sanctions have been shrugged off, though sometimes with temporary stoppages, Gazprom and Russian officials are now sounding the alarm over the growing “risk” the project could be suspended altogether if more Washington sanctions are piled on:

  Russian state gas company Gazprom acknowledged there is a risk that its undersea pipeline to Germany could be suspended or cancelled after the United States on Tuesday slapped sanctions on a Russian ship involved in its construction.

  Germany’s Economy Ministry said it had been informed in advance of the new US sanctions against the Russian pipe-laying ship Fortuna and its owner. “We take note of this announcement with regret,” the ministry said.

  The Nord Stream 2 pipeline would increase Europe’s dependence on Russian gas and Russia’s leverage over Central Europe. Today, @StateDept imposed sanctions on KVT-RUS for providing a vessel engaged in pipe-laying & identified the vessel as blocked property.https://t.co/OUYG2KqSK7

  — Morgan Ortagus (@statedeptspox) January 19, 2021

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

  While underscoring the state-owned company plans to finish, a fresh memorandum by Gazprom issued to investors noted that these latest sanctions could make “the implementation of the project impossible or unfeasible and lead to its suspension or cancellation,” according to TASS.

  Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov separately on Tuesday slammed the “crude and illegitimate US pressure” in the form of 11th hour Trump administration sanctons.

  “We closely follow the situation and analyze it as we continue work to finalize the project,” Peskov told reporters.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/20/2021 – 01:00

• Escobar: Baghdad On The Potomac – Welcome To The Blue Zone
  Escobar: Baghdad On The Potomac – Welcome To The Blue Zone

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Saker blog,

  The season opening of the Joe and Kammy Regime Change Show could not be a more appropriate roomful of mirrors reflecting the self-described US “political elite”.

  

  The star of the Joe and Kammy Regime Change Show

  During the 2000s, I came face to face with Baghdad’s Green Zone multiple times.

  I always stayed, and worked, in the hyper-volatile Red Zone – as you may check in my 2007 book Red Zone Blues.

  We knew then that blowback would be inevitable.

  But still, we could never have imagined such a graphic simulacrum: the Green Zone fully replicated in the heart of imperial D.C. – complete with walls, barbed wire, multiple checkpoints, heavily armed guards.

  That is even more significant because it ends a full “new world order” geopolitical cycle: the empire started bombing – and cluster bombing – Iraq 30 years ago. Desert Storm was launched in January 17, 1991.

  The Blue Zone is now “protected” by a massive 26,000 plus troop surge – way more than Afghanistan and Iraq combined. The Forever Wars – which you may now relieve through my archives – have come back full circle.

  Just like an ordinary Iraqi was not allowed inside the Green Zone, no ordinary American is allowed inside the Blue Zone.

  Just like the Green Zone, those inside the Blue Zone represent none other than themselves.

  

  The D.C. Blue Zone map

  And just like the Green Zone, those inside the Blue Zone are viewed by half of the population in the Red Zone as an occupying force.

  Only satire is capable of doing poetic justice to what is, de facto, the Potemkin inauguration of a hologram. So welcome to the most popular president in history inaugurated in secret, and fearful of his own, fake, Praetorian Guard. The Global South has seen this grisly show before – in endless reruns. But never as a homegrown Hollywood flick.

  When in doubt, blame China

  Meanwhile, trapped inside the Blue Zone, the White House has been busy compiling an interminable list of accomplishments.

  Multitudes will go berserk relieving the appalling foreign policy disasters, courtesy of American Psycho Mike Pompeo; debunking the official narrative partially or as a whole; and even agreeing with the odd “accomplishment”.

  Yet close attention should be paid to a key item: “Colossal Rebuilding of the Military”.

  This is what is going to play a key role beyond January 20 – as Gen Flynn has been extremely busy showing evidence to the military, at all levels, of how “compromised” is the new Hologram-in-Chief.

  And then there’s the rolling, never-ending November 3 drama. Blame should be duly apportioned. Impeachment, digital witch hunts, rounding up “domestic terrorists”, that is not enough. “Foreign interference” is a must.

  Enter Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Ratcliffe, adamantly stating that “the People’s Republic of China sought to influence the 2020 U.S. federal elections.”

  Ratcliffe was referring to a report sent to Congress on January 7 by the DNI’s Chief of the Solutions Division, or analytic ombudsman Barry Zulauf, side by side with an assessment about “foreign interference”.

  A legitimate question is why it took them so long to finish this report. And it gets wackier: the full intel on the report about foreign interference was scotched by none other than CIA higher-ups.

  The ombudsman states that the groups of analysts working on Russian and Chinese interference used different standards. Russia, of course, was guilty from the start: a categorical imperative. China had the benefit of the doubt.

  Ratcliffe actually states that some analysts refused to blame Beijing for election interference because they were – what else – Never Trumpers.

  So Langley, we’ve got a problem. Pompeus “We Lie, We Cheat, We Steal” Minimus is CIA. He qualifies the Chinese Communist Party as the greatest evil in the history of mankind. How would he not influence his minions to produce, by any means necessary, any instance of Chinese election interference?

  At the same time, for the Dem Deep State faction, Russia is perpetually guilty of…whatever.

  This rift inside the Deep State roomful of mirrors delightfully reverberates the Blue Zone/Red Zone schism.

  Needless to add, in both the ombudsman’s report and Ratcliffe’s letter, there is absolutely no hard evidence of Chinese interference.

  As for Russia, apart from election interference – once again, no evidence – the Dem Deep State Dementia apparatus is still busy trying to blame Moscow also for 1/6. The latest gambit centers on a MAGA chick who may have stolen Pelosi’s laptop from her office at the Capitol to sell it to the SVR, Russian foreign intel.

  The whole Global South – Baghdad’s Green Zone included – just can’t get enough of the greatest show on earth. Do they sell bananas in the Blue Zone?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 23:50

• Fire-Crotch? Gwyneth Paltrow's Vagina Scented Candle "Explodes", Sets UK Home Ablaze
  Fire-Crotch? Gwyneth Paltrow’s Vagina Scented Candle “Explodes”, Sets UK Home Ablaze

  To look back and think we thought things were weird in January 2020, when we first reported that Gwyneth Paltrow was selling a candle called “This Smells Like My Vagina”, is funny. Incidentally, once Covid-19 took hold of the year, Paltrow’s vagina-scented candle wound up turning into one of the more normal stories of the year.

  But not unlike the new year’s Covid mutations, the Paltrow-vagina-candle-story has also mutated for 2021. And neither mutation is good news.

  

  It was reported this weekend that one of Paltrow’s vagina-scented candles “exploded into flames” after a woman in the U.K. lit it in her living room. The woman had won the candle as a prize for a quiz, the New York Post reports. 

  The woman, 50 year old Jody Thompson, said: “The candle exploded and emitted huge flames, with bits flying everywhere. I’ve never seen anything like it. The whole thing was ablaze and it was too hot to touch. There was an inferno in the room.”

  She then said she “threw the flaming candle out the front door”. 

  “It could have burned the place down. It was scary at the time, but funny looking back that Gwyneth’s vagina candle exploded in my living room,” Thompson said. 

  

  As we noted last year, for just $75, perverts around the world can fool themselves into thinking they are living in the nether regions of the famous 47 year old actress by shelling out for and burning the candle, which according to Fox News actually is made up of geranium, citrusy bergamot and cedar smells. 

  The idea for the candle supposedly started as a joke and the product description online reads: “This candle started as a joke between perfumer Douglas Little and GP — the two were working on a fragrance, and she blurted out, ‘Uhhh … this smells like a vagina’ — but evolved into a funny, gorgeous, sexy, and beautifully unexpected scent.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 23:30

• Biden’s DHS Pick To "Study" Whether To Keep Trump’s Border Wall
  Biden’s DHS Pick To “Study” Whether To Keep Trump’s Border Wall

  Submitted by Planet Free Will,

  On the same day Trump extended an emergency declaration at the southern border, Biden’s pick for secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, says that he will “study” whether the border wall constructed under the Trump administration will remain in place.

  “President-elect Biden has committed to stop construction of the border wall. It would be my responsibility to execute on that and I have not looked at the question of what we do with respect to the wall that has already been built,” Mayorkas said Tuesday during his Senate confirmation hearing.

  “I look forward to studying that question, understanding the costs and benefits of doing so, being open and transparent with you and all members of this committee, sharing my thoughts and considerations and working cooperative with you toward a solution,” he said.

  

  The incoming DHS Sec. says that he plans to work on “harnessing innovation and technology” for future border security as he believes a border wall may not be the most effective way to stop people from entering the country.

  President-elect Biden has stated that he would not construct “another foot” of border wall between the U.S. and Mexico when he assumes office.

  “There will not be another foot of wall constructed on my administration, No. 1,” Biden said in August. “I’m going to make sure that we have border protection, but it’s going to be based on making sure that we use high-tech capacity to deal with it. And at the ports of entry — that’s where all the bad stuff is happening,”

  As we highlighted earlier, President Donald Trump on Tuesday extended his declared emergency at the southern border to be in effect until February 2022. The order set in motion funding for the now 453 miles in length southern border wall after congress had folded on devoting money to the project in 2019.

  “The executive branch has taken steps to address the crisis, but further action is needed to address the humanitarian crisis and to control unlawful migration and the flow of narcotics and criminals across the southern border of the United States,” the President said in a statment, adding:

  For these reasons, the national emergency declared on February 15, 2019, and the measures adopted on that date to respond to that emergency, must continue in effect beyond February 15, 2021. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Proclamation 9844 concerning the southern border of the United States.

  If further construction of the border wall ends under Biden, the U.S. southern border would remain largely open between Texas and Mexico.

  

  While both Biden and his incoming DHS Secretary tout a “high-tech” solution to securing the border, it is unclear what type of technology could prevent caravans of migrants, such as the one currently heading north through central American to the U.S., from breaching the largely open border.

  Caravan from Honduras busting through Guatemala Border in route to the USApic.twitter.com/ZSdFqGLzxb

  — Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) January 16, 2021

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

  Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Thomas Homan said Monday that Biden’s immigration policies could cause “a surge at the border that we’ve never seen before.”

  “The criminal gangs have already figured out the transportation routes. The caravans are already loaded up and coming and more is going to come. You’re going to see a surge at the border that we’ve never seen before because of the words of Joe Biden,” Homan told Fox News.

  The poor economic conditions in Honduras is sending a wave of economic-migrants up through Central America in anticipation for the Biden Administration’s welcoming immigration policies which could place a moratorium on deportations and fast track millions of migrants to citizenship.

  Honduran migrant: President-elect Biden is “going to help all of us.” pic.twitter.com/LkrVCsXcSb

  — The Hill (@thehill) January 18, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 23:10

• CIA Director Gina Haspel Announces Resignation A Day Before Biden Enters Office
  CIA Director Gina Haspel Announces Resignation A Day Before Biden Enters Office

  After a 36-year career in the CIA the Trump-appointed director of the agency, Gina Haspel, has stepped down a day before Joe Biden’s inauguration.

  She took up the top post in 2018, replacing Mike Pompeo who moved to Secretary of State, and was the first woman to ever be named director. Her retirement is being reported as “widely expected” given tensions within the administration down to the last minute.

  

  “It has been the greatest honor of my life to lead this remarkable organization,” Haspel said in a message shared by the CIA on Twitter. There’s long been speculation she would be fired amid an increasingly soured relationship with President Trump, however she’s stayed largely in the background and has avoided publicly opposing or embarrassing the president.

  According to Yahoo News, “Haspel also reportedly resisted Trump’s last-minute attempts to install Kash Patel, a former aide to Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, a Trump ally, as CIA deputy director.” It was believed this was a strategy to push her out.

  Axios had recently detailed based on inside sources that Trump had “spent his last year in office ruminating over Haspel” and whether he should replace her based on perceived lack of loyalty.

  Biden has previously announced plans to nominate career diplomat William Burns as his pick for CIA director.

  Before becoming CIA director, Haspel ran a “black site” in Thailand where detainees were tortured. It’s great that her incoming successor, Bill Burns, has never tortured anyone or defended torture. Now it’s urgent to block torture apologist Avril Haines from confirmation as DNI. https://t.co/xuECfsWDaH

  — Stephen Kinzer (@stephenkinzer) January 19, 2021

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

  Most of Haspel’s career was spent abroad as an operations officer in a covert capacity. Her rising to the director in 2018 was the first time much of the American public had ever heard of her.

  She’s come under wide scrutiny for running a “black site” in Thailand during the post-9/11 ‘war on terror’ – where it’s believed she oversaw torture of terror suspects. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 22:50

• Yellen's Opening Salvo Shows No Let Up In Tensions
  Yellen’s Opening Salvo Shows No Let Up In Tensions

  By Ye Xie, macro commentator at Bloomberg

  If there were any expectations for a quick reset of the tense U.S.-China relationship under the incoming Biden administration, Treasury Secretary nominee Janet Yellen dashed those hopes on Tuesday.

  At her confirmation hearing, Yellen said the U.S. is prepared to take on China’s “abusive” trade and economic practices, saying Beijing is undercutting American businesses by dumping products, subsidizing domestic companies and stealing intellectual property. These are harsh words, but they’re hardly surprising. After all, China-bashing has bipartisan support, as shown in a Morgan Stanley survey.

  

  Interestingly, just a day earlier, China’s top financial regulator rebutted accusations that the country is pursuing “state monopoly capitalism” that distorts market relations, as if to preemptively push back against the U.S. criticism. Guo Shuqing, chairman of the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission, pointed out that government subsidies to state-owned enterprises were actually negative. Their tax burden is twice as much as private firms, which like foreign companies have enjoyed preferable taxation and fees. He added that it’s impossible for China’s banks to subsidize state-backed companies amid intensified competition in the credit market.

  The difference in U.S. and Chinese perspectives suggests that it won’t be easy to repair the trade relationship. The tariffs imposed on Chinese products during the Trump administration are likely to stay for a while, not least of all because the Biden administration is likely to prioritize domestic issues, such as Covid stimulus relief, in its early months.

  It’s also clear that technology will be a key area of competition between the two countries. During the hearing, Yellen called China the U.S.’s “most important strategic competitor” and urged America to strengthen its own economy by investing in infrastructure and research and development.

  It’s perhaps not a coincidence that tech firms account for a big chunk of companies that have been put on the U.S. black list in the final days during the Trump era, as shown in this chart compiled by economists at Natixis.

  

  Ironically, the strategic rivalry and tech competition means it may be necessary for investors to get exposure to both the U.S. and Chinese markets as positioning for what Blackrock described as a “bipolar” world. Small wonder that mainland investors are busy buying those sanctioned firms in Hong Kong these days.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 22:30

• "It's Killing Younger People" – New COVID Strain Reportedly Emerging Within Brazilian Amazon
  “It’s Killing Younger People” – New COVID Strain Reportedly Emerging Within Brazilian Amazon

  As warnings about the hyper-infectious COVID strains first isolated in the UK and South Africa ring out across the US, Europe and, well, the rest of the world, too, at this point, authorities in Brazil fear they may have a new strain on their hands that’s more infectious, and deadlier, than anything the world has seen previously.

  According to a report published by Brazilian outlet Universo Online, a surge in cases and deaths, particularly among younger patients, in the hard-hit Amazonian city of Manaus (situated in northwestern Brazil, on the banks of the River Negro) has drawn the attention of health professionals working on the front lines of the pandemic in the hard-hit Latin American powerhouse.

  

  Several officials with direct knowledge of the situation told UOL that a new “variant” – a mutated strain of the virus – may be responsible for harsher symptoms, and quicker onset times.

  But the most alarming shift has been a surge in deaths among younger people, who are dying now in greater numbers than in earlier waves of the outbreak in Manaus, which has long struggled with overburdened health-care resources.

  According to Manaus death records from the past 30 days cited by ULO, four out of ten deaths during that time involved patients under the age of 60 in the state.

  The UOL analyzed the latest data Transparency Portal of the registry offices. There were 710 deaths in the state (since it may still increase), of which 285 were people under 60 years old – or 40.1% of the total. Before that period, this percentage was 36.5%. “Without a doubt many more young people are dying. We are not just talking about a risk group: this is in all age groups, affecting babies, children, teenagers even without comorbidity”, points out the infectologist Silvia Leopoldina, who also works in the state public networks and municipal of Manaus. The doctor says there were changes in the behavior of the disease in the state. “Before, the first symptoms of severity appeared around the tenth day onwards. Now there are patients who, with seven, eight days, are involved in 75% of both lungs.”.

  One researcher told ULO that, while he couldn’t say for certain what it is, “something very different” is happening in Manaus right now.

  “Something very different is happening in Manaus. I don’t know if it is a new strain or if it is something different. But those on the front line are seeing an increase in the severity of the cases,” says infectologist and researcher Noaldo Lucena, who works in popular clinic, home care and public hospitals.

  The new infection and death numbers are so severe, he says, they go beyond the already known greater contagiousness of the new variant of the virus.

  “Clearly, we are facing an invisible being that is much more pathogenic and transmissible. Today whole families arrive with the symptoms at the same time, before it was one at a time.”

  Lucena added that patients in Manaus are also seeing more severe damage to their lungs.

  “This year, I have seen 150 more people here at the clinic and 300 more in the public service. I say that less than 2% of them had mild impairment. The rest were over 50%. Some with 70%, 80%, 90%, requiring immediate hospitalization and even ventilatory support,” he said.

  The lung damage is also becoming harder to detect on initial examination.

  “You auscultate the patient’s lungs and hear nothing. But when you see the tomographic image, you don’t believe how there is such a huge commitment with so little noticeable clinical repercussion.”

  While researchers are still working to confirm exactly what is causing the surge in deaths and severity in Manaus, the biggest fears remain: that new mutations of COVID-19 might be able to pierce through immunity from past infections, and the vaccine.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 22:10

• Media Cheers DC Under Military Occupation
  Media Cheers DC Under Military Occupation

  Authored by Michael Tracey via mtracey.medium.com (emphasis ours),

  Downtown Washington, DC is currently under what essentially amounts to military occupation. Streets are locked down, guarded by Army vehicles and blocked off by huge, garish checkpoints. Vehicular traffic is limited to motorists who can show papers demonstrating that, as one Guardsman told me, they are conducting “legitimate business.” (Apparently this includes Uber drivers and food delivery workers.)

  

  According to official estimates, 25,000 military personnel are now deployed to the area — on top of countless federal, state, and local law enforcement agents. Troops roam around carrying rifles with no ammo loaded. If you can manage to navigate on foot to the perimeter of the National Mall, you encounter an enormous fencing apparatus, complete with barbed wire.

  TV media has clearly settled on a dramatic backdrop image pic.twitter.com/bsaerjMJlZ

  — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 18, 2021

  Question: does anyone with a media job find this situation to be worthy of some further inquiry? Or in other words, worthy of questioning the premise of why such an extravagantly intensive military presence is allegedly necessary? Is it proportionate to the scale of the purported threat? Has the nature of the threat itself — whatever that might be, exactly — been adequately probed to determine whether it is grounded in reality? Already a bunch of purported threats initially trumpeted across the media with the usual five-alarm-five hysteria have dissipated in short order, so there is perhaps some reason for doubt in that regard.

  Instead of applying a modicum of skepticism to this gigantic show of military force, much of which appears to be “security theater” in its purest form, our vaunted media is doing little other than cheering it on. And of course, inflating the threats being cited as justification for it. They can repeat over and over again that what occurred on January 6 at the Capitol was an “attempted coup,” and therefore everything and anything is justified to retaliate, but everyone with a brain by now should be able to recognize that the government was never at a greater than 0% risk of being overthrown that day. Fear-inducing terms like “insurrection,” “domestic terrorism,” “seditious conspiracy,” “armed rebellion,” and others have been marshaled intentionally to inure the public to extreme actions such as the swiftly-executed corporate censorship purge and now, the transformation of the country’s capital into a military fortress.

  It’s doubly odd because the deployment of military personnel to various cities last summer, though generally welcomed by locals and intended to quell what had genuinely been a sudden outburst of destructive chaos, was depicted by media members at the time as the rawest incarnation of violent fascism. The New York Times nearly imploded in a spasm of wild outrage. Suddenly though, this unprecedented militarization of DC is greeted by the same media hive-mind as the triumph of good over evil, light over darkness. It’s almost like the ultimate variable is not principled apprehension about the force of the state, but whose political priorities are being defended by such force — and who is being punished.

  *  *  *

  Note from MT: If you enjoyed this piece, please consider a contribution. If you didn’t, I profusely apologize.

  PayPal: https://paypal.me/mctracey

  Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mtracey

  Bitcoin: https://pastebin.com/QV5SjPr6

  Venmo: @mtracey

  CashApp: https://cash.app/$mctracey

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 21:50

• China Unveils New Attack Drone For "High-Threat Battlefield Environments" 
  China Unveils New Attack Drone For “High-Threat Battlefield Environments” 

  For the last couple of years, China has been exporting military drones into Europe and the Middle East, rapidly shrinking America’s military-industrial complex’s international drone market share. In the latest development of advanced Chinese military drones soon to hit the international markets is the WJ-700, a high-altitude, long-endurance, and high-speed armed reconnaissance drone, according to the Chinese state-run media Global Times. 

  WJ-700 successfully conducted its maiden flight test last week as the new drone has been “characterized by its large payload and ability to launch large munitions from outside hostile anti-aircraft fire coverage zone,” said Global Times.

  

  Third Academy of the state-owned arms firm China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp told Global Times in a written statement that the drone “integrates high altitude, high speed, long-endurance, and large load capacities, and focuses on the domestic and international market needs in the next five to 10 years.” 

  With a successful test flight and surely more testing ahead, the Academy said the groundwork has been laid out for the drone’s future series production. 

  “The WJ-700 is the only high-altitude, high-speed and long-endurance drone capable of executing both attack and reconnaissance missions in China, and is also a rare type in the world,” the Academy said.

  

  Wei Dongxu, a Beijing-based military expert who spoke with Global Times about the new drone, said the most distinguishing characteristic of the WJ-700 is that it will carry larger missiles outside of enemy anti-aircraft fire coverage zones. 

  The Academy said the drone offers operators the ability to switch between combat and wide-area reconnaissance areas at a moment’s notice in “high-threat battlefield environments.” We believe the Academy is referring to the militarized islands in the South China Sea that China has laid claim to as US warships continue to use “freedom of navigation” to sail through. 

  The unveiling of the WJ-700 is the latest installment of how China is rapidly expanding its defense industry. 

  VIDEO:

  The Chinese combat drone (UCAV) WJ-700 successfully completed its maiden flight, Chinese state media announced. pic.twitter.com/PwXsrvlIip

  — FJ (@Natsecjeff) January 14, 2021

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

  Multiple countries in the Middle East are already using Chinese military drones; the same goes for Europe. 

  American exceptionalism is slowly rapidly dying, China is catching up… and the world wants more inexpensive Chinese military drones. 

  Adding to the conversation about exceptionalism in the West declining, China is now expected to overtake the US as the world’s largest economy in 2028, five years earlier than previously thought, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 21:30

• Greenwald: The New Domestic War On Terror Is Coming
  Greenwald: The New Domestic War On Terror Is Coming

  Authored by Glenn Greenwald via greenwald.substack.com,

  The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting “terrorism” that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This trend shows no sign of receding as we move farther from the January 6 Capitol riot. The opposite is true: it is intensifying.

  ​

  We have witnessed an orgy of censorship from Silicon Valley monopolies with calls for far more aggressive speech policing, a visibly militarized Washington, D.C. featuring a non-ironically named “Green Zone,” vows from the incoming president and his key allies for a new anti-domestic terrorism bill, and frequent accusations of “sedition,” “treason,” and “terrorism” against members of Congress and citizens. This is all driven by a radical expansion of the meaning of “incitement to violence.” It is accompanied by viral-on-social-media pleas that one work with the FBI to turn in one’s fellow citizens (See Something, Say Something!) and demands for a new system of domestic surveillance.

  Underlying all of this are immediate insinuations that anyone questioning any of this must, by virtue of these doubts, harbor sympathy for the Terrorists and their neo-Nazi, white supremacist ideology. Liberals have spent so many years now in a tight alliance with neocons and the CIA that they are making the 2002 version of John Ashcroft look like the President of the (old-school) ACLU.

  

  The more honest proponents of this new domestic War on Terror are explicitly admitting that they want to model it on the first one. A New York Times reporter noted on Monday that a “former intelligence official on PBS NewsHour” said “that the US should think about a ‘9/11 Commission’ for domestic extremism and consider applying some of the lessons from the fight against Al Qaeda here at home.” More amazingly, Gen. Stanley McChrystal — for years head of Joint Special Operations Command in Iraq and the commander of the war in Afghanistan — explicitly compared that war to this new one, speaking to Yahoo News:

  I did see a similar dynamic in the evolution of al-Qaida in Iraq, where a whole generation of angry Arab youth with very poor prospects followed a powerful leader who promised to take them back in time to a better place, and he led them to embrace an ideology that justified their violence. This is now happening in America….I think we’re much further along in this radicalization process, and facing a much deeper problem as a country, than most Americans realize.”

  Anyone who, despite all this, still harbors lingering doubts that the Capitol riot is and will be the neoliberal 9/11, and that a new War on Terror is being implemented in its name, need only watch the two short video clips below, which will clear their doubts for good. It is like being catapulted by an unholy time machine back to Paul Wolfowitz’s 2002 messaging lab.

  The first video, flagged by Tom Elliott, is from Monday morning’s Morning Joe program on MSNBC (the show that arguably did more to help Donald Trump become the GOP nominee than any other). It features Jeremy Bash — one of the seemingly countless employees of TV news networks who previously worked in Obama’s CIA and Pentagon — demanding that, in response to the Capitol riot, “we reset our entire intelligence approach,” including “look[ing] at greater surveillance of them,” adding: “the FBI is going to have to run confidential sources.” See if you detect any differences between what CIA operatives and neocons were saying in 2002 when demanding the Patriot Act and greater FBI and NSA surveillance and what this CIA-official-turned-NBC-News-analyst is saying here:

  The second video features the amazing declaration from former Facebook security official Alex Stamos, talking to the very concerned CNN host Brian Stelter, about the need for social media companies to use the same tactics against U.S. citizens that they used to remove ISIS from the internet — “in collaboration with law enforcement” — and that those tactics should be directly aimed at what he calls extremist “conservative influencers.”

  “Press freedoms are being abused by these actors,” the former Facebook executive proclaimed. Stamos noted how generous he and his comrades have been up until now: “We have given a lot of leeway — both in the traditional media and in social media — to people with a very broad range of views.” But no more. Now is the time to “get us all back in the same consensual reality.”

  In a moment of unintended candor, Stamos noted the real problem: “there are people on YouTube, for example, that have a larger audience than people on daytime CNN” — and it’s time for CNN and other mainstream outlets to seize the monopoly on information dissemination to which they are divinely entitled by taking away the platforms of those whom people actually want to watch and listen to:

  (If still not convinced, and if you can endure it, you can also watch MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski literally screaming that one needed remedy to the Capitol riot is that the Biden administration must “shutdown” Facebook. Shutdown Facebook).

  Calls for a War on Terror sequel — a domestic version complete with surveillance and censorship — are not confined to ratings-deprived cable hosts and ghouls from the security state. The Wall Street Journal reports that “Mr. Biden has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, and he has been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists and increasing funding to combat them.”

  Meanwhile, Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) — not just one of the most dishonest members of Congress but also one of the most militaristic and authoritarian — has had a bill proposed since 2019 to simply amend the existing foreign anti-terrorism bill to allow the U.S. Government to invoke exactly the same powers at home against “domestic terrorists.”

  Why would such new terrorism laws be needed in a country that already imprisons more of its citizens than any other country in the world as the result of a very aggressive set of criminal laws? What acts should be criminalized by new “domestic terrorism” laws that are not already deemed criminal? They never say, almost certainly because — just as was true of the first set of new War on Terror laws — their real aim is to criminalize that which should not be criminalized: speech, association, protests, opposition to the new ruling coalition.

  

  The answer to this question — what needs to be criminalized that is not already a crime? — scarcely seems to matter. Media and political elites have placed as many Americans as they can — and it is a lot — into full-blown fear and panic mode, and when that happens, people are willing to acquiesce to anything claimed necessary to stop that threat, as the first War on Terror, still going strong twenty years later, decisively proved.

  ---

  An entire book could — and probably should — be written on why all of this is so concerning. For the moment, two points are vital to emphasize.

  First, much of the alarmism and fear-mongering is being driven by a deliberate distortion of what it means for speech to “incite violence.” The bastardizing of this phrase was the basis for President Trump’s rushed impeachment last week. It is also what is driving calls for dozens of members of Congress to be expelled and even prosecuted on “sedition” charges for having objected to the Electoral College certification, and is also at the heart of the spate of censorship actions already undertaken and further repressive measures being urged.

  

  This phrase — “inciting violence” — was also what drove many of the worst War on Terror abuses. I spent years reporting on how numerous young American Muslims were prosecuted under new, draconian anti-terrorism laws for uploading anti-U.S.-foreign-policy YouTube videos or giving rousing anti-American speeches deemed to “incite violence” and thus provide “material support” to terrorist groups — the exact theory which Rep. Schiff is seeking to import into the new domestic War on Terror.

  It is vital to ask what it means for speech to constitute “incitement to violence” to the point that it can be banned or criminalized. The expression of any political viewpoint, especially one passionately expressed, has the potential to “incite” someone else to get so riled up that they engage in violence.

  If you rail against the threats to free speech posed by Silicon Valley monopolies, someone hearing you may get so filled with rage that they decide to bomb an Amazon warehouse or a Facebook office. If you write a blistering screed accusing pro-life activists of endangering the lives of women by forcing them back into unsafe back-alley abortions, or if you argue that abortion is murder, you may very well inspire someone to engage in violence against a pro-life group or an abortion clinic. If you start a protest movement to object to the injustice of Wall Street bailouts — whether you call it “Occupy Wall Street” or the Tea Party — you may cause someone to go hunt down Goldman Sachs or Citibank executives who they believe are destroying the economic future of millions of people.

  If you claim that George W. Bush stole the 2000 and/or 2004 elections — as many Democrats, including members of Congress, did — you may inspire civic unrest or violence against Bush and his supporters. The same is true if you claim the 2016 or 2020 elections were fraudulent or illegitimate. If you rage against the racist brutality of the police, people may go burn down buildings in protest — or murder randomly selected police officers whom they have become convinced are agents of a racist genocidal state.

  The Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and hard-core Democratic partisan, James Hodgkinson, who went to a softball field in June, 2017 to murder Republican Congress members — and almost succeeded in fatally shooting Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) — had spent months listening to radical Sanders supporters and participating in Facebook groups with names like “Terminate the Republican Party” and “Trump is a Traitor.”

  Hodgkinson had heard over and over that Republicans were not merely misguided but were “traitors” and grave threats to the Republic. As CNN reported, “his favorite television shows were listed as ‘Real Time with Bill Maher;’ ‘The Rachel Maddow Show;’ ‘Democracy Now!’ and other left-leaning programs.” All of the political rhetoric to which he was exposed — from the pro-Sanders Facebook groups, MSNBC and left-leaning shows — undoubtedly played a major role in triggering his violent assault and decision to murder pro-Trump Republican Congress members.

  

  Despite the potential of all of those views to motivate others to commit violence in their name — potential that has sometimes been realized — none of the people expressing those views, no matter how passionately, can be validly characterized as “inciting violence” either legally or ethically. That is because all of that speech is protected, legitimate speech. None of it advocates violence. None of it urges others to commit violence in its name. The fact that it may “inspire” or “motivate” some mentally unwell person or a genuine fanatic to commit violence does not make the person espousing those views and engaging in that non-violent speech guilty of “inciting violence” in any meaningful sense.

  To illustrate this point, I have often cited the crucial and brilliantly reasoned Supreme Court free speech ruling in Claiborne v. NAACP. In the 1960s and 1970s, the State of Mississippi tried to hold local NAACP leaders liable on the ground that their fiery speeches urging a boycott of white-owned stores “incited” their followers to burn down stores and violently attack patrons who did not honor the protest. The state’s argument was that the NAACP leaders knew that they were metaphorically pouring gasoline on a fire with their inflammatory rhetoric to rile up and angry crowds.

  But the Supreme Court rejected that argument, explaining that free speech will die if people are held responsible not for their own violent acts but for those committed by others who heard them speak and were motivated to commit crimes in the name of that cause (emphasis added):

  Civil liability may not be imposed merely because an individual belonged to a group, some members of which committed acts of violence. . . .

  [A]ny such theory fails for the simple reason that there is no evidence — apart from the speeches themselves — that [the NAACP leader sued by the State] authorized, ratified, or directly threatened acts of violence. . . . . To impose liability without a finding that the NAACP authorized — either actually or apparently — or ratified unlawful conduct would impermissibly burden the rights of political association that are protected by the First Amendment. . . .

  While the State legitimately may impose damages for the consequences of violent conduct, it may not award compensation for the consequences of nonviolent, protected activity. Only those losses proximately caused by unlawful conduct may be recovered.

  The First Amendment similarly restricts the ability of the State to impose liability on an individual solely because of his association with another.

  The Claiborne court relied upon the iconic First Amendment ruling in Brandenburg v. Ohio, which overturned the criminal conviction of a KKK leader who had publicly advocated the possibility of violence against politicians. Even explicitly advocating the need or justifiability of violence for political ends is protected speech, ruled the court. They carved out a very narrow exception: “where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action” — meaning someone is explicitly urging an already assembled mob to specific violence with the expectation that they will do so more or less immediately (such as standing outside someone’s home and telling the gathered mob: it’s time to burn it down).

  It goes without saying that First Amendment jurisprudence on “incitement” governs what a state can do when punishing or restricting speech, not what a Congress can do in impeaching a president or expelling its own members, and certainly not social media companies seeking to ban people from their platforms.

  But that does not make these principles of how to understand “incitement to violence” irrelevant when applied to other contexts. Indeed, the central reasoning of these cases is vital to preserve everywhere: that if speech is classified as “incitement to violence” despite not explicitly advocating violence, it will sweep up any political speech which those wielding this term wish it to encompass. No political speech will be safe from this term when interpreted and applied so broadly and carelessly.

  And that is directly relevant to the second point. Continuing to process Washington debates of this sort primarily through the prism of “Democrat v. Republican” or even “left v. right” is a sure ticket to the destruction of core rights. There are times when powers of repression and censorship are aimed more at the left and times when they are aimed more at the right, but it is neither inherently a left-wing nor a right-wing tactic. It is a ruling class tactic, and it will be deployed against anyone perceived to be a dissident to ruling class interests and orthodoxies no matter where on the ideological spectrum they reside.

  The last several months of politician-and-journalist-demanded Silicon Valley censorship has targeted the right, but prior to that and simultaneously it has often targeted those perceived as on the left. The government has frequently declared right-wing domestic groups “terrorists,” while in the 1960s and 1970s it was left-wing groups devoted to anti-war activism which bore that designation. In 2011, British police designated the London version of Occupy Wall Street a “terrorist” group. In the 1980s, the African National Congress was so designated. “Terrorism” is an amorphous term that was created, and will always be used, to outlaw formidable dissent no matter its source or ideology.

  If you identify as a conservative and continue to believe that your prime enemies are ordinary leftists, or you identify as a leftist and believe your prime enemies are Republican citizens, you will fall perfectly into the trap set for you. Namely, you will ignore your real enemies, the ones who actually wield power at your expense: ruling class elites, who really do not care about “right v. left” and most definitely do not care about “Republican v. Democrat” — as evidenced by the fact that they fund both parties — but instead care only about one thing: stability, or preservation of the prevailing neoliberal order.

  Unlike so many ordinary citizens addicted to trivial partisan warfare, these ruling class elites know who their real enemies are: anyone who steps outside the limits and rules of the game they have crafted and who seeks to disrupt the system that preserves their prerogatives and status. The one who put this best was probably Barack Obama when he was president, when he observed — correctly — that the perceived warfare between establishment Democratic and Republican elites was mostly theater, and on the question of what they actually believe, they’re both “fighting inside the 40 yard line” together:

  A standard Goldman Sachs banker or Silicon Valley executive has far more in common, and is far more comfortable, with Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan than they do with the ordinary American citizen. Except when it means a mildly disruptive presence — like Trump — they barely care whether Democrats or Republicans rule various organs of government, or whether people who call themselves “liberals” or “conservatives” ascend to power. Some left-wing members of Congress, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) have said they oppose a new domestic terrorism law, but Democrats will have no trouble forming a majority by partnering with their neocon GOP allies like Liz Cheney to get it done, as they did earlier this year to stop the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and Germany.

  Neoliberalism and imperialism do not care about the pseudo-fights between the two parties or the cable TV bickering of the day. They do not like the far left or the far right. They do not like extremism of any kind. They do not support Communism and they do not support neo-Nazism or some fascist revolution. They care only about one thing: disempowering and crushing anyone who dissents from and threatens their hegemony. They care about stopping dissidents. All the weapons they build and institutions they assemble — the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the NSA, oligarchical power — exist for that sole and exclusive purpose, to fortify their power by rewarding those who accede to their pieties and crushing those who do not.

  No matter your views on the threat posed by international Islamic radicalism, huge excesses were committed in the name of stopping it — or, more accurately, the fears it generated were exploited to empower and entrench existing financial and political elites. The Authorization to Use Military Force — responsible for twenty-years-and-counting of war — was approved by the House three days after the 9/11 attack with just one dissenting vote. The Patriot Act — which radically expanded government surveillance powers — was enacted a mere six weeks after that attack, based on the promise that it would be temporary and “sunset” in four years. Like the wars spawned by 9/11, it is still in full force, virtually never debated any longer and predictably expanded far beyond how it was originally depicted.

  The first War on Terror ended up being wielded primarily on foreign soil but it has increasingly been imported onto domestic soil against Americans. This New War on Terror — one that is domestic in name from the start and carries the explicit purpose of fighting “extremists” and “domestic terrorists” among American citizens on U.S. soil — presents the whole slew of historically familiar dangers when governments, exploiting media-generated fear and dangers, arm themselves with the power to control information, debate, opinion, activism and protests.

  

  That a new War on Terror is coming is not a question of speculation and it is not in doubt. Those who now wield power are saying it explicitly. The only thing that is in doubt is how much opposition they will encounter from those who value basic civic rights more than the fears of one another being deliberately cultivated within us.

  Subscribe here

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 21:10

• Federal Officials Warn "Mutant" COVID Strain Spreading In US As Cases Decline: Live Updates
  Federal Officials Warn “Mutant” COVID Strain Spreading In US As Cases Decline: Live Updates

  Summary:

  • University of California system to return to in-person classes in the fall
  • Federal officials warn that
  • US COVID deaths top 400K
  • Cases decline across US; NY releases latest data
  • US nears 400K COVID-linked deaths
  • Global cases: 95.7MM
  • UK vaccinates 6% of population
  • Brazil approves US, Chinese vaccines
  • Israel opens vaccinations to people in their
  • UK considering “all possible measures” as deaths spike
  • Germany extends lockdown to Feb. 14
  • California deaths down day over day
  • NY saw second straight daily drop over weekend
  • Swedish PM couldn’t rule out further restrictions

  * * *

  Update (2035ET): As cases decline across all four regions of the US, while Joe Biden holds a public memorial for the 400K people who have now died from COVID over the past year since the start of the pandemic, the head of the University of California system (located in a state with one of the most pro-lockdown stances), has seemingly bucked the trend by announcing the return to in-person education.

  In a statement, the office of the president said the university system intends to conduct 100% of its classes in person in the fall.

  The University of California Office of the President announced that it intends to hold Fall 2021 classes in person rather than online.

  The statement says that the school is making the change systemwide, and is “planning for a return to primarily in-person instruction” beginning in fall 2021.

  UC System President Michael Drake stated that “current forecasts give us hope that in the fall our students can enjoy a more normal on-campus experience.”

  “With robust research advancements and COVID-19 vaccines soon becoming available to students, staff, and faculty, UC is preparing to welcome students back to all its campuses this fall, while remaining vigilant in all critical prevention efforts and continuing to prioritize the health and well-being of the University community,” said the statement.

  The news comes as Dr. Fauci insists that, with Biden in office, it will be possible to blanket the country with immunity from the virus.

  A breakdown of COVID-linked deaths in Illinois shows that roughly 50% of those who succumbed were in long-term care facilities.

  

  On the federal end, even as cases decline in all four regions, the presence of the more contagious mutant strain of the virus is spreading among Americans and could become dominant by March,  according to federal public health officials cited by Joe Bidem, as the endless parade of warnings continues.

  * * *

  Update (1450ET): US COVID deaths have officially passed the 400K mark, the largest official death toll in the world, almost exactly one year after the first cases were confirmed in the US, marking the official start of the pandemic (even though the WHO dawdled on calling it that for a week or two).

  On Tuesday afternoon in New York, Johns Hopkins counted 400,002 deaths in the US, a death toll that’s higher than the number of American deaths in battle of any single war, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, and is higher than World War II, the most deadly war for Americans, by about 108,000 deaths.

  * * *

  Update (1350ET): New York State just reported its latest numbers, and it looks like a trend that started late last week has persisted. Instead of the post-Christmas explosion of cases promised by Dr. Fauci, cases are falling across all regions of the US.

  

  Here are the latest numbers out of NY.

  Today’s update on the numbers:

  Total COVID hospitalizations are at 9,236.

  Of the 177,269 tests reported yesterday, 12,512 were positive (7.06% of total).

  Sadly, there were 167 fatalities. pic.twitter.com/Ets0DlDHTx

  — Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) January 19, 2021

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

  Also, Moderna shares took a hit earlier Tuesday after the company revealed it didn’t know how many jabs had been given from a batch of vaccines causing a higher than normal number of adverse reactions.

  As we noted earlier, Dr. Fauci is again making the media rounds to proclaim that hitting 100MM Americans vaccinated in his first 100 days is “entirely feasible”, and that it’s also possible to bring about herd immunity in the US by the fall, before the next flu season, even though these scientists don’t know exactly where the herd immunity threshold is.

  * * *

  As the US approaches 400K COVID-related deaths (at least, according to the official numbers) the focus Tuesday morning has shifted back to Europe, where Chancellor Angela Merkel has reached a deal with local leaders to extend Germany’s lockdown until Feb. 14.

  According to the latest numbers from Johns Hopkins, another 3.8K US patients in the US died of causes related to COVID-19, keeping the country on track to reach 400K deaths before Joe Biden’s Wednesday inauguration. Meanwhile, even after Pfizer and Moderna missed their vaccination target for year-end 2020 by a wide margin, Dr. Anthony Fauci team Biden’s promise of delivering 100MM doses of the vaccine in 100 days is “absolutely a doable thing.”

  

  A breakdown of new cases by state shows particularly harsh numbers in California, and parts of the Southeastern US.

  

  As the incoming Biden team continues to wrestle with the US vaccine rollout (as refusals climb to levels unexpected by the experts, at least among health-care workers), Israel continues to lead the world in the race to vaccinate its entire population, with eligibility expanded to those 40 and older, as the tiny Mediterranean county has now vaccinated 27% of its population.

  Meanwhile, the FT is once again hyping up the UK’s vaccination rollout, carefully planned by PM Boris Johnson and the NHS. According to the FT, the UK, which has “pulled ahead” of its western peers, has already vaccinated roughly 6% of its population.

  In stark contrast to this message, UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said Tuesday that the UK is considering “all possible measures” as deaths top 1.2K for the fifth day in a row, something that experts have attributed to the mutant strain, which purportedly makes the virus more infectious.

  Meanwhile, yet another COVID strain “variant” may be emerging in Amazonia, in the Brazilian city of Manaus, which has seen a surge in younger patients dying.

  As far as vaccinations are concerned, the WHO recently selected vaccine “inequality” as the theme for its new annual report, which expanded on remarks from Dr. Tedros, the chief of the WHO, who called the vaccine rollout worldwide a “massive moral failure.”

  This, from an organization that has once again meekly obliged as Beijing once again denied access to investigators looking to figure out how the global viral outbreak began, and what exactly Beijing did wrong. With Beijing pushing vaccines from half a dozen Chinese companies, the question of access for various countries will likely come down to whether they receive the “rich” world Pfizer and Moderna jabs, or the vaccines from China and Russia.

  Underscoring all of this, Brazil has officially approved both the AstraZeneca COVID vaccine and the SinoVac jab as cases and deaths climb, and the total number of shots delivered worldwide nears 40MM, according to Bloomberg.

  Here’s some more COVID news from the US and Europe.

  California reported 432 deaths, fewer than 669 the previous day and below the 14-day rolling average of 490, according to the health department’s website. If the state were a country, its 33,392 total fatalities would rank it 16th, between South Africa and Poland. California added 42,229 new cases yesterday, surpassing the 2.94 million mark. The state’s 14-day positivity rate was 12.5%, little changed from the 14-day average (Source: Bloomberg).

  France reported 16,642 new cases on Sunday, the lowest daily increase in six days and less than the previous seven-day rolling average of infections of 18,148 (Source: Bloomberg).

  Virginia destroys its record for new infections Sunday, rising to a new daily high of 9.9K, state health data show (Source: Bloomberg).

  New York state reported 13.8Knew cases Sunday, the second daily drop after infections climbed to a record of just below 20K on Friday. Hospitalizations, a growing concern, fell slightly to 8.8K, as did the positive test rate, to 5.61% statewide, Governor Andrew Cuomo said in a statement. Another 172 people in the state died (Source: Bloomberg).

  Sweden’s Prime Minister Stefan Lofven says he can’t rule out further restrictions under a temporary new law (Source: Bloomberg).

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 20:52

• The ECB Has Quietly Launched Yield Curve Control… Just Don't Call It Yield Curve Control
  The ECB Has Quietly Launched Yield Curve Control… Just Don’t Call It Yield Curve Control

  When the BOJ – that experiment guinea pig among “developed” central banks which now holds a record 133% of Japan’s GDP on its balance sheet and which simply can’t stop intervening or Japan’s economy will implode in an instant – launched Yield Curve Control in late 2016, most market participants knew that it was just a matter of time before this particular experiment came to every other “developed” central bank. After all, the world’s monetary experimentalists long ago found themselves permanently trapped by pushing yields to record low levels to enable a tsunami of debt by inflating a gigantic asset bubble and then hoping they can let some air out of the bubble occasionally, and let yields rise again, if ever so slowly in hopes of “renormalization.” Alas as the recent events of late 2018 showed, in a world that has over $300 trillion in debt, higher yields – and renormalization – are now impossible, which is why central banks can never stop their micromanagement of capital markets and the economy, and why digital currencies are coming as the current fiat regime is now effectively defunct.

  But first, it means that Japan’s Yield Curve Control will be attempted across the world.

  And while we wait for Jerome Powell to launch YCC in the US, which according to some may happen once the nascent inflationary spike pushes 10Y yields to 1.50% or higher threatening a crash in the bond market – and from there all other markets – it appears that the ECB has already launched a stealthy version of Yield Curve Control of its own, i.e., controlling and manipulating government bond yields which are only permitted to trade within a narrow range of parameters. Just two caveats: it’s “different” from the BOJ version of YCC, and whatever you do, don’t call it yield curve control.

  According to Bloomberg, the ECB “is buying bonds to limit the differences between yields for the strongest and weakest economies in the euro zone, according to officials familiar with the matter, with one person saying the central bank has specific ideas on what spreads are appropriate.”

  In other words, yield curve control. But since the ECB does not want to be associated with the stigma that trails the BOJ which, as everyone knows, will be the first central banks to capitulate, the European incarnation of bond market nationalization is called yield spread control.

  The ECB’s stealthy market manipulation strategy, which has never been disclosed previously in any official capacity, explains for example why the spread between Italian and German debt “has stayed remarkably stable despite the Italian government nearing collapse, after the central bank raised the pace of bond buying.” It also explains why rates volatility – both in Europe and by extension, in the US – has been is at record lows.

  As Bloomberg explains, “the latest insight into its strategy sheds light on how policy makers are navigating euro-area complexities that make publicly targeting bond levels difficult.” It also helps answer a long-running investor question: whether the central bank has specific levels in mind when it tries to cap bond yields. It turns out that the answer is no – instead the ECB is focusing on spreads between different countries.

  “It’s different to the so-called yield curve control deployed by the Bank of Japan and Reserve Bank of Australia, which have publicly announced numerical targets for specific yields. In the case of the BOJ, it aims for zero percent on the 10-year government bond.”

  The reason why the ECB, which could love to have the same luxury as the BOJ of pulling all yields to zero but can’t due to different fiscal regimes and different sovereign risks, can’t pursue an identical YCC is because ECB President Christine Lagarde has to manage the monetary needs of a currency union with 19 nations, each issuing their own debt.

  While that strategy is similar to yield curve control, “they’re calling it something different,” said Christoph Rieger, head of fixed-rate strategy at Commerzbank AG. “My feeling is that this is an important thing for the ECB, they’re looking at it and they’re actually envious of the BOJ. They would love to have something like that.”

  Why of course they would; and they would be even more envious of the USSR which would set all price levels by fiat and capital markets would no longer exist. But that too is coming, just not immediately.

  As for YCC, the BOJ was the first central bank to adopt the policy in 2016 as a stimulus tool to boost inflation (actually that’s not true: the Fed was running under a yield curve control regime in the 1940s to keep bond yields during and after World War II). The RBA followed suit, and announced last March it would keep three-year yields at around 0.25%, and in November reduced that to around 0.1%. U.S. Federal Reserve Vice Chair Richard Clarida said late last year it’s part of the toolbox, but the Fed is waiting for yields to blow out first before launching it as it would be one less key tool in the Fed’s “toolkit.”

  The YCC pledge has to be credible though…. or the central bank simply has to monopolize the entire bond market. The BOJ, which is the only price setter left in Japan does the latter. Meanwhile, as Bloomberg correctly notes, investors must believe the central bank will spend as much as needed to defend its policy, and that’s where the ECB runs into problems.

  For starters, it lacks a single bond to target. That’ll change soon when the European Union starts issuing joint debt to finance its 750 billion-euro ($909 billion) recovery fund, but that plan is a temporary one linked to the pandemic –  the ECB could run out of bonds to buy. The European central bank is also forbidden by EU law from directly financing governments. It has kept its bond-buying programs legal by imposing limits on what it can buy and for how long, but yield curve control is implicitly limitless.

  “There are a number of issues in opting for such a strategy, or adding this to the ECB toolbox,” said Katharina Utermoehl, an economist at Allianz SE. “This could bring out the idea that actually the ECB is doing monetary financing.”

  Which, of course, the ECB has been doing for years, but in a world where it is in everyone’s best interest to spread lies and pretend that rules are still followed, nobody pretends to notice.

  And speaking of pretending, even though the ECB has been engaging in spread control, the ECB is now pretending it may actually launch official yield curve control, and Bank of Spain Governor Pablo Hernandez de Cos said this month that it’s an “option worth exploring.”

  Hernandez de Cos suggested targeting a technical measure, the region’s overnight index swap curve. Other economists, such as ABN Amro’s Nick Kounis have proposed using an average euro-zone bond yield weighted by national gross domestic product.

  Both Hernandez de Cos and Executive Board member Isabel Schnabel say the Governing Council has never discussed formal yield curve control. And why would they if the ECB is already doing it, just under a different name.

  Hilariously, Bloomberg then pretends that someone actually cares about the long-term, and notes that “the measure does carry broader risks, such as encouraging reckless fiscal policy by relieving governments of some market constraints.” Uhm, guys, we are now well beyond that part: if you don’t believe us, just check out the price of bitcoin.

  Meanwhile, YCC always comes with a cost, even if it is delayed. As mentioned above, when the Fed and the U.S. Treasury agreed in 1942 to cap borrowing costs to fund the country’s participation in World War II, yields were just barely above 0%. Five years later, inflation has exploded in double digits amid the post-war boom and the central bank was forced to start pulling back. It is this inflationary deluge that assets which central banks don’t (yet) control like bitcoin, are sniffing out.

  Explicit yield goals also make exiting the policy a challenge. Investors are likely to dump bonds, driving up borrowing costs, the moment they perceive the target is about to be dropped. Hence why the Fed spent all of last week talking down the risk of QE tapering.

  Finally, in an amusing twist of semantics, Bloomberg naively concludes that “that may ultimately mean the ECB has an edge with what Lagarde has described as an “holistic” approach to maintaining favorable financing conditions.”

  “It’s not as explicit as the Japanese do it, but broader,” said Florian Hense, European economist at Berenberg. “Once it’s out that you explicitly control the yield curve, this commitment can be very expensive.”

  Well, the cat is now officially out of the bag, and whatever one calls it, the fact that it is only with the ECB’s explicit intervention that European yields haven’t blown out will mean that the moment there is even the tiniest whiff the ECB may be pulling back its intervention that we will have an epic crisis.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 20:52

• Democrats Fear Inauguration Violence… But Certainly Are Experts
  Democrats Fear Inauguration Violence… But Certainly Are Experts

  Via HumanEvents,com,

  In a CNN interview, Rep. Steve Cohen (TN-9) made the egregious accusation that because of its conservative majority, 75 percent of the National Guard might be inclined to attack during Joe Biden’s inauguration. 

  .@RepCohen on his concerns w/ the National Guard securing the Inauguration: “The [National] Guard is 90 some-odd percent male; and only about 20 percent of white males voted for Biden … there are probably not more than 25% of the people there protecting us that voted for Biden” pic.twitter.com/ofQfLuCw8I

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 18, 2021

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

  “You know, I was thinking, the Guard is 90 some-odd percent, I believe, male; and only about 20 percent of white males voted for Biden. You’ve got to figure that in the Guard, which is predominately more conservative, and I see that on my social media and we know it, they’re probably not more than 25 percent of the people that are there protecting us who voted for Biden,” he said. 

  

  “The other 75 percent are in the class that would be, the large class of folks, who might want to do something. And there were military people and police who took oaths to defend the Constitution and to protect and defend who didn’t do it who were in the insurrection, so it does concern me,” he continued. 

  “The suspect group is large.” 

  If Trump and all other conservatives inherently and collectively encourage or incite violence, democrats are guilty by their own standards. 

  The Daily Wire put together a video exposing the countless times democrats and the left-wing Hollywood elite openly inciting violence against the president and conservatives. 

  Here are some examples: 

  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: “I don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be.” 

  Eric Holder: “When they go low, we kick them.” 

  Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ): “Go to the Hill today. Get up and please, get up in the face of some Congresspeople.” 

  Joe Biden: “They asked me if I would like to debate this gentleman. I said ‘No,’ I said ‘If I were in high school I’d take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him.’” 

  Mickey Rourke: “I’ll meet him in a hotel room, any motherf***ing day of the week, and give hima  Louisville slugger. Kiss my motherf***ing a**.” 

  Madonna: “Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.” 

  Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA): “Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up, and if you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they are not welcome. Anymore. Anywhere.” 

  Gov. Andrew Cuomo: “He can’t come back to New York. He can’t. He’s gonna walk down the street in New York, forget bodyguards, he better have an army if he thinks he’s gonna walk down the street in New York.” 

  Kathy Griffin: 

  pic.twitter.com/HG3wwVO8hm

  — Kathy Griffin (@kathygriffin) November 4, 2020

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

  Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA): “If the president does go ahead and fire Robert Mueller, we would have people take to the streets. I believe there would be widespread civil unrest because Americans understand that the rule of law is paramount.” 

  Johnny Depp: “When was the last time an actor assassinated a president? It’s been a while, and maybe it’s time.” 

  Big Sean: “If you put this round my neck, and I might just kill ISIS with the same ice pick that I murdered Donald Trump in the same night with.”

  Nancy Pelosi, again: “Sunday morning. I just came from Mass, but nonetheless I’ll just say this. If you’re in the arena, you’ve got to be ready to take a punch. You got to be ready to throw a punch, for the children.” 

  Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT): “Even in states where Donald Trump won big, that it does you any good running away from Donald Trump. I think you need to go back and punch him in the face. I mean, the truth is is this guy is bad for this country.” 

  Rep. Cynthia Johnson (D-MI): “So this is just a warning to you Trumpers. Be careful. Walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough. And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay.” 

  Of course, those cases are all completely different… because #OrangeManBad.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 20:30

• Sub-Hunting Drone Completes Successful Test Off California Coast
  Sub-Hunting Drone Completes Successful Test Off California Coast

  The US Navy and General Atomics tested a Reaper drone for the first time ever with new submarine-hunting technology, according to Defense News.

  The General Atomics’ MQ-9A Block V Reaper drone dropped ten sonobuoys were used to track an underwater training target that mimicked a submarine. 

  

  The test was conducted in November. The MQ-9A Block V Reaper is part of a research and development project with the Navy’s Naval Air Systems Command.

  The successful completion of the test may lower submarine-hunting surveillance costs and divert more expensive human-crewed airplanes, such as the Boeing P-8 Poseidon, to more critical missions. 

  A General Atomics tear-off sheet shows the MQ-9A Block V Reaper has four pods that can carry up to 40 ‘A’ size or 80 ‘G’ size sonobuoys. During the test, the drone dropped sonobuoys to track an underwater target in real-time. 

  “This demonstration is a first for airborne antisubmarine warfare. The successful completion of this testing paves the way for the future development of more Anti-Submarine Warfare capabilities from our MQ-9s,” said General Atomics Aeronautical Systems President David Alexander in a statement. “We look forward to continuing collaboration with the US Navy as they explore innovative options for distributed maritime operations in the undersea domain.”

  Using drones for anti-submarine warfare could be the cheapest bet for the military to monitor the Pacific Ocean as China continues to expand its underwater capabilities. 

  Suppose the MQ-9A Block V Reaper is deployed in the future. In that case, courtesy of BofA is a map of US military bases and presence in the Pacific Ocean and, specifically, in proximity to China. 

  

  To sum up, the US Navy has likely found a new countermeasure against China’s growing fleet of underwater drones and submarines. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 20:10

• The Empirical Case For A Mask Mandate Lacks Scientific Grounding
  The Empirical Case For A Mask Mandate Lacks Scientific Grounding

  Authored by Phillip Magness via The American Institute for Economic research,

  Last fall, the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics Evaluation (IHME) published a headline-grabbing study with a politically appealing claim: if Americans would simply mask up when they ventured out into public, over 120,000 lives could be saved by the beginning of next year.

  

  As Joe Biden takes office later this week, he is widely expected to use executive orders to enact a 100-day long national mask mandate.

  Biden’s action is directly premised on the claims of the IHME study, which he has repeatedly alluded to in his public commentary. But is the science behind this claim sound?

  As I documented last fall, the IHME’s projections rested upon a simple data error. The IHME model begins from the assumption that only 49% of Americans were currently wearing masks in public. Increase the mask adoption rate to between 85% and 95%, it stands to reason, and you’ll save over a hundred thousand lives by reducing the spread of Covid-19. A national mask mandate, the authors implied, would do the trick.

  The IHME’s projections had a crucial problem however. The IHME took its 49% adoption figure from a months-old outdated survey at the beginning of the pandemic. As of late September when they made their projections, US mask adoption hovered at 80% nationwide. Instead of nearly doubling mask use rates, a national mask mandate would only increase compliance by about 5 to 15 percentage points. The number of lives that the mandate would save, it turned out, had been vastly exaggerated in the published report.

  The IHME’s director took exception to my criticism, though notably he did not dispute any of my math.

  “[Magness] is correct that our estimate of mask-wearing rates has increased” since the study’s publication, explained Christopher J.L. Murray in a letter to the Wall Street Journal.

  New data from the summer and early fall confirmed an increase in public mask adoption rates.

  Yet Murray continued: “[h]e is incorrect to suggest that this weakens the case for public policies that require masks.”

  In the roughly two months since this public exchange, the IHME’s mask model has undergone a curious transformation. Murray and his team quietly updated their figures to reflect the higher and more realistic mask-adoption rates. Furthermore, they extended these corrections retroactively to their model’s projections from the summer months.

  The chart below shows how the IHME mask model has shifted over time. The blue line depicts the actual US mask adoption rate, as tracked by the YouGov survey. It shows that US mask adoption rapidly increased in the spring until hitting about 80% in mid-July. From July until the present, it has held stable at the 80% level (parallel surveys by the CDC, Pew Charitable Trust, Carnegie Mellon University, and the Kaiser Family Foundation confirm these findings).

  The orange line shows the IHME’s mask model and forecast on September 21, which is the version it published in the journal Nature-Medicine. The yellow line shows the IHME’s subsequent upward revisions as of January 2021, which are now finally starting to converge with reality. Their estimates still fall slightly short of what the aforementioned surveys show, but as of January 18th the IHME model assumes that 76% of Americans wear masks in public – just shy of the 80% level.

  

  While the IHME team is to be commended for correcting their model to better reflect reality, these adjustments also mean that comparatively few additional gains remain to be had from bumping the mask-adoption rate upward to 85 or 95%. The most recent of the independent surveys – a study conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation in December – even reports that 89% of Americans always or almost always wear masks in public, suggesting we are already at or near the targeted “universal adoption” threshold of the IHME model.

  The ongoing corrections to the IHME model have severely dampened the promised benefits of a national mask mandate. The figure below shows the IHME’s “lives saved” forecast under universal mask adoption with 95% compliance, as projected for 4 months out from its release date.

  

  Back in September, the IHME model projected over 120,000 lives would be saved by January under a mask mandate. Now it projects a much smaller 31,000 lives saved by the end of April.

  When reading these ever-shrinking projections, keep in mind that US mask adoption patterns have not meaningfully changed since the mid-summer of 2020, before the IHME even released its first “lives saved” estimate. It has stayed constant at roughly 80% throughout this entire time. The only apparent changes are the input data for the IHME model, which they updated in the wake of my critique to better approximate reality. The effect is to reduce the IHME’s “lives saved” projection at the 4-month mark to only one quarter of its headline-grabbing claim from back in the fall.

  These changes do not mean that masks lack effectiveness at the margins. They remain a precautionary hygienic response – particularly in certain indoor venues and around vulnerable people. Rather, the IHME’s model adjustments confirm what several of us have been pointing out since the mask mandate movement began in earnest last year. The main gains from masking have already been reaped. Americans rapidly adopted them last summer and have continued to use them at consistently high rates ever since. Adding a new national mask mandate on top of this practice will bring little if any additional benefit to what voluntary adoption already achieved, though it may foster a false hope in the exaggerated claims of an obsolete and erroneous model.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 19:50

• Pompeo Hits China With 11th Hour 'Genocide' Label For Its Treatment Of Uighur Minority
  Pompeo Hits China With 11th Hour ‘Genocide’ Label For Its Treatment Of Uighur Minority

  In some of his last official remarks as Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo on Tuesday lashed out a final time both at China and the incoming Biden administration. 

  He said China’s communist government is committing ongoing “genocide” targeting its minority-Muslim Uighur population in the Xinjiang region while underscoring that Biden policies are likely to only embolden China. It’s a significant eleventh-hour declaration against Beijing using the strongest language thus far on the issue (namely, the genocide label).

  

  Getty Images

  “If the Chinese Communist Party is allowed to commit genocide and crimes against humanity against its own people, imagine what it will be emboldened to do to the free world, in the not-so-distant future,” Pompeo said in the statement. 

  “While the CCP has always exhibited a profound hostility to all people of faith, we have watched with growing alarm the Party’s increasingly repressive treatment of the Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minority groups,” Pompeo added.

  The issue has been highlighted in multiple reports both by international human rights organizations as well as in press reports. In particular over the past year there’s further been detailed descriptions of ‘re-education’ and forced labor camps in Xinjiang.

  Pompeo went on in his statement, describing Chinese authorities, to say: 

  “Their morally repugnant, wholesale policies, practices, and abuses are designed systematically to discriminate against and surveil ethnic Uyghurs as a unique demographic and ethnic group, restrict their freedom to travel, emigrate, and attend schools, and deny other basic human rights of assembly, speech, and worship.”

  And further: “The governing authorities of the second most economically, militarily, and politically powerful country on earth have made clear that they are engaged in the forced assimilation and eventual erasure of a vulnerable ethnic and religious minority group, even as they simultaneously assert their country as a global leader and attempt to remold the international system in their image,” he said.

  A so-called vocational training center in Xinjiang many are reportedly across the region where Chinese Muslims are sent for alleged ‘re-education’ programs:

  

  Interestingly the Trump administration has waited to level the genocide label till now, a mere day before Biden’s inauguration, as perhaps a final major effort to “box Biden in” when it comes to China. The issue of whether China’s treatment of Uighurs constitutes genocide had been studied and under intensive review by the State Department since at least last month.

  Any Biden reversals in terms of the Trump’s targeted sanctions on Chinese officials – particularly related to the Hong Kong issue – will make the Democratic administration look “soft”. But this is precisely what such statements as Pompeo’s latest are designed to do.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 19:30

• My Pillow CEO Says Bed Bath & Beyond, Kohl's To Stop Selling His Products
  My Pillow CEO Says Bed Bath & Beyond, Kohl’s To Stop Selling His Products

  Authored by Zacharty Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  My Pillow products won’t be carried in Kohl’s or Bed Bath & Beyond any longer, the company’s CEO says.

  

  CEO Mike Lindell said Monday that his company recently was notified of the discontinuance.

  “I just got off the phone with Bed Bath and Beyond. They’re dropping My Pillow. Just got off the phone not five minutes ago. Kohl’s, all these different places,” Lindell told Right Side Broadcasting Network.

  Kohl’s and Bed Bath & Beyond didn’t immediately respond to inquiries.

  Lindell said the actions came after groups like Sleeping Giant push companies to stop doing business with him.

  “It’s not their fault that they’re scared because they don’t realize these are fake people that are on, they’re going ‘we’re going to boycott your store if you don’t drop My Pillow.’”

  “People should go into the stores and say they support My Pillow,” he added.

  

  A general view of the Bed Bath & Beyond sign as photographed in Westbury, N.Y., on March 20, 2020. (Bruce Bennett/Getty Images)

  He also said his company is a good partner and has seen its direct sales increase 30–40 percent since Friday.

  Lindell drew attention last week by visiting the White House to meet with President Donald Trump. While there, notes he was holding were photographed and pictures of the notes were then circulated on social media. The notes suggested Trump declare martial law and move the chief of staff to acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller to acting CIA chief.

  Lindell told The Epoch Times that the notes contained suggestions from a lawyer and he was just the messenger. He said martial law wasn’t part of the five-minute discussion he shared with the president.

  The cancellation of Lindell’s products is the latest in punitive action taken against Trump and his supporters since the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol. The president was banned from social media platforms and cut off by some banks, while some supporters have also been banned by Twitter and been fired by employers.

  Sleeping Giants, a leftist activist group, has ongoing campaigns to pressure companies to drop conservative and right-leaning websites, such as Breitbart News and Fox News. On Twitter, it trumpeted the news that Bed Bath & Beyond and Kohl’s dropped My Pillow, claiming Lindell played a part in motivating the breach of the Capitol by questioning the results of the 2020 election.

  “Honestly, how awesome would it be if we started selling Sleeping Giants pillows?” it added.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 19:10

• US Cuts Off Telephone Line To Russian Consulate In New York Day Before Inauguration
  US Cuts Off Telephone Line To Russian Consulate In New York Day Before Inauguration

  Russian state-run news agency RIA is reporting that the US has switched off to telephone line to Russia’s consulate in New York.

  RIA cited officials with the Russian diplomatic mission, who further said there’s been no connection for more than a day.

  

  However, RIA gave no further details. Speculation abounds given the timing of the apparent phone switch off, coming a mere day before Joe Biden’s inauguration.

  It also comes amid some Democratic leaders as well as the mainstream media actually attempting to tie the Capitol Hill riot of January 6 somehow to Russian intelligence and social media ‘influence ops’.

  In a follow-up to RIA’s initial reporting, Russia’s Sputnik confirmed the following:

  The Russian Consulate-General in New York has been completely cut off city telephone lines by the American authorities since 18 January, the diplomatic mission in the city has stated via its official Twitter account. The consulate added that it is occasionally also encountering issues with Internet connectivity.

  A source at the Russian mission in New York says US authorities are citing technical issues as the reason for the cut-off. According to the source, however, a two-day delay in the resumption of telephone services is “unheard of”. The diplomatic mission in the city has several telephone lines connected and all of them went dead at the same time, the source adds.

  Meanwhile in terms of the strangeness of the timing, there’s this bizarre continuing saga:

  NBC News: The FBI has charged Riley Williams with her role in the Capitol riot.

  The FBI says she told a former partner that she intended to take a laptop / hard drive stolen from Pelosi’s office, ship it to Russia, where a friend would turn it over to the SVR — Russian intel. pic.twitter.com/OFW5LuABr2

  — Tom Winter (@Tom_Winter) January 18, 2021

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

  Sputnik notes further, however, that “This is not the first time the Trump administration takes actions against Russian diplomatic missions in the US. Back in 2017, Washington decided to close the Russian Consulate-General in San Francisco in response to the expulsion of American diplomats from Russia.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 18:50

• China To Sanction US Officials For "Blatant Interference" In Hong Kong & Taiwan
  China To Sanction US Officials For “Blatant Interference” In Hong Kong & Taiwan

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  China announced it plans to sanction US officials as retaliation for measures Washington has taken over Hong Kong and for steps the Trump administration has taken to increase ties with Taiwan.

  Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying said on Monday that the US was “blatantly interfering” in Hong Kong by sanctioning Chinese officials over arrests in the city.

  

  Last Friday, the US imposed sanctions on six Hong Kong and Chinese officials. In December, the US sanctioned members of Beijing’s legislature for their alleged role in crafting Hong Kong’s new national security law.

  Hua said Beijing will hit US officials and lawmakers who are “primarily responsible for the vile actions on Hong Kong” with reciprocal sanctions. “The US must immediately stop interfering in Hong Kong’s affairs and immediately stop using various pretenses to interfere in China’s internal affairs,” she said.

  Hua also said China will take action against US officials responsible for the increased ties between Washington and Taipei. Specific names of US officials that will be subject to punitive measures have not been given.

  The Trump administration has taken several steps to increase diplomatic relations with Taiwan as part of its hardline China policies. In the latest move, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced he was lifting State Department restrictions on official US contacts with Taiwanese officials.

  Hua said Monday that unspecified US officials would also be targeted by Beijing as they had “acted maliciously” on the Taiwan issue.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 18:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• China Imports Of Corn, Wheat Hit Record High Amid Soaring Food Prices
  China Imports Of Corn, Wheat Hit Record High Amid Soaring Food Prices

  On the same day that China published a much stronger than expected (if largely laughable as we first noted and Michael Pettis subsequently confirmed) GDP print, making China the only major economy to grow in the “year of covid”, China customs data showed that grains imports soared to record highs in 2020 after tight domestic corn supplies pushed prices to multi-year peaks, driving demand for cheaper imports.

  China, the world’s top agricultural market, bought a record 11.3 million tonnes of imported corn last year, according to General Administration of Customs data, exceeding the annual quota – which was set at 7.2 million tonnes – for the first time.

  

  China also imported a record 8.38 million tonnes of wheat, just shy of the max quota of 9.64 million tonnes.

  According to Reuters, in 2019 China only used 67% of its annual quota for corn and one-third of its quota for wheat. China has accelerated buying of global grains in the past year due to healthy demand from a recovering pig sector, and a domestic shortfall in corn supplies.

  The table below shows imports of China’s major agriculture products in December, according to data released on Monday. The data did not provide a breakdown on the origins of the imports. Data on soybean imports was released earlier this month.

  

  This is happening as grains prices have exploded by over 60% in the past 6 months…

  

  … prompting a very worried Albert Edwards to warn that a new and potentially much more violent “Arab Spring” revolutionary cascade could be imminent unless food prices stabilize and revert to much lower levels (see “Why Albert Edwards Is Starting To Panic About Soaring Food Prices“.)

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/19/2021 – 01:00

• FBI Probing Allegation That Woman Stole Laptop From Pelosi’s Office To Sell It To Russia
  FBI Probing Allegation That Woman Stole Laptop From Pelosi’s Office To Sell It To Russia

  By Zachary Stieber of Epoch Times

  The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is investigating whether a woman seen in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) office on Jan. 6 stole a computer or hard drive and planned to sell it to Russia. The claim was outlined in an affidavit filed in the case against Riley June Williams, a Pennsylvania woman who authorities said stormed the U.S. Capitol earlier this month.

  

  In the days following the breach, a witness called the FBI’s tip line several times. The witness said he or she was a former romantic partner of Williams and saw Williams in video footage captured on Jan. 6.

  NBC News: The FBI has charged Riley Williams with her role in the Capitol riot.

  The FBI says she told a former partner that she intended to take a laptop / hard drive stolen from Pelosi’s office, ship it to Russia, where a friend would turn it over to the SVR — Russian intel. pic.twitter.com/OFW5LuABr2

  — Tom Winter (@Tom_Winter) January 18, 2021

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

  The caller (W1) also claimed to have spoken to friends of Williams who showed him or her a video of Williams taking a computer or hard drive from Pelosi’s office during the mayhem that day.

  “W1 stated that WILLIAMS intended to send the computer device to a friend in Russia, who then planned to sell the device to SVR, Russia’s foreign intelligence service,” Special Agent Jonathan Lund wrote in the court filing.

  “According to W1, the transfer of the computer device to Russia fell through for unknown reasons and WILLIAMS still has the computer device or destroyed it. This matter remains under investigation.”

  Pelosi’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for Pelosi confirmed last week that a laptop was stolen from her office during the breach of the Capitol. The computer “was only used for presentations,” spokesman Drew Hammill said.

  At least one other laptop was stolen from congressional offices on Jan. 6. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said a computer was taken from his office.

  U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin told reporters in a recent briefing that people “were literally rifling through Pelosi’s office and stealing items, stealing materials, mail, and sometimes even personal mementos.”

  The new affidavit was signed by a judge on Sunday.

  Officials say Williams, 22, apparently fled. According to law enforcement officers in Harrisburg, Williams’s mother said her daughter packed a bag and left home, saying she’d be gone for a couple of weeks. Sometime after Jan. 6, Williams changed her phone number and deleted accounts on social media platforms, including Facebook, Reddit, and Parler.

  Williams was charged with illegally entering the Capitol and violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds. Williams didn’t have an attorney listed as of Monday morning.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 23:45

• China Reports 100+ Cases For Sixth Day As Lockdowns Expanded To 29MM
  China Reports 100+ Cases For Sixth Day As Lockdowns Expanded To 29MM

  As the CCP scrambles to ship tens of thousands of people out of Shinjiang into designated “quarantine centers” across Hebei province, Chinese authorities have confirmed 100+ new cases of COVID-19 for the sixth straight day on Monday as infections continue to rise in Hebei, the northeastern province surrounding Beijing, where an outbreak centered around the city of Shijiazhuang, only 300 kilometers (186 miles) from Beijing, has been festering for weeks.

  

  Rising infection numbers in China are unsurprisingly triggering anxieties and international media coverage as the world prepares for the Lunar New Year holiday, the travel season that helped spread the virus around the world one year ago, when the CCP failed to stop citizens from Wuhan from traveling across the country, the region and the world.

  So far this year, 457 new cases have been confirmed in the region, though Beijing has long been suspected of under-reporting the numbers.

  

  Officials have been ratcheting up travel restrictions and other social distancing rules in cities across the region, with the new controls in the city of Gongzhuling in Jilin province, which has a population of about 1MM people, brings the total number of people under lockdown to more than 29MM.

  In other related news, as more questions arise about the efficacy of some of the Chinese COVID vaccines, Hong Kong’s government-appointed vaccine advisory panel is seeking more data from the Norwegian and German governments on the reported deaths of elderly people after they received the Pfizer-BioNTech as fears about “adverse” health reactions.

  Still, the panel recommended the shot for use in Hong Kong, though they  but would ask the government to stop administering it “as soon as we receive information that tips the balance ratio of risks and benefits”. The panel is also seeking more information on the deaths from Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical which is marketing the vaccine in mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan.

  Circling back to the official tally, NHC Minister Ma Xiaowei said over the weekend that outbreaks in the northeast have come from travellers entering the country or contaminated frozen food imports. China is the only country to claim COVID-19 can be transmitted via cold chain imports, even though the WHO has downplayed the risks.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 23:15

• Turley On 'The No-Show' Option: Trump Could Sit Out The Senate Trial And Still Prevail
  Turley On ‘The No-Show’ Option: Trump Could Sit Out The Senate Trial And Still Prevail

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  There is a better defense: no defense…

  

  In a matter of days, this country will face an unprecedented Senate trial. The Senate not only will try a president for a second time but will do so after he has left office.

  Vice President-elect Kamala Harris assures us the Senate can politically “multitask” to deal with an impeachment, an incoming Biden administration and a pandemic.

  However, the threshold question is whether this is constitutionally one of those tasks — and for soon-to-be citizen Donald Trump, the best defense may be no defense at all.

  In fairness, people on both sides are struggling to deal with this novel impeachment. While I have stated that I do not wish to serve as the president’s counsel, I have spoken to members of Congress and the White House on the historical and constitutional backgrounds for a trial. From a purely strategic perspective, I believe Trump may be wise to skip any trial.

  For a notorious counterpuncher, avoiding a fight might be the most difficult decision of all, particularly because he has obvious defenses.

  First, he was denied due process when the House held an unprecedented “snap impeachment” without a hearing or inquiry even though a trial likely would not occur immediately.

  Even a one-day hearing would have allowed evidence to be discussed as well as a formal request for a response.

  Second, the impeachment article is poorly crafted and poorly conceived, built around assertions that Trump’s Jan. 6 speech to supporters was an “incitement to insurrection.” His speech raised potentially impeachable grounds; I condemned it as he gave it and opposed his challenge of electoral votes from the outset. But as I wrote previously, it would have been far better to censure him for it in a bipartisan, bicameral resolution.

  While impeachment can be based on noncriminal grounds, Trump’s speech alone did not amount to criminal incitement. Absent direct evidence of intent, a criminal charge would likely collapse in an actual trial or on appeal on First Amendment grounds. Trump expressly called for his supporters “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” He told them to go to the Capitol “to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women,” to “fight like hell” to challenge the election, and to remind unsupportive Republicans that their actions would not be forgotten. It was a reckless speech — but, in a court of law, it would constitute protected speech.

  Despite the strength of such defenses, the president must first decide whether he wants to sit for trial at all. He can legitimately argue that a private citizen cannot be impeached and that the Senate cannot remove a person from office who has already left.

  Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution states that the sole purpose of an impeachment trial is whether “the president, vice president and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office.” While the Senate can later add a disqualification from holding federal office again, that is only after removal is decided — because it is a question of the penalty, not the purpose of the proceeding.

  The Constitution refers to a present-tense status of “the president.” That status is key to other provisions bestowing official powers and privileges, which do not linger after leaving office. No one would argue that Trump could continue to exercise those powers once President-elect Biden is sworn in. Yet a Senate trial would insist that, while Trump has no continuing powers, he remains subject to continued penalties tied to the office. Moreover, the stated purpose of the impeachment trial is whether a president “shall be removed.” Thus, the only person constitutionally subject to an impeachment trial would be the sitting president, Joe Biden.

  This issue has been debated since the first impeachment in 1797, when Sen. William Blount of Tennessee faced allegations of conspiring to help Great Britain seize what is now Louisiana. Blount was expelled from the Senate before being impeached, so he insisted he was not subject to trial and refused to appear. The Senate apparently agreed and dismissed the case — just 10 years after the Constitution’s ratification, with most of the Framers still alive and some serving in Congress. (Indeed, Blount was one of its signers.)

  The second case fared little better. In 1876, former Secretary of War William Belknap was tried even though he resigned before being impeached. Almost half of the senators voted that they did not have jurisdiction, and Belknap was later acquitted, in part due to doubts over the trial’s legitimacy.

  The absence of a defendant or defense counsel might not be the only curious element in this trial. It is unclear, for example, if Chief Justice John Roberts would be called upon to preside. After all, the Constitution stipulates that when “the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside” — but the president will be Biden, not Trump.

  The failure to put on a defense is not an admission of guilt. The Senate has a duty to resolve whether there is a valid impeachment trial to be held and then whether the constitutional standard has been satisfied. If the Senate does not dismiss the case in a threshold vote, Trump can treat the proceeding as an extraconstitutional act because he is no longer subject to removal. If the Senate were to convict, he would have standing to challenge any disqualification from future federal offices. He could well prevail, and the Senate would have created a precedent against itself: history’s first judicial reversal of an impeachment verdict.

  Courts have long maintained that impeachments are left to Congress. Yet this is different. This is a question of whether a private citizen can be subjected to a proceeding that is expressly committed to the removal of officeholders. Impeachments go to the status of an officeholder, while indictments go to the status of an individual. If prosecutors believe Trump incited insurrection, they should charge him. However, the Senate must decide if it wants to hold a trial based on a legal fiction: a vote to remove someone who is no longer in office.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 22:45

• Facebook Temporarily Bans Ads For Combat Gear Following Capitol Riots 
  Facebook Temporarily Bans Ads For Combat Gear Following Capitol Riots 

  On Saturday morning, Facebook published a short update on their blog titled “Our Preparations Ahead of Inauguration Day,” explaining how the social media company would temporarily prohibit advertisements from defense firms amid the fallout from the Jan. 6 US Capitol riots.

  Facebook wrote, “we are banning ads that promote weapon accessories and protective gear in the US at least through Jan. 22, out of an abundance of caution.”

  

  “We already prohibit ads for weapons, ammunition, and weapon enhancements like silencers. But we will now also prohibit ads for accessories such as gun safes, vests, and gun holsters in the US,” the social media company continued. 

  The ad ban on gun safes, vests, and gun holsters on the platform comes a little more than a week after the Capitol riots. 

  What’s concerning is the ban could be permanent if Democrats have it their way. 

  Last week, three senators and four attorney generals sent letters to Facebook demanding that the platform permanently ban ads of defense products used in armed combat. 

  The senators, all Democrats (Tammy Duckworth, Richard Blumenthal, and Sherrod Brown), said the social media company must take bold action to “hold itself accountable for how domestic enemies of the United States have used the company’s products and platform to further their own illicit aims.”

  “Whether through negligence or with full knowledge, Facebook is placing profit ahead of our Nation’s democracy,” they said.

  An update on the blog on Friday said the social media company was “implementing a series of additional measures to continue preventing attempts to use our services for violence,” adding that “we are blocking the creation of any new Facebook events happening in close proximity to locations including the White House, the US Capitol building and any of the state capitol buildings through Inauguration Day.”

  Under a Biden presidency, a taste of what’s coming could be a major clamp down on the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Biden has already said he will “defeat” the now-bankrupted NRA. 

  Last week, readers learned that New York could be the first state to ban body armor for civilians if a new bill is passed. If the bill is passed, body armor bans could sweep across blue states. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 22:15

• Tomorrow Q4 Earnings Begin In Earnest: Here's What To Expect… And Why They Don't Matter
  Tomorrow Q4 Earnings Begin In Earnest: Here’s What To Expect… And Why They Don’t Matter

  Earnings season ramps up this week as 43 companies in the S&P 500 will report –  the highlights will be Bank of America, Netflix, Charles Schwab and Goldman Sachs tomorrow, then on Wednesday, releases will come from Procter & Gamble, UnitedHealth Group, ASML Holding, Morgan Stanley and BNY Mellon. Finally on Thursday, we’ll hear from Intel, Union Pacific and IBM.

  

  So what to expect?

  According to BofA, the bank’s one-month Global Earnings Revision Ratio increased in December from 1.30 to 1.35 to reach a two-year high. The recovery in earnings expectations has been supported by continuing accommodative monetary and fiscal policy and the start of global distribution of multiple vaccines. In the past, when the Ratio has been near current levels, the MSCI All Country World Index has averaged 11.3% over the subsequent 12 months. And since the global earnings cycle has a 76% correlation with the Global Wave, BofA says that “the rising Global Wave suggests a sustained earnings recovery could support the next leg of an equity market rally.”

  

  In terms of actual quantitative expectations, Goldman’s David Kostin writes that consensus expects S&P 500 firms to report 4Q year/year EPS growth of -11% as virus restrictions hampered the growth of cyclical sectors. Excluding Energy, S&P 500 EPS is expected to fall by a more modest 8%.

  

  LIke earnings, margins are forecast to contract by 116 bps to 9.5%, falling in 7 of 8 sectors. In contrast, consensus estimates that sales will only fall by 1% (and rise by 2% ex-Energy).

  Beneath the surface of the market, earnings growth is expected to vary widely across sectors. In contrast with the index-level decline, Health Care will post 2% year/year EPS growth and Info Tech earnings will grow by 1%. Overall, analysts expect cyclical sectors will report the largest earnings declines. Consensus expects EPS to contract by 102% for Energy, 40% for Industrials, and 21% for Consumer Discretionary. Materials represents a notable exception; its 6% expected EPS growth for 4Q is the largest of any S&P 500 sector.

  Looking ahead, Goldman notes that risks to 4Q EPS estimates “appear tilted to the upside.” If current consensus forecasts are realized, the year/year growth rate will have decelerated from 3Q, but this to Kostin would be inconsistent with the improving trajectory of economic activity. Putting this in context, since 2003 realized S&P 500 EPS has averaged 4% greater than consensus expectations at the start of reporting season. However, in 2Q and 3Q, the aggregate S&P 500 surpassed consensus expectations by 24% and 17%, respectively.

  

  In both quarters, the realized decline in margins was ultimately less than expected. On the other hand, Goldman warns that the delayed passage of a fiscal stimulus deal may have constrained consumer spending and poses a downside risk to S&P 500 EPS estimates.

  The irony is that like the past few quarters, nothing that is reported will actually matter (which is why stocks have been sloshing around in a sea of liquidity with zero concerns about fundamentals). Indeed, consistent with the previous two quarters, Goldman expects “investors will look through 4Q results and focus on company commentary about the trajectory of recovery in 2021.”

  That said, as investors look to 2021, (ultra loose) policy remains a key driver for corporate profits. Joe Biden laid out his economic plan on Thursday, where he proposed a fiscal stimulus package of $1.9 trillion, designed to support the economy as it emerges from the pandemic recession. Core components of the package include direct stimulus checks of $1,400 per person, further expansion of unemployment benefits through September, $370 billion for additional state and local government aid, and $190 billion for public health funding. Biden indicated that he would seek bipartisan support for the bill (60 votes) rather than pass it via reconciliation (50 votes). In response, Goldman’s political economists increased their fiscal assumptions and now assume Congress will enact $1.1 trillion in additional stimulus, well below what BIden has proposed. But, they expect a second proposal dealing with taxes, infrastructure, and benefit programs to pass around mid-year. That should also be over a trillion dollars.

  In this context, Kostin notes that he recently revised his top-down S&P 500 EPS forecasts “to reflect the policy implications of unified Democratic control in Washington, DC.” Following the Democratic victories in the Georgia run-offs – which as a reminder as recently as two months ago was seen as bearish for markets – Goldman economists turned uber bullish, and now incorporate the likelihood of increased fiscal spending as a result lifting their 2021 real US GDP growth forecast. They also raised their 2021 S&P 500 EPS growth rate by 2 pp to +31% ($178). But at the same time they lowered their 2022 EPS growth rate by 2 pp to 10% ($196) to reflect the positive impact of greater fiscal spending but also the headwind of higher corporate taxes.

  Going back to Goldman’s 2021 EPS estimate, these remain 6% above the consensus bottom-up forecast of $168 because the bank expects upward revisions in the near future. Consensus 2021 EPS estimates for the overall S&P 500 index have risen by less than 1% since November 9 when Pfizer/BioNTechannounced the surprisingly-high efficacy of its vaccine candidate. Additionally, consensus forecasts have historically been too pessimistic coming out of recessions (e.g., in 2010). In particular, Goldman warns that analysts tend to underestimate margin rebounds in recovery periods. Instead the bank sees three sources of potential margin upside: (1) operating leverage, which currently stands at the highest in a decade, (2) moderating costs (e.g., labor, T&E), as SG&A expenses currently account for an elevated share of S&P 500 revenue, and (3) the growing weight of high margin industries in the S&P 500.

  The real story, however, will be at the sector level: here, Goldman expects 8 of the 11 sectors to surpass their 2019 EPS by the end of 2021. As vaccine rollout develops, the bank expects sectors with the highest degree of operating leverage—namely, Consumer Discretionary and Energy—to deliver some of the fastest EPS growth this year.

  

  In addition to operating leverage, last week we noted that Goldman’s Commodities team brought forward their expectations for higher Brent prices, which should support Energy EPS growth. Still, sespite the cyclical rebound, Goldman expects 2021 EPS will remain below 2019 levels in three sectors: Energy, Industrials, and Financials. On the other end, Tech will continue to deliver rapid growth and represent the largest share of S&P 500 EPS given its exposure to long-term secular trends.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 21:45

• Taibbi: How Much Did "The Culture Of Narcissism" Get Right?
  Taibbi: How Much Did “The Culture Of Narcissism” Get Right?

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  It is symptomatic of the underlying tenor of American life that vulgar terms for sexual intercourse also convey the sense of getting the better of someone, working him over, taking him in, imposing your will through guile, deception, or superior force.

  – Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism

  Back in 1979, social critic Christopher Lasch wasn’t buying the idea that Americans in the sex-drugs-and-disco era were actually having fun.

  “This hedonism is a fraud,” he wrote. “The pursuit of pleasure disguises a struggle for power. Americans have not really become more sociable and cooperative… they have merely become more adept at exploiting the conventions of interpersonal relations for their own benefit.”

  Lasch’s reasoning traced to the beginning of American society.

  The Puritans embraced the idea of getting rich, but “saw personal aggrandizement as incidental to social labor” and “instructed men who prospered not to lord it over neighbors.” Puritans gave way to Yankees and their Protestant work ethic, which imagined prosperity as a reward for hard work, but also for “self-discipline, the training and cultivation of God-given talents, above all the cultivation of reason.”

  

  A century later, the ideal of self-improvement gave way to what Lasch called a “cult of competitive industry,” as people like P.T. Barnum began to evangelize a more brutally self-interested version of the Ben Franklin Yankee ideal. The new idea was to strive for worldly success “without Franklin’s concern for the attainment of wisdom.” Instead of pursuing an abstract goal of discipline and self-denial, American society became more openly organized around competing and beating one another to the top.

  In the twentieth century, mass media promoted a new religion of self-care that stressed turning one’s whole self into an engine of such competitive ascent. People gobbled up magazine articles about “the art of conversation,” fashion, and “culture,” as the “management of interpersonal relations came to be seen as the essence of self-advancement.” New stresses on “winning friends and influencing people” now replaced the old ideals of self-discipline and thrift, leading, as Lasch put it, to a stage of history where “the pursuit of wealth lost the few shreds of moral meaning that still clung to it.”

  By the sixties and seventies, America became an intrinsically performative society, a vast population that didn’t particularly distinguish between public and private life, and for whom image was as important as inner reality. Even foreign policy was understood as an effort to manipulate how other nations perceived us. One of the creepier revelations of the Pentagon Papers was that we even waged war in places like Vietnam with an eye out for how our actions would be perceived by “relevant audiences,” e.g. the Communists, the South Vietnamese, America’s Western allies, and the American public.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 21:15

• Goldman: Here Is What Bidencare Will Look Like
  Goldman: Here Is What Bidencare Will Look Like

  Last week, Goldman published its preview of what political life would look like for at least the next two years under a Democratic “blue sweep” of Washington. Today, in a follow up to that widely-read report, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius assesses the macroeconomic implications of Biden’s campaign proposal to modify and expand the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which Goldman’s economists believe has a good chance of enactment through the reconciliation process later this year. Below, we except from the key parts of Goldman’s report providing a preliminary view of the macroeconomic impact of Biden’s expanded healthcare platform, which Goldman calls Bidencare.

  * * *

  The Biden-Harris healthcare platform proposes to expand healthcare coverage and reduce costs, in part by providing more generous health insurance subsidies to consumers and by lowering the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 60. The proposal would boost gross government spending on healthcare by roughly $1.5tn over 10 years (0.6% of GDP).

  The most straightforward effect of the plan would be an increase in healthcare coverage, on the order of 14 million people by the mid-2020s according to the Penn-Wharton model. This expansion would be roughly half as large as the 29.6 million people who gained coverage during the ACA’s implementation from 2010 to 2015, 24 million of whom joined government-sponsored or direct-purchase programs. Accordingly, many of the macroeconomic effects of the ACA during the 2010s would likely recur on a smaller scale in the 2020s.

  To complement Goldman’s review of the academic literature studying the ACA, the bank analyzed the state-level cross section of macro outcomes in the 2010s (the ACA was passed in 2010 and for the most part implemented over 2012-2017).

  The left panel of Exhibit 1 compares states that expanded their Medicaid programs under the ACA in 2014 to those that didn’t. In expansion states on average, the publicly insured population share rose an additional 3% over five years, healthcare employment rose an additional 1.4%, and healthcare consumption rose an additional 1.6% on a nominal basis—and probably quite a bit more in real terms due to lower healthcare inflation in the MSAs of those states.

  

  As with the original ACA, coverage expansion in the 2020s would likely be financed by some combination of Medicare reimbursement rate cuts (lower healthcare prices paid by the government to healthcare providers), tax increases, and efficiency gains.

  In terms of labor supply effects, labor force participation fell almost everywhere during 2012-2017, but it surprisingly fell by less on average in Medicaid expansion states (-0.7pp vs. -1.1pp in non-ACA states over the full period). Similarly, the average workweek fell in most of the country, but by less so in expansion states on average (-0.1% vs. -0.5% over the full period).

  The academic literature on the healthcare sector implications of the ACA generally arrives at the same conclusions using considerably more detail in order to isolate the ACA’s causal effects. As shown in Exhibit 2, these studies generally find that the ACA lowered healthcare prices and costs, increased healthcare consumption, and generally improved quality of care, particularly for lower-income consumers. However, some studies found a reduction of physician time spent with each patient, and the potential consequences of this trend on quality of care warrant further study; meanwhile deductibles soared. Additionally, some studies suggest improvements in health outcomes or labor productivity are concentrated or skewed towards specific subgroups, such as lower-income households or minorities.

  

  Based on the median results of these studies, Goldman’s state cross-sectional results, and an assumption that the 2020s coverage expansion would be roughly half as large as that of the ACA itself (discussed earlier), the bank offers tentative estimates of the implications of a possible ACA expansion on these macro variables in the final row of Exhibit 2. Taken together, Biden’s proposed ACA expansion would ultimately boost healthcare consumption by at least 1%. If such legislation is partially financed by Medicare reimbursement rate cuts — as was the original ACA — it would likely lower PCE healthcare inflation by 0.25-0.5% per year for several years. These inflation effects would be additive to the continued drag from annual Medicare cuts legislated by the original ACA (worth roughly -0.5%) and to the temporary changes in healthcare price levels in 2020-22 related to the coronavirus. The literature also suggests that ACA expansion would likely improve health outcomes as well, most obviously for those gaining coverage.

  In terms of the effect on the medical sector’s financial health, Goldman writes that hospital margins actually rose during ACA implementation, despite the legislated cuts to Medicare prices paid to hospitals and negative price spillovers to private-payer reimbursement rates (e.g. what health insurance companies pay to hospitals). And both in the state cross-section and the academic literature (“Provider Finances” column of Exhibit 2), ACA implementation appeared to be neutral or even positive for the financial health of providers (190bp of margin outperformance among hospital systems in expansion states, population-weighted, based on data from the American Hospital Association).

  The outperformance of hospital margins in expansion states likely in part reflects the fact that Medicare reimbursement cuts affected providers in all states, whereas the benefits of the ACA’s Medicaid expansion (primarily increased volumes and less uncompensated care) were better enjoyed by states that participated in the program. As shown in Exhibit 3, expansion states saw slower growth of uncompensated care (relative margin impact of +0.8pp on average versus 2011), which for example includes uninsured individuals going to the emergency room and not always paying the full bill.

  

  Given the magnitude of the Medicare cuts, it is somewhat surprising that margins increased at all over this period. At a minimum, the absence of margin contraction in expansion states in the 2010s suggests scope for additional increases in healthcare coverage and consumption that are financed in part by lower prices—and that need not overburden the healthcare system itself.

  

  In terms of the impact on the labor market (first two columns, exhibit 4), the literature is more mixed, with some evidence of a boost to employment levels, but ambiguous effects on labor force participation. In the strongest evidence of a negative effect, Duggan, Goda, and Li (2020) analyze a sample of near-elderly individuals, finding that the expanded coverage options in the ACA reduced participation by 1.1% among this group (or 110k individuals exiting the labor force). Using microdata from the Current Population Survey, Goldman also finds that larger increases in insurance coverage were associated with larger participation declines among those close to retirement age (55-65 years old), both in states that expanded Medicaid and in those that had larger increases in coverage, as shown in Exhibit 5.

  

  Given this and the likelihood that Biden’s plan to lower the Medicare eligibility age would amplify this incentive, Goldman believes that implementation would likely reduce labor force participation — at least among the near-elderly — but this labor supply effect would only partially offset the boost to employment levels from other channels in the medium term.

  The GDP effects of an ACA expansion are less clear cut, given so many moving parts and uncertainty around the details of the program. That said, based on the bank’s analysis and literature review, Hatzius says that he believes the GDP effects are likely to be positive over the medium term, unless they are financed by large tax increases on lower- and middle-income consumers. In summary, Goldman believes that the combined GDP boost from higher healthcare consumption, increased healthcare labor demand, and a more productive workforce could more than offset the drag from reduced labor force participation among the near-elderly.

  * * *

  Bottom line: Bidencare will be just the “virtuous wrapper” the doctor ordered so speak, to transfer $1.5 trillion in debt-funded deficit spending into the broader economy, while enabling tens if not hundreds of billions of government inefficiencies (read waste, corruption and embezzlement) along the way, while banks get to pocket their 5-10% advisory fees along the way, making everyone – except future generations of course, which will be saddled with even more insurmountable debt – better off. That last bit, by the way, was from us and not from Goldman for obvious reasons.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 20:45

• Trump Lifts Ban On Travel From EU, UK And Brazil… And Biden Immediately Reinstates It
  Trump Lifts Ban On Travel From EU, UK And Brazil… And Biden Immediately Reinstates It

  The back and forth between the outgoing and incoming administrations is approaching peak humor levels.

  Late on Monday, the Trump admin announced plans to lift airline travel bans that kept most visitors from Europe, the United Kingdom and Brazil away since last spring, when President Trump imposed bans on those countries as part of his administration’s initial response to the coronavirus pandemic.

  Under a presidential proclamation released by the White House on Monday, the change would go into effect Jan. 26, the same day as new requirements announced last week that all people flying to the U.S. from abroad test negative for Covid-19 no more than three days before their flights. Restrictions on travel from China and Iran would remain in place.

  Yet barely had potential visitors to the US cracked open a bottle of champagne, when the incoming Biden administration promptly reversed the reversal, and rejected Trump’s effort to lift bans on most travel into the U.S. Biden’s incoming White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, wrote on Twitter on Monday night that the Biden administration wouldn’t lift the travel restrictions.

  “With the pandemic worsening, and more contagious variants emerging around the world, this is not the time to be lifting restrictions on international travel,” she wrote. “On the advice of our medical team, the Administration does not intend to lift these restrictions on 1/26. In fact, we plan to strengthen public health measures around international travel in order to further mitigate the spread of Covid-19.”

  On the advice of our medical team, the Administration does not intend to lift these restrictions on 1/26. In fact, we plan to strengthen public health measures around international travel in order to further mitigate the spread of COVID-19.

  — Jen Psaki (@jrpsaki) January 19, 2021

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

  According to the WSJ, members of Trump’s coronavirus task force had discussed lifting the restrictions, which were a core element of the administration’s early response to the pandemic, for some time, according to people familiar with the matter, acknowledging they did little to help the U.S. with the virus already circulating widely here. But clearly, the incoming Biden administration disagreed.

  Martin Cetron, who leads the CDC’s Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, said in an interview last week that the travel restrictions created collateral damage to the economy and had proved leaky. “We learned that the opening strategy of banning locations and asking about exposures and doing fever checks just didn’t cut it,” Dr. Cetron said. “We had to pivot.”

  Officials in Europe and the U.K. had also pressed the Trump administration to take steps to allow travel to resume in some form, the WSJ reported citing sources. Finally, the airlines themselves – suffering from severely depressed international travel in recent months – had also advocated lifting the restrictions in conjunction with the new testing regime.

  It’s not just the US that remains out of reach for most: many countries, including much of Europe, remain closed to most U.S. citizens. But lifting of the restrictions could set the stage for reciprocal agreements with foreign governments to allow each others’ residents to cross their borders, according to one U.S. official familiar with the matter. That, however, does not appear to be imminent under the Biden administration.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 20:11

• Major Airstrikes Rock Iran-Backed Iraqi Militias Near Baghdad, Casualties Reported
  Major Airstrikes Rock Iran-Backed Iraqi Militias Near Baghdad, Casualties Reported

  update: Moments ago US Central Command denied that the United States was involved in the reported airstrikes on Iraqi paramilitary positions south of Baghdad.

  New: @CENTCOM isn’t aware of **any** strikes tonight in #Iraq per @Reuters. https://t.co/CbeMDYCDlf

  — Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) January 19, 2021

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

  * * *

  In what could be the start of a last-minute ‘counter Iran’ military operation which many have anticipated during President Trump’s final days in office, a major air assault on Iran-backed paramilitary units southwest of Baghdad is being reported in regional media.

  The airstrikes are also being reported in Iranian state media overnight (local time). The target was reportedly Shia militia positions in Jurf al-Sakhr, and follow last month’s rocket attack on Baghdad’s Green Zone and US Embassy, as well as multiple IED attacks on US coalition forces in various parts of the country.

  

  “Casualties reported after airstrikes hit Iraqi forces’ positions in Jurf al-Sakhr, Babil province,” Iran’s PressTV reports. 

  Militia sources have told regional media the attack was conducted by US-F-16 jets. However, it remains that little information has been verified.

  The area is known for hosting the headquarters for Iran-backed Iraqi paramilitary units.

  Social media accounts linked to Shia militias reported fatalities in “US airstrikes” near Jurf al-Sakhr.
  Iran-affiliated Sabreen News claims that 6 Iraqi soldiers have been killed. #Iraq #Iran

  — Baxtiyar Goran (@BaxtiyarGoran) January 18, 2021

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

  Gulf-based Al-Arabiya reports the following:

  Multiple explosions were heard south of Iraq’s capital overnight Monday in what reports suggest may have been US airstrikes on Iran-backed militias.

  The Pentagon and US Central Command (CENTCOM) have not yet responded to a request for comment.

  

  Though unconfirmed, militia as well as Iranian state sources are saying that at least 6 Iraqi soldiers have been killed.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 19:50

• 13,000 NY Nursing Home Residents And Nearly Half Of Staff Decline COVID-19 Vaccine
  13,000 NY Nursing Home Residents And Nearly Half Of Staff Decline COVID-19 Vaccine

  New York will be reallocating unused COVID-19 vaccines after more than ten thousand nursing home residents and nearly half of staffers declined the jab, according to Gareth Rhodes, a member of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s COVID-19 Response Task Force.

  

  Rhodes said that out of 70,000 nursing home residents, 57,000 have been vaccinated, while 13,000 have declined. Meanwhile, out of 89,000 nursing home staff, 41,000 have declined.

  Overall, 105,000 first-doses of the vaccine have been used so far in nursing homes, while 120,000 doses remain.

  “We’re gonna reallocate those that are used in the long-term facility program to the state program, but we’ll make sure that the residents who want to take it and the staff who want to take it, we will reserve their doses,” said Cuomo, who in July came under fire for ordering nursing homes to accept coronavirus patients from hospitals.

  The reallocation comes more than a week after New York came under scrutiny over discarded vaccines – with officials changing regulations which required that extra doses to be tossed.

  In a Monday letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, Cuomo called on the federal government to beef up vaccine supply, claiming that Azar falsely claimed that doses would be held in reserve, when they were in fact distributed to states.

  I’m demanding @HHSGov Secretary Alex Azar explain his false claim that reserve vaccine doses would be shipped to states—when in fact the fed gov had ALREADY distributed all of those doses and will not be increasing the supply. pic.twitter.com/71uIx2FOq6

  — Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) January 18, 2021

  New York has received approximately 1.2 million doses, of which around 860,000 have been administered. The figure doesn’t include shots allocated to nursing homes, while the CDC claims New York has received 1.8 million doses. 

  Cuomo last week extended the shots to anyone age 65 and over, but has repeatedly insisted the state has nowhere near enough doses to cover everyone who is now eligible.

  The governor also sent a letter Monday to Pfizer chairman and CEO Albert Bourla asking him to let New York purchase COVID-19 vaccines directly from the company. –NY Post

  “My job as governor of New York is to pursue every avenue,” said Cuomo, adding “The federal government increased eligibility dramatically but never increased the supply for the dosages.”

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 19:25

• 'No Evidence Of Threats, No Issues Flagged' As MSM Stokes Fears Of Military Insider Attack At Inauguration
  ‘No Evidence Of Threats, No Issues Flagged’ As MSM Stokes Fears Of Military Insider Attack At Inauguration

  Fears of mayhem at state capitol buildings and the US Capitol complex in Washington, DC, this past weekend were widely overblown by mainstream media. Now there’s more fearmongering from mainstream outlets, this time it’s AP, who reports fears of an insider attack that have prompted the FBI to vet the 25,000 National Guard troops stationed in DC ahead of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration. 

  AP quotes Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, who said military officers are conscious of the potential threat and warned officers to observe troops under their command for any red flags. 

  But, as usual, there’s something missing from AP’s headline. As Jack Posobiec points out, “the way read to establishment media articles is skip the headline and scroll to the middle,” while referring to the AP article titled “FBI vetting Guard troops in DC amid fears of insider attack.” 

  Despite the fearmongering of an imminent “insider attack” by Guardsmen during inauguration day, AP’s clickbait journalism is more or less another classic example of how real journalism is dead, as AP themselves admit, further down the story, past the point at which 99% of America’s short-sighted, closed-minded partisans will read, that:

  So far, however, he and other leaders say they have seen no evidence of any threats, and officials said the vetting hadn’t flagged any issues that they were aware of. 

  The way to read establishment media articles is skip the headline and scroll to the middle pic.twitter.com/DwHTCxRMEK

  — Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 18, 2021

  Commenters on Posobiec’s post were furious with AP’s reporting, calling it, “Clickbait journalism is more destructive than Trump ever could have been.” 

  Another said, “They’ve gotta pump up the time spent on the site so they can get their advertising dollars.”

  Someone else said, “Nothing new. Typical tactics for spreading BS. Getting 67K likes and 29K retweets. While maybe 2,347 actually read the article to find that it’s all a Nothing Burger.” 

  We must remind readers how Bloomberg, NBC, and CNN published headlines late last week detailing how as per a Bloomberg headline read, “Rioters Came to Capture And Assassinate Officials, US Says.” 

  It was later noted that the top federal prosecutor in Washington, DC said there was no “direct evidence” that suggested rioters who stormed the US Capitol had formed “kill capture teams.”

  Again, more evidence of mainstream media’s Alinsky-ite news-cycle of misinformation.

  However, as Southfront reported last week, this narrative of looking inside the military for issues  is nothing new. The administration of US President-elect Joe Biden has not entered power yet, but its allies within the country’s highest government bodies have already launched an advance on the vestiges of symbols that do not fit the new trend of the total dominance of neo-liberal and globalist values.

  The purge of sources of the ‘wrong ideology’ took place not only in social media, where accounts of the acting US President Donald Trump and his supporters were targeted, but also in the US military.

  Commanders of the US Air Force have been ordered to review their unit emblems, morale patches, mottos, nicknames, coins and other forms of unit recognition in order to eliminate ‘potentially offensive images’.

  “Their continued use (of derogatory symbols and language) ostracizes our teammates undermining unit cohesion and impeding our mission readiness and success … Our diversity of experience, culture, demographics and perspectives is a force multiplier and essential to our success in this dynamic global environment … We must ensure all our Airmen and Guardians are valued and respected,” the memo emphasized.

  This move comes directly from the ongoing push to rewrite the US history and remove & cancel all historical figures and symbols that may be described as ‘offensive’ for the globalists, neo-liberals and various minorities that dominate in the US public politics and media. For the US military, the push started with the removal of Confederate imagery on military property and the names of its installations.

  Taking into account the existing trend, it would take little time to fully rebrand the US armed forces, including the Air Force and the Navy, to new the neo-liberal force. In the previous year, the US administrations were providing their policies under the moto of defending democracy. Now, military interventions and other active actions of the US foreign policy will likely be justified by the need to fight ‘oppressors’ and create a minorities-friendly environment.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 19:00

• Peter Schiff: Economic "Rescue" Plan Like Throwing A Drowning Man An Anchor
  Peter Schiff: Economic “Rescue” Plan Like Throwing A Drowning Man An Anchor

  Via SchiffGold.com,

  President-elect Joe Biden unveiled his massive stimulus plan last week touted as the “American Rescue Plan.” In his podcast, Peter Schiff said it was more like throwing a drowning man an anchor.

  

  Before Biden announced his stimulus plan, Jerome Powell spoke and reassured everybody that the Fed will continue with its loose monetary policy. He emphasized that the central bank will hike interest rates “no time soon.” He also pushed back against some of the other Fed presidents, particularly Atlanta Federal Reserve President Raphael Bostic, who hinted the central bank might consider “pulling back” on asset purchases in the near future. Powell said, “Be careful not to exit too early,” adding “by the way, try not to talk about exit if you’re sending that signal because markets are listening.”

  Powell seems to sincerely believe that the Fed can stimulate economic growth and create jobs by printing money. Peter said Powell lecturing about economics is “the blind leading the blind.”

  He knows nothing about economics and he’s talking to people who know nothing about it. But what’s worse  — it’s not just he doesn’t know anything — it’s that he thinks he knows something. And what he thinks he knows is wrong. And that is the real danger. You know, you have all this power in the hands of somebody that has no idea what they’re doing. Power and ignorance is a dangerous combination, especially when you’re the chairman of the Federal Reserve. You have the power to print all this money and you think that if you exercise that power you’re doing good. But you’re actually doing harm.”

  Powell talked about how much the government is helping during the pandemic. Peter said if the government really wants to help, it should get out of the way.

  The government needs to lighten the burden that it places on the economy. … It should be cutting spending. Instead, it’s doing the opposite and it’s adding an inflationary problem to the health problem, so we’re in much worse shape.”

  It’s difficult to overstate the level of spending. The US government set an all-time record high December budget deficit of $143.6 billion last month. In just the first quarter of fiscal 2021, the federal government spent $1.3 trillion. And the spending isn’t about to slow down. In fact, it will likely accelerate.

  Last week, Joe Biden unveiled plans for a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill. It’s called the

  First of all, this is not going to stimulate the economy. This is going to sedate the economy. So, it’s not a stimulus. It is a sedative.”

  In a nutshell, Biden wants to “stimulate” the economy with a bunch of government spending paid for by more Federal Reserve money printing. Here are just a few highlights.

  • Direct payments of $1,400 to most Americans

  • Increasing the federal, per-week unemployment benefit to $400 and extending it through the end of September

  • $350 billion in state and local government aid

  • $170 billion for K-12 schools and institutions of higher education

  • $50 billion toward Covid-19 testing

  • $20 billion toward a national vaccine program in partnership with states, localities and tribes

  Biden said the expanded and extended unemployment benefits would help people make ends meet while they look for a job. Peter said it will just let them put off their job search.

  They don’t have to start looking for jobs because they got a better deal on unemployment than anything they can hope for in the employment market.”

  Biden also included a proposal to increase the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. Peter said that will make the unemployment benefits an even bigger deal.

  The higher minimum wage is going to make it a lot harder for the low-skilled workers to get jobs. Because if they can’t convince an employer to pay them $15 an hour, they’re out of luck. They have no choice.”

  Biden’s plan is effectively to incentivize people not to work by paying them more money to stay at home, and to make it more difficult for them if they actually do want to go back to work by making it harder for people with low skills to get a job because they’re not legally employable given their relatively low productivity.

  So, Biden’s plan to revive employment is going to achieve the opposite result. It’s going to further incentivize people not to work and then make it a lot more difficult for the people who want to work to actually get a job.”

  All of this stimulus spending will be almost entirely financed by the Federal Reserve. There may be some tax hikes on “the rich” down the road, but that won’t come anywhere close to closing the spending gap.

  All this money – the $1.9 trillion – is going to be printed and spent into circulation. And that is the inflation that is driving commodity prices. It’s the anticipation of that inflation.”

  This isn’t a rescue plan. It’s basically the equivalent of throwing a drowning man an anchor.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 18:35

• Greenwald Explains How Biden's Neoliberal Policies To Fuel Rise Of A "Smarter, More Stable Donald Trump"
  Greenwald Explains How Biden’s Neoliberal Policies To Fuel Rise Of A “Smarter, More Stable Donald Trump”

  Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, formerly of The Intercept, gave his broad assessment and predictions of the incoming Joe Biden administration during Chris Hedges’ Sunday show On Contact.

  “I don’t think it’s particularly difficult… to know what to expect from the Biden administration,” Greenwald told Hedges early in the interview, which focused on both the growing immense power of Silicon Valley as well as an expected return to disastrous foreign policy thinking under Obama.

  Biden is “somebody who has repeatedly supported militarism and imperialism” given also he was “one of the crucial leading advocates of the invasion of Iraq,” Greenwald said. At the same time Biden is “a loyal servant of the credit card and banking industry” on the domestic front.

  Greenwald has long been a thorn in the side of Liberals, given his politics are Left yet he’s a foremost fierce critic of the Democratic establishment, unwilling to buy into the blind hyperpartisanism that often defines public discourse in America.

  As an example of his willingness to be radically independent and buck the simplistic discourse, he again went after those among Democrats feigning progressive politics while imposing censorship in the name of anti-Trumpism.

  Greenwald told Hedges in this fresh interview:

  “The most disturbing event yet beyond as we discussed earlier, Facebook and Twitter’s unity in blocking the New York Post reporting [on Hunter Biden], is the fact that Amazon, Apple, and Google, three of the four companies that a Democratic House Subcommittee, just three months ago, declared to be dangerous, monopolist, and illegal anti-trust, anti-competitors in a really comprehensive report that they issued, united to remove from the internet a competitor to Twitter, and Facebook, and Instagram that had become the most popular app downloaded on the Apple Store, which is Parler, on the grounds that Parler played a role in inciting or agitating for the capital breach and the riot that occurred on January 6th, even though it was their own properties like Google’s YouTube and Facebook that played a much, much bigger role.  They simply destroyed a competing platform at the urging of people like Congressman Ro Khanna, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They issued demands for it on Twitter, and within 72-hours, Parler was gone from the internet.“

  And here’s more on what to expect of President-Elect Biden, set to enter the White House January 20, based on the RT interview with Glenn Greenwald…

  

  On Militarism, Imperialism, Corporatism

  Greenwald: “Joe Biden has been at the national political level since 1972.  So we’re talking about essentially 50 years.  He has a very clear record of who he is, somebody who has repeatedly supported militarism and imperialism.  He obviously was one of the crucial leading advocate in the invasion of Iraq as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2002.  He, coming from Delaware, has been a very loyal servant of the credit card and banking industry, architecting the bill that Elizabeth Warren said made her so angry that she entered politics, which was the bill that made it much more difficult for consumers to discharge debt and bankruptcy.  Obviously, he is the architect of the 1994 Crime Bill, which is so ironic in a year when we had months and months of protests, largely from the Left against the police state and against racist police abuses, that the person who is probably more responsible than any other single person for that became the person behind whom they rallied.”  

  “And then you add on to that eight years of the Obama administration of which Biden was a crucial part of that, as you said, which he’s clearly attempting consciously to replicate.  I think people have forgotten what the Obama administration is like.  The Democrats are very good at creating a brand that is radically different than the reality.  But essentially the Democratic Party serves militarism, imperialism, and corporatism. That’s who funds them. That’s what they believe in.  It’s why you see neocons migrating so comfortably back to the Democratic Party, why you see… operatives cheering for Joe Biden, why Wall Street celebrated when he picked Kamala Harris, who of course has her own background as a harsh prosecutor.  I think it’s very easy to see exactly who they are.”

  Biden’s Neoliberal Policies to Fuel Rise Of a “Smarter more stable version of Donald Trump”

  Greenwald: “I think you see the dangers of–that neoliberal mentality, that neoliberal ideology in not just United States but entirely–basically throughout the democratic world.  Here in Brazil where I live, people always ask me how is it possible that a country that elected a center-left Workers Party from 2002 until 2014, so essentially four consecutive national elections, suddenly lurched to this far-right extremism in Jair Bolsonaro, and the answer is it’s because the system failed them, they know the system failed them, and then they rallied behind whoever it was who seem to be the most virile adversary of that political order.  Obviously, the same was true with Brexit in the United Kingdom with the rise of far-right parties in Western Europe, places we never expected to see them.  And it’s not a coincidence that after eight years of Obama and Biden, we got Donald Trump.  And, obviously, if you go back and do exactly the same thing that the O’Biden administration did for eight years, which is what Biden is preparing to do, any rational person has to expect the same outcome.“

  “The same outcome being the middle class continues to be destroyed, companies that have no allegiance to the United States that will take as many jobs as possible and shift them to places where they can pay slave labor will continue to do so, communities will continue to be ravaged with unemployment, crisis with drug addiction, with suicide, with depression, all the things that are dominating small American towns, rural towns, and increasingly even larger ones.  And that anger and dissatisfaction is going to only continue to grow so that when you have a smarter more stable version of Donald Trump tapping into that populace anger, promising them to close the United States, to give them better lives, it’s going to be even more appealing this time around.“

  The two cable personalities arguably more responsible than anyone on TV for Trump becoming the GOP nominee by endlessly promoting him are now demanding that Facebook “be shutdown,” and they apparently want Biden to do it. Just listen: https://t.co/LNoIBsIOI2

  — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 18, 2021

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

  Big Tech Censorship and Russia, Russia, Russia!

  Greenwald: “I mean, one of the big causes of the Left during the 2020 election, it was one that I supported, was working to help Ed Markey, the long-time congressman, now senator from Massachusetts defeat a primary challenge nominally from his Right on the part of Congressman Joe Kennedy III.  He became a hero of the Left.  And right after he won, his primary and general election, there was a hearing convened where they called Silicon Valley leaders, including Mark Zuckerberg to testify before a committee on which Senator Markey sits and he told Mark Zuckerberg, Unlike my Republican colleagues who are complaining about censorship, we don’t believe that the problem is that you’re censoring too much.  We believe the problem is you’re not censoring enough.  And then proceeded to show him a bunch of content on Facebook that Markey thinks is dangerous or extremist speech that he demanded be censored.  Obama delivered a speech a couple months before the election in which he says he believes the internet is the greatest threat to American democracy because of the role it’s playing in disseminating misinformation.”  

  “So the Democratic Party, including its Liberal wing and its Left-wing, are very much on board with idea that we cannot have free speech in this age of, whatever they want to call it, White supremacy, domestic terrorism, right-wing extremism, because it simply too dangerous.  And not only should the free speech be restricted by laws and acted by Congress, which presumably would have to mean amending the First Amendment, but until then they’re on their knees pleading with billionaires, and oligarchs, and monopolists, and Silicon Valley to censor in the way that they believe is politically advantageous.  And this was true, as you said, even before the election.  I honestly think, Chris, that one of the most momentous moments of the last five or six years was when the New York Post started reporting on documents that, to this day, everyone acknowledges are completely authentic.  And the intelligence community invented a lie that it was Russian disinformation, which immediately pressured or gave the pretext to Twitter and Facebook to ban report it.” 

  Banning Content in the Name of Protecting ‘Biden Brand’

  “If you wanted to go on Twitter and post a link to the New York Post reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop, which contain a lot of information about what Joe Biden was doing in Ukraine, what he was doing in China when he was the presidential frontrunner, you couldn’t even post the link.  They had banned it.  Facebook algorithmically announced through a long-time Democratic Party operative networks at Facebook that they were going to suppress the spread of that story.  That was stunning intervention on the part of Silicon Valley in the ability to do journalism, in the election on behalf of a candidate that Silicon Valley overwhelmingly was supporting.  And since the Democrats won, every time the Democrats call on Apple, or Google, or Facebook, or Twitter to censor, those companies comply because they’re in debt together.  There is an alliance between Silicon Valley billionaires, and oligarchs, and monopolist on the one hand and the Democratic party on the other.  And it’s now all about to merge with the power of the state.”

  “I found it really interesting that numerous world leaders, including ones who have famously acrimonious relationship with President Trump stood up and very vehemently denounced Twitter’s decision and Facebook’s decision to ban President Trump from the platform, that includes Chancellor Angela Merkel, who’s a center-right politician with whom Trump has argued and bickered almost his entire presidency.  It includes President Lopez Obrador in Mexico, who’s a leftist president, who very eloquently and vehemently warned that Silicon Valley is becoming essentially a world media leader.  Something greater than nation states, because–and ministers high up in the Macron government in France, obviously who also don’t love Donald Trump, denounced it in similar terms.  Why?  Because they’re extremely concerned that these private tech monopolists who they cannot battle–the EU has been trying to break up Google and break up Facebook for years, and they simply can’t because they’re too powerful, are also coming for their democracies.”

  The Biden-MSM Nexus will try to Destroy Independent Media

  Greenwald: “I think absolutely they are very committed to the destruction of any outlets that permit independent voices of dissent.  Already you could just pick up a New York Times this morning, and there was an article about how people who were using Parler but now can no longer because it was removed from the internet by Amazon, Google, and Apple are migrating to platforms like Telegram and Signal.  And there was a New York Times article, Laying the Groundwork, for saying, Look, Telegram and Signal are now the venues for this right-wing extremism that has become a dangerous.  It’s only a matter of time as Substack grows before these groups of journalists that the–that NBC and the New York Times and the CNN employ whose only function is to demand censorship, start turning their guns on platforms like Substack or Patreon and saying, Look at the extremism that they’re hosting.  Why aren’t they removing this content that’s extremist and radicalizing people, and is so dangerous. 

  “They want to maintain a monopoly over the dissemination of information, and they’re not–and the most shocking part of it is the people who are leading this crusade, this censorship crusade are journalists, are the people who work at the large corporate media outlets. They are the biggest and the most vocal cheerleaders for corporate censorship of anybody because they don’t want any other voices competing with their own.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 18:10

• In Today's America, The Wise Person Willfully Suspends Belief
  In Today’s America, The Wise Person Willfully Suspends Belief

  Authored by Frank Liberato via AmericanThinker.com,

  In 2007, then-Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton deemed it necessary to “willfully suspend disbelief” to accept General David Petraeus’ progress report on the Iraq war.

  In 2021, it seems necessary for the American people to willfully suspend belief in our government institutions, the media, and their corporate overlords. 

  The body politic is putrid and lashing out with the most disgusting displays of immorality, deceit, and coercion. Entertainment, education, social media, and the MSM ‘watchdogs of democracy’ are now the defenders, recruiters, and propagandists for this sick, bloated, and festering bureaucracy. 

  Twenty years ago, I believed most of what came over the nation’s airwaves. Ten years ago, I was becoming quite the skeptic. Today, after years of unrelenting attacks on the President, I don’t believe any of it.

  

  It’s all lies, half-truths, and misinformation, designed to influence elections and steer the collective mentality toward accepting the loss of freedom, the loss of constitutional rights and, eventually, to embrace communist ideas and authoritarian policies. I’m not sure when it all went south, but I think it was probably long before I first became aware that there was a problem.

  Fifty years ago, it seemed outrageous that the government would create laws requiring people to wear seat belts or to purchase auto insurance to be able to drive. Today, the debate is about forcing people to stay in their homes, wear masks, and allowing the government to inject them with “vaccines.” Where is the outrage? Oh, it’s all for “our protection.” Well, OK then. 

  To stay out of jail, I’ll wear the mask where it’s required but I won’t be getting the vaccine and Joe Biden is not my President.

  Anyone who stayed up to watch the election results on November 3rd knows that this election was a fraud. The counting stopped around midnight with the President enjoying seemingly insurmountable leads in all key states. We waited hours for a victory declaration or for the counting to resume. When neither was forthcoming, we called it a night.

  We woke before sunrise to discover that all leads were gone and that Trump was losing in Michigan and Wisconsin. How is this possible? It’s not.

  People ask me where is the evidence of fraud? I watched the fraud happen on the night of the election. I don’t need any more evidence, but it has been pouring in for weeks for those willing to look.

  To this day, the President has not been granted a venue where he can present all the evidence. Is it any wonder that upwards of half-a-million people gathered in the capital to peacefully protest? They don’t need the President to tell them this was a fraud. They watched it happen.

  The violence in the capital was a setup. Just as the Obama administration took extraordinary, and illegal measures to try to cripple or oust the incoming President, so too has the Deep State devised a plan to deface Trump’s legacy while simultaneously reducing all his followers to the status of domestic terrorists. It was brilliantly planned and executed, and altogether evil.

  I would not have believed it possible four years ago, but after seeing the Russian collusion fiasco unravel with its illegal unmasking, spying, and politically motivated prosecutions, all orchestrated by the deep state and the opposition political party, and then to see all the actors that were caught red-handed walk away virtually unscathed, I can easily believe that political operatives with no scruples and nothing much else to do, could come up with this plan without any fear of being held responsible.

  The Capitol scheme is already starting to unravel, with timelines not matching up and evidence of a preplanned attack coming to light. In the coming weeks and months, we should see a great deal more exposed, but the President is already impeached, and he and his followers are being banned from social media.

  It’s very convenient that all the tech giants were ready to pounce. They were just waiting for the go signal from the deep state and now the media will run cover for all of them. If we do learn who was behind it all, I’m sure a never-ending investigation will be put to bed after a few years when everyone has fallen asleep. 

  If not for President Trump’s pardons, General Flynn, Paul Manafort, and Roger Stone would be languishing in prison for the rest of their lives. Their crime was having a relationship with Donald Trump. None of them would have faced any prosecution had they not tried to help the President in some way. 

  Comey, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Strzok, Page, Clinton, Joe Biden, and many others have committed real crimes. Many of them are on tape and documented, but it looks like they will all skate. 

  If we continue to accept the swamp narrative, we’ll never get this ship turned around. I no longer believe anything that comes out of that den of thieves. I’m willfully suspending belief. We all should.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 17:45

• California Halts COVID Vaccinations From Moderna Batch Linked To "Unusually High Number" Of Adverse Reactions
  California Halts COVID Vaccinations From Moderna Batch Linked To “Unusually High Number” Of Adverse Reactions

  As the suspected death toll attributed to COVID-19 vaccines rises around the world, with dozens already reported in the US and Norway, California health officials have asked health-care providers in the state to immediately stop administering a batch of Moderna COVID-19 jabs after an “unusually high number” of adverse reactions were linked to it, according to RT.

  On order of State epidemiologist Dr. Erica S. Pan and the California Department of Public Health, the vaccines should be shelved until a proper investigation can be conducted. The lot in question is Moderna Lot 041L20A.

  Message to #CovidVaccine providers:

  “This week, a higher-than-usual number of adverse events were reported with a specific lot of #Moderna vaccine administered at one community vaccination clinic. Fewer than 10 individuals required medical attention over the span of 24 hours.” pic.twitter.com/RsaIzd1Gap

  — Shawna Khalafi (@ShawnaKhalafiTV) January 18, 2021

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

  More than 330,000 doses from this lot have been distributed to 287 providers across the state.

  The shipments arrived in California between Jan. 5 and 12.

  All of the reactions appear to be tied to a single community clinic that was administering the batch. The clinic reportedly closed for several hours after a string of adverse reactions occurred.

  

  California has confirmed nearly 3MM COVID cases as of Monday morning,

  California COVID-19, By The Numbers:

  🔹 Confirmed cases to date: 2,942,475
  🔹 Note: Numbers may not represent true day-over-day change as reporting of test results can be delayed

  More information at https://t.co/TLLUGx7imH. pic.twitter.com/bYSD41PQRL

  — CA Public Health (@CAPublicHealth) January 18, 2021

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

  Officials on Wednesday announced a major expansion of vaccination eligibility guidelines, allowing all residents 65 and older to more quickly qualify for COVID-19 vaccinations. As far as numbers go, more than 330K doses from the same Moderna vaccine batch have been distributed to 287 providers across the state, but this is the first time that health authorities have received reports detailing adverse reactions associated with the lot.

  While acknowledging that “less data exists on adverse reactions related to the Moderna vaccine,” the state epidemiologist insisted that it’s still rare for vaccines to trigger serious side effects. Moderna, the CDC, and the FDA are reviewing the batch and all relevant medical data.

  The COVID-19 jab has been linked to other cases of serious medical emergencies, not just in the US, but in Europe and elsewhere around the world.

  In December, a physician in Boston said he suffered one of the worst allergic reactions he’s ever experienced after receiving Moderna’s vaccine, describing the episode as potentially life-threatening, while a doctor in Miami actually died due to a reaction from the vaccine.

  Similar cases linked to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine have been referred to the CDC and FDA for review. According to other reports, Hong Kong’s government-appointed vaccine advisory panel is seeking more data from the Norwegian and German governments on the reported deaths of elderly people after they received.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 17:25

• Trump Plans 100 Pardons For Tuesday – Will Assange Be Among Them?
  Trump Plans 100 Pardons For Tuesday – Will Assange Be Among Them?

  President Trump is expected to issue a long list of pardons and commutations on Tuesday, according to several sources who spoke to CNN:

  President Donald Trump is preparing to issue around 100 pardons and commutations on his final full day in office Tuesday, according to three people familiar with the matter, a major batch of clemency actions that includes white collar criminals, high-profile rappers and others but — as of now — is not expected to include Trump himself. The White House held a meeting on Sunday to finalize the list of pardons, two sources said.

  

  The president had issued a number of pardons prior to Christmas, but this final large list is said to have been finalized in a White House meeting on Sunday.

  Some of them may be controversial to say the least – for example Steve Bannon. But currently still dominating the news are those arrested in the wake of the Capitol Hill mayhem of last week.

  Sen. Lindsey Graham addressed this on a Sunday news show, telling Fox “There are a lot of people urging the President to pardon the folks” involved in the rioting. “To seek a pardon of these people would be wrong.”

  But the biggest name said to be under possible consideration is WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange, subject of a major independent and social media campaign to lobby for his full pardon and release from a London jail where extradition proceedings are still ongoing. Will President Trump pardon Assange?

  Pamela Anderson says Donald Trump is ‘debating’ pardoning Julian Assange https://t.co/xrYq44uNM6

  — Sky News (@SkyNews) January 18, 2021

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

  Even if Assange’s name isn’t among the current list of one hundred expected to be pardoned, it’s theoretically possible Trump could do so even on the morning of January 20 just ahead of Biden being formally sworn in as president.

  100 pardons from Trump tomorrow.
  I hope Assange and Snowden get a pardon. They are the most important truth-tellers of our time and deserve to be treated with dignity. Please bring those shameful episodes of US bullying to an end. https://t.co/tYTUctkVUX

  — Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) January 18, 2021

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

  “Still, Trump is expected to leave the White House on January 20 and could issue pardons up until noon on Inauguration Day,” according to CNN.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 17:20

• "It Was A Non-Event" – MSM Forced To Admit Nationwide Pro-Trump Protest Panic Was Overblown
  “It Was A Non-Event” – MSM Forced To Admit Nationwide Pro-Trump Protest Panic Was Overblown

  “It was a non-event today and we are glad it was.”

  That’s how Troy Thompson, spokesman for the Department of General Services – the agency that protects the Pennsylvania Capitol in Harrisburg, described yesterday’s mass national armed protest “domestic terrorism” event that the mainstream media (and various government agencies) has been “warning” ‘good’ Americans about all week.

  As we reported in detail yesterday – avoiding the mainstream media’s jump to a pre-conceived narrative conclusion – armed protesters did indeed appear at multiple state capitol complexes across the country Sunday morning.

  

  This followed a special bulletin from the FBI last week that warned: “armed protests” were being planned at 50 state capitols and the US Capitol in Washington, DC, ahead of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20. This was immediately picked up by the media and amplified dramatically…

  

  However, as Reuters reports, only small gatherings of demonstrators had taken to the streets alongside much larger crowds of law-enforcement officers and media personnel.

  Even worse, they decried violence! Doesn’t sound very “terrorist”-y or “coup”-y or “insurrection”-y:

  “I am not here to be violent and I hope no one shows up to be violent,” said one man standing on the lawn in front of the capitol.

  The man, who refused to give his name, wore a “Make America Great Again” hat and waving a “Don’t tread on me” flag.

  And furthermore, as we detailed previously, while the protesters are being identified across various platforms as members of a so-called “boogaloo” movement, they largely appear to be generic anti-government anarchists – some of whom call themselves “liberty boys,” and others who oppose the conservative Proud Boys. Their sudden emergence surrounding the inauguration is curious, to say the least.

  Even The Guardian was forced to admit:

  “At heavily fortified state capitals across USA on Sunday, law enforcement & media outnumbered protesters, with only a handful of armed men showing up to planned demonstrations.”

   Some local news agencies flipped the narrative, proclaiming that the lack of turnout of “domestic terrorists” was due to the outsize presence of National Guardsmen nationwide.

  We suspect otherwise, as we have already seen numerous walkbacks of hyperbolic headlines and statements from various deep-state-loyal agencies:

  • After FBI Director Christopher Wray told Vice President Mike Pence in a briefing on Thursday that the bureau was seeing an “extensive amount of concerning online chatter” of potential threats before and during the inauguration, Ken Cuccinelli, acting deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, said on CNN’s “New Day,” that “there’s no specific credible threats at this point in time. There’s just this raised level of tension. And so we’re raising our security level. And we’re doing it across the country,”

  • After local Federal prosecutors claimed “Strong evidence, including Chansley’s own words and actions at the Capitol, supports that the intent of the Capitol rioters was to capture and assassinate elected officials in the United States government,”…the top federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C. said on Friday there is no “direct evidence” to suggest that rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol had formed “kill capture teams.”

  So who could blame Americans for not trusting the media or the government?

  As Jordan Schachtel concludes, the FBI seems to be grossly exaggerating the capabilities of a fringe network of activists that does not have the capacity to mobilize significant numbers of people. Certainly, they do not present a threat of “insurrection,” or anything close. In leaking these bulletins to the media, it appears that the Bureau is once again, after four years of “Trump-Russia” madness, engaged in unsavory activism and attempts to manufacture a political narrative.

  

  However, given this embarrassing propaganda-rife exaggeration of threats, and the FBI ‘lies’ and these local prosecutors’ ‘lies’, the chances of a ‘false-flag’ event are rising rapidly as one might just get the impression that fear is being ratcheted up for political gain and to enable Patriot Act II’s crackdown on “domestic terrorism” to more easily slide between the cheeks of an anxious American public desperate to be saved from this terror – to hell with liberty, just do something!

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 16:55

• COVID Lockdowns Will Result In 1 Million Excess Deaths Over Next 15 Years, Scientists Find
  COVID Lockdowns Will Result In 1 Million Excess Deaths Over Next 15 Years, Scientists Find

  Back in the summer of 2020, a critical discussion almost broke out between progressives on one hand, who were adamant that if “just one life” could be saved with pervasive, widespread economic lockdowns that it was everyone’s imperative to bring the economy to a crawl, and pragmatic, rational thinkers who argued that the economic cost of such lockdowns would end up being far greater than the immediate human cost in terms of lives lost, especially since the impacted lives would be far younger than potential covid vicitms most of whom are in their 70s and 80s. Deutsche Bank credit strategist Jim Reid summarized it best as follows:

  … while the coronavirus has lead to virtually no excess deaths in younger age cohorts, it is the younger strata of society that are the most impact by the economic shutdowns that have resulted in tens of millions of unemployed Millennials.

  Reid then argued that since “younger people will be suffering most from the economic impact of Covid-19 for many years to come, we wonder how history will judge the global response.” To this, however, we countered that since the economic crisis resulting from Covid-19 helped crush Donald Trump’s chances for re-election and also unleashed full-blown helicopter money as well as the biggest round of corporate bailouts of insolvent and zombie companies in history, “we are confident that the tsunami of global moral hazard – which will leave tens of millions of young workers without a job – will allow central bankers to sleep soundly at night.”

  Unfortunately as we said at the top, this discussion “almost” happened, although in the end it did not because any time an attempt for rational discourse emerged it would be promptly and violently shouted down by the armies of virtue signalers who were also monetarily incentivized in maintaining the lockdown status quo (such as bankers, pharma and online payment companies, politicians, the media and so on) and who would instantly defer to the “scientists” as the only expert class worth opining on the critical debate of “excess covid deaths now” vs “excess deaths from economic shutdowns later.”

  Well, with a roughly one year delay, scientists from Duke, Harvard, and Johns Hopkins finally wrote a paper which may come as a shock to all the virtue-signaling progs out there, because its conclusion is stunning: in a nutshell, the NBER working paper (“The Long-Term Impact Of The Covid-19 Unemployment Shock On life Expectancy And Mortality Rates“) finds that while there have been roughly 400,000 covid-linked deaths so far (amid extensive debate of just what is a “covid-linked death” since even crash victims are counted as covid casualties, not to mention tens of thousands of others with terminal co-morbidities), the long-term economic implications from covid-related lockdowns are dire, resulting in COVID-19-related unemployment  “which is between 2 and 5 times larger than the typical unemployment shock” and resulting in a “3.0% increase in mortality rate and a 0.5%  drop in life expectancy over the next 15 years for the overall American population.”

  The bottom line, as scientists Bianchi, Bianchi and Song find is that…

  For the overall population, the increase in the death rate following the COVID-19 pandemic implies a staggering 0.89 and 1.37 million excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively

  That’s bad; where it gets even worse for the world’s progressives is the report’s finding that the “shock will disproportionately affect” women, particularly of Hispanic heritage; African Americans; foreign born individuals; less educated adults and individuals age 16-24 – in short all those racial and social classes that are of primary concern to the “progressives” – while “white men might suffer large consequences over longer horizons” (we doubt progs will care too much about this).

  In short, everyone will be hit by the covid-lockdowns, with blacks, Hispanics and women first, and white men next for a far longer period of time. And, in the process, nearly 1 million excess deaths will take place that wouldn’t have taken place otherwise.

  We wonder how those same progressives, who demanded wholesale economic lockdowns – because that’s the only way to save even one life – will feel now that scientists explicitly state that their preferred policies will lead to nearly a million excess deaths simply from the economic shutdowns. Or, as Reid warned all the way back in July 2020 – when nobody bothered to listen – “younger people will be suffering most from the economic impact of Covid-19 for many years to come, we wonder how history will judge the global response.”

  Here are some more details from the NBER paper:

  While the trade-off between containing  the  COVID-19  pandemic and economic activity has been analyzed in the short-term,  there is currently no analysis regarding the long-term impact of the COVID-19-related economic recession on public health. What is more, most of  the papers interested in the relation between the COVID-19 pandemic and economic activity argue, correctly, that lockdowns can save lives at the cost of reducing economic activity, but they do not consider the possibility that severe economic distress might also have important consequences  on  human  well-being  (Gordon  and  Sommers  (2016)  and  Ruhm (2015)). This shortcoming is arguably explained by the fact that current macroeconomic models do not allow for the  possibility that economic activity might affect mortality rates of the agents in the economy.

  Which merely goes to show just how idiotic macroeconomics as a so-called “science” truly is, because if economists are truly baffled by this “shortcoming”, maybe they should take a look at the millions of small businesses and unemployed service workers to emerge from the covid crisis. Anyway, continuing with the paper:

  Between  late  March-early April, most U.S. states imposed stay-at-home orders and lockdowns, resulting in widespread shut down of business. Unemployment rate rose from 3.8% in February 2020 to 14.7% in April 2020 with 23.1 million unemployed Americans.  Despite a decline to 6.7% in November 2020,the average unemployment rate over the year is comparable with the 10% unemployment rate at  the peak of the 2007-2009 Great Recession and it is near the post-World War II historical maximum reached in the early 1980s (10.8%). Importantly, COVID-19 related job losses disproportionately affect women, particularly of Hispanic heritage; African Americans; foreign born individuals; less educated adults and individuals age 16-24.  In fact, the unemployment rate underestimates the extent of the economic contraction as many potential workers have abandoned the workforce (especially women).

  We fast-forward to the conclusion:

  The long-term effects of the COVID-19 related unemployment surge on the US mortality rate have not been characterized in the literature. Thus, as a last step, we compute an estimate of  the excess deaths associated with the COVID-19 unemployment shock.   This corresponds to the difference between the number of deaths predicted by the model with and without the unemployment shock observed in 2020. For the overall population, the increase in the death rate following the COVID-19 pandemic implies a staggering 0.89 and 1.37 million excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively. 

  These numbers correspond to 0.24% and 0.37%of  the  projected  US  population  at  the  15-  and  20-year  horizons,  respectively.   For  African-Americans, we estimate 180 thousand and 270 thousand excess deaths over the next 15 and 20years, respectively.  These numbers correspond to 0.34% and 0.49% of the projected African-American population at the 15- and 20-year horizons,  respectively. For Whites, we estimate 0.82 and 1.21 million excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively. These numbers correspond  to  0.30%  and  0.44% of the projected White population at the 15- and 20-year horizons, respectively. These numbers are roughly equally split between men and women.

  And the damning piece de resistance which every virtue signaler will rush to burn before reading

  Overall, our results indicate that, based on the historical evidence, the COVID-19 pandemic might have long-lasting consequences on human health through its impact on economic activity. We interpret these results as a strong indication that policymakers should take into consideration the severe, long-run implications of such a large economic recession on people’s lives when deliberating on COVID-19 recovery and containment measures. Without any doubt, lockdowns save lives, but they also contribute to the decline in real activity that can have severe consequences on health. Policy-makers should therefore consider combining lockdowns with policy interventions meant to reduce economic distress, guarantee access to health care, and facilitate effective economic reopening under health care policies to limit SARS-CoV-19 spread.

  Needless to say, the longer the lockdowns continue, the death toll will only grow bigger across all races and social classes.

  But wait, there’s even more!

  As we reported last week, a new peer reviewed study out of Stanford has questioned the effectiveness of lockdowns and stay-at-home orders (which it calls NPIs, or non-pharmaceutical interventions) to combat Covid-19. The study’s lead author (an associate professor in the Department of Medicine at Stanford), found that “the study did not find evidence to support that NPIs were effective in preventing the spread” and that “we fail to find strong evidence supporting a role for more restrictive NPIs in the control of COVID in early 2020.”

  So, did left-leaning states’ rushed policies in response to the pandemic – to unleash broad lockdowns, crush economies, and spark mass unemployment and poverty leading to increasing deaths of despair actually achieve anything? The short answer is no…

  

  … while the longer answer we now know thanks to the NBER report, is yes: they made the situation for African Americans, Hispanics and women (and yes, even white men) considerably worse for at least the next two decades.

  In other words, while lockdowns may not have even led to a tangible improvement in halting the spread of covid, what they will certainly do is lead to hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, in excess deaths over the next decade.

  Which begs the question: now that “respected scientists” have finally quantified the “staggering” excess death toll resulting from covid lockdowns, is it time to finally have the discussion – which nobody has dared to have since about a year ago – about the cost-benefit analysis between widespread economic lockdowns, which will lead over a million early deaths, and locking down the economy every time there is even a modest rebound in covid cases…

  

  … as per the covid we created several months ago, and which may have zero positive impact on actually halting the spread of covid?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/18/2021 – 16:55

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Looking Through An Adversary's Eyes: A KGB Agent's Prophecy
  Looking Through An Adversary’s Eyes: A KGB Agent’s Prophecy

  Authored by ‘Jean Chen’ via The Epoch Times,

  Human beings have a weakness: It is easy for us to see others’ problems, but not our own problems. Actually, most of us are nearly blind to our own problems.

  However, if we examine how our enemies look at us, some insights may be revealed.

  For many people right now, the aftertaste of the 2020 presidential election is bitter. They feel that something is very wrong with our country. But what is it?

  For current events, it may be useful to look through the eyes of an adversary that many thought had been vanquished: the USSR in the 20th century

  The Prophecy of a KGB Agent

  I came across a YouTube video of a 1985 interview of Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who defected to the West in 1970.

  The interview is about the Soviet Union’s strategy to subvert the United States. It is eye-opening and I wish to share a quote here first:

  “Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students, without being challenged or counter-balanced by the basic values of Americanism and American patriotism … The demoralization process in the United States is basically completed already … Most of it is done by Americans to Americans thanks to lack of moral standards.

  As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures. Even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp he will refuse to believe it until he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom. When the military boot crashes him, then he will understand, but not before that. That’s the tragic of the situation of demoralization.”

  It is scary to watch the video. (More video here and here.)

  What Mr. Bezmenov described 35 years ago is unfolding in front of our very eyes. To me, what is most alarming is that the demoralization is mostly “done by Americans to Americans due to lack of moral standards.” Actually, as Bezmenov pointed out, “for the last 25 years, actually it’s over-fulfilled because the demoralization now reaches such areas where previously not even Comrade Andropov [KGB leader during 1967–1982] and all his experts would even dream of such a tremendous success.”

  According to Bezmenov, only 10 to 15 percent of the KGB’s personnel and resources were allocated to traditional clandestine espionage in James Bond’s style, with the rest going to “legitimate, overt, and open” ideological subversion. He said that subversion happens in four stages: demoralization, destabilization, crisis, and “normalization.”

  The first stage, lasting for about 15 to 20 years, the period of time needed to raise a generation, is to brainwash the public with communist ideology. Manipulation of the media and academia is required for this purpose.

  The second stage focuses on throwing society into chaos, and it usually takes 2-5 years. During this stage, the status quo in economy, foreign relations, and defense systems are changed. The establishment promises all kinds of goodies in order to win people’s support for creating a massive government that is intrusive to people’s lives. Media and academia are also essential to make it successful.

  The third stage instigates a crisis that leads to a civil war, revolution, or foreign invasion. This stage only took 2-6 months. This is the stage when the leftist idealists, or “useful idiots,” are no longer needed, because they would be disillusioned and become obstacles. They are going to be eliminated, exiled, or imprisoned, like what has happened in Grenada, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and China. “It is the same pattern everywhere,” said Bezmenov.

  These three steps culminate in the fourth and final stage of “normalization”—the populace begins to accept and assimilate communism. This final stage can take up to 20 years to complete.

  Today, 35 years after the interview, Bezmenov’s chilling prophecy still sounds so relevant. According to annual polls by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, support for socialism and Marxism among young people in the United States increases steadily. Actually, that is happening in all Western countries. Ambitious proposals like the “Great Reset Initiative” are aiming to change the world fundamentally in economy, international relations, and defense systems, and establish global governance, which sounds like Bezmenov’s stage two, destabilization.

  The United States is lauded as the beacon of democracy and freedom. But our once-proud institutions based on the Constitution and the separation of powers seems so powerless under the stress test of the 2020 presidential election. The deep frustration and distrust of the system cannot be dissipated by political intimidation, or deliberate ignoring of evidence-based allegations of irregularities. Many people are deeply worried about our country’s future.

  “The United States is in a state of war. Undeclared total war against the basic principles and the foundations of this system… The time bomb is ticking. Every second, the disaster is coming closer and closer. Unlike myself, you will have nowhere to defect to unless you want to live in Antarctica with penguins. This is it. This is the last country of freedom and possibility.” (Bezmenov)

  How did we get this far almost unknowingly?

  The Surreptitious Path of Infiltration

  Sen. Ted Cruz once commented about the law school of a prestigious university he attended:

  “There were more self-declared communists [in the faculty] than there were Republicans. … If you asked [them] to vote on whether this nation should become a socialist nation, 80 percent of the faculty would vote yes and 10 percent would think that was too conservative.”

  The amazing book, “How the Specter of Communism Is Ruling Our World,” gives a comprehensive analysis of the non-violent infiltration of communism in the West. In 1884, a year after Karl Marx’s death, the British Fabian Society was founded to bring about communism gradually. It encourages its members to advance socialist aims by joining suitable organizations and ingratiating themselves with important figures, such as cabinet ministers, senior administrative officials, industrialists, university deans, and church leaders. Since then, many American intellectuals began accepting communist ideas or its Fabian socialist variant.

  The 1960s counterculture movement produced a large number of young anti-traditional students who were influenced greatly by cultural Marxism and Frankfurt School theory. After graduation, they entered the institutions with the most influence over society and culture, such as universities, news media, government agencies, and non-profits. What guided them at that time was mainly the theory of “the long march through the institutions” proposed by Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci. This “long march” aimed to alter the most important traditions of western civilization. As a result, generations of young people have been indoctrinated with the communist ideology.

  Why are Intellectuals So Prone to Communism?

  Intellectuals tend to be fooled by radical ideologies. This phenomenon has drawn the attention of scholars. British historian Paul Johnson found that radical intellectuals share the fatal weaknesses of arrogance and egocentrism.

  This arrogance is exhibited in a statement by nineteenth-century French politician and art critic Jules-Antoine Castagnary: “Beside the divine garden from which I have been expelled, I will erect a new Eden … At its entrance, I will set up Progress … and I will give a flaming sword into his hand and he will say to God, ‘Thou shalt not enter here.’”

  Rapid scientific progress since the 18th century greatly strengthened humankind’s confidence in its own ability and fueled the intellectual trend of progressivism. People started to worship humanist reason instead of God. Reason is believed to be able to lead people to the path of happiness and morality. People want to create a utopia, a “paradise on earth,” which is the essential idea of communism. As the “pastors” of modern science, intellectuals believe that they are the interpreter of the truth, and their cause is so important that no means are off-limits to serve their ends. This has caused a deluge of blood and misery.

  What Can We Do?

  Two hundred years of experimenting with human pride and reason has led to the declining of morality and the loss of tens of millions lives due to the ravages of communism.

  Founding Father John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Interestingly enough, a ruthless communist dictator, Joseph Stalin, echoed his point from another angle, “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”

  It is time for us to be humble again, look inward, and follow the true wisdom of righteous spiritual beliefs. This is our only solution.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 23:30

• ​​​​​​​Feds Warn Amateur Radio Operators "Not To Commit Criminals Acts" Ahead Of Inauguration
  ​​​​​​​Feds Warn Amateur Radio Operators “Not To Commit Criminals Acts” Ahead Of Inauguration

  As tech giants shift into censorship overdrive – between Parler’s deplatforming, Twitter purges, and Facebook seemingly cracking down on just about any political discussion ahead of the inauguration – and Sunday’s imagery of anti-government anarchists who showed up to several US capitols on Sunday, those who wish to coordinate peaceful protests (and perhaps not-so peaceful protests) may try to use less-monitored methods to coordinate efforts.

  

  As such, the feds have put would-be criminals on notice.

  

  The Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) of the Federal Communications Commission is out with a Sunday warning reminding “licensees and operators in the Personal Radio Services, that the Commission prohibits the use of radios in those services to commit or facilitate criminal acts.“

  The Bureau has become aware of discussions on social media platforms suggesting that certain radio services regulated by the Commission may be an alternative to social media platforms for groups to communicate and coordinate future activities. The Bureau recognizes that these services can be used for a wide range of permitted purposes, including speech that is protected under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Amateur and Personal Radio Services, however, may not be used to commit or facilitate crimes.

  Specifically, the Bureau reminds amateur licensees that they are prohibited from transmitting “communications intended to facilitate a criminal act” or “messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning.” 1 Likewise, individuals operating radios in the Personal Radio Services, a category that includes Citizens Band radios, Family Radio Service walkie-talkies, and General Mobile Radio Service, are prohibited from using those radios “in connection with any activity which is against Federal, State or local law.” 2 Individuals using radios in the Amateur or Personal Radio Services in this manner may be subject to severe penalties, including significant fines, seizure of the offending equipment, and, in some cases, criminal prosecution. – the memo read 

  The Bureau’s warning comes days before President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20. 

  The FBI released a special bulletin last week warning about armed protests at 50 state capitols and the US Capitol in Washington, DC, ahead of the inauguration. Considering Sunday’s footage of armed ‘boogaloo boys’ who actually showed up – and who appear to be largely leftist anti-government anarchists – it stands to reason that they, or others, may try to use radio amateur radio frequencies to coordinate rallies and or attacks.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 23:00

• As Tech Companies Purge Users, Here Are Some Alternatives
  As Tech Companies Purge Users, Here Are Some Alternatives

  By Simon Black at Sovereign Man

  By now you’re probably aware of the various purges taking place across tech platforms and social media. Major companies have used the events of January 6th at the US Capitol as an excuse to delete users and deplatform businesses. But the scope of the purge has gone much further than removing calls for violence.

  For example, 147 members of Congress are being blacklisted by banks, insurance providers, and hotel companies because they objected to certifying the results of the election.

  The entire social media company Parler was shut down when Amazon banned it from its servers, while Apple and Google dropped the app from their stores.

  Twitter executed over 70,000 accounts.

  PayPal cut ties with the US President, as well as a Christian website that raised funds to send protesters to DC. Shopify removed accounts “associated” with Trump, and payment processor Stripe joined in the purge as well.

  Facebook even suspended Ron Paul’s account for a time, before claiming it was a mistake. Ron Paul, keep in mind, has been an outspoken critic of this administration’s defense and monetary policies.

  The message is clear: your access, your data, and potentially your livelihood is not safe in the hands of the biggest tech companies, which we have been conditioned to rely on. Express the wrong opinion, and you may be the next casualty.

  What this means:

  The good news is there are alternatives, and the purge has been a major driving force for people to move to alternative platforms.

  For example, Telegram, a private messaging app which allows you to enable encryption in private chats, attracted 25 million new users in a 72-hour period. The app now has over 500 million active daily users worldwide.

  Almost 18 million people downloaded the (arguably better) encrypted messaging app Signal between January 5th and January 12th– a 61x increase.

  Meanwhile, Facebook-owned WhatsApp’s downloads were down about 20% week on week.

  Facebook and Twitter just voluntarily handed market share to their competitors. From January 5-14, Facebook lost over $70 billion of valuation. Twitter lost over $5 billion during the same period.

  Don’t go where you aren’t wanted.

  Spy-apps that repeatedly censor and abuse their customers have faced calls for an exodus for some time now. But now a critical mass is actually moving, which makes it more likely that the amount of content and users will keep people engaged in social media alternatives.

  In that sense, you could consider the purge a good thing.

  What you can do about it:

  The following are some popular alternatives to common social media platforms. Keep in mind that we aren’t endorsing or vouching for the safety/ privacy of any particular company listed below. The point is to start exploring alternatives so that all your eggs aren’t in one tech-company basket.

  Social Networks Alternatives to Facebook and Twitter

  • Gab.com – Similar to Twitter, Gab bills itself as a champion of free speech. It owns and operates its own servers, which means it can’t simply be shut down like Parler. But that also means the website is a little stressed at the moment, as so many new users flock to it.

  • MeWe.com – As a Facebook alternative, MeWe’s main draw is that it does not share or sell user data. But it does state in the user agreement that it reserves the right to terminate users who post “hateful, threatening, harmful” content.

  • Minds.com – This is a blockchain-based social media website which rewards engagement with tokens. Tokens can be used to boost your own content, fund other users, or redeemed for other currency. The website’s code is open source for transparency and accountability, and the content moderation policy is based on the First Amendment.

  Private Messaging Alternatives to Whatsapp

  • Signal – This messaging app is end-to-end encrypted so no one can snoop on your communications. And its technology is open source, so anyone who knows the coding language can check that it’s truly secure. Signal does require your phone number to use, but that’s about all the information it collects.

  • Telegram – Plenty of Whatsapp groups are migrating to Telegram for privacy reasons. But it is important to note that only private messages can be encrypted, and even then you have to specifically select the “secret chat” feature.

  Video Posting and Viewing Alternatives to YouTube

  • LBRY.com – This is an open source, blockchain-based, decentralized digital content sharing protocol. That means anyone can use it to build apps that allow peer to peer sharing of digital content. But the main selling feature is LBRY.tv or Odysee.com which facilitate the video sharing and viewing portions of the platform. Unlike Youtube, you have ultimate control over your own content.

  • Brighteon.com – Mike Adams, the creator of Natural News, started this video hosting website as a free speech alternative after he was repeatedly censored on YouTube and other social media.

  Then there is Brave Browser to replace Chrome, Protonmail to replace Gmail, and plenty of methods to accept cryptocurrency, instead of using typical payment processors.

  Clearly, this list is not exhaustive. And in the future we will be talking about more alternatives, and doing a deeper dive on their privacy and accountability. The point is you don’t have to allow these tech giants to have power over you.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 22:30

• China Reports Stronger Than Expected GDP, Is Only Major Economy To Grow In 2020
  China Reports Stronger Than Expected GDP, Is Only Major Economy To Grow In 2020

  China, which a little over a year ago unleashed a global pandemic on the world which reshaped economies, global supply chains, capital markets, and societies and was directly responsible for the downfall of a US president, was hell bent on demonstrating that it was the biggest winner from said plague, and early on Monday local time, Beijing’s National Bureau of Statistics announced that Gross Domestic Product in 2020 growth beat expectations of 6.2% to reach 6.5% in the fourth quarter of last year, with the economy expanding 2.3% for the full year 2020, making China the only major economy to expand last year on the back of an unprecedented multi-trillion credit expansion.

  

  That China’s sprawling economy managed to calculate all this just two weeks into the new year was perfectly normal as nobody actually believes any “data” out of China; instead all that matters is what Beijing wishes to telegraph to the outside world, and for now that message is “all is well.”

  The “data” underlines a rapid turnround in the world’s second-largest economy, which declined in early 2020 for the first time in more than four decades after the country was hit by the pandemic and authorities imposed a harsh lockdown. 

  The recovery was aided by record fiscal and monetary stimulus that boosted investment in infrastructure and real estate. Once China had virus cases under control and factories were able to resume production, growth was spurred by strong overseas consumer demand for Chinese exports, especially medical equipment and work-from-home devices.

  Despite the stronger than expected GDP, overall December activity data were mixed – industrial production growth was stronger than market expectations, but retail sales and fixed investment growth were below market expectations. In particular, December industrial production came in at +7.3% yoy, above market expectations, and was faster vs. November. Based on IP by major product data, cement production decelerated to 6.3% yoy in December from 7.7% yoy growth in November; steel product production grew 12.8% yoy in December vs. 10.8% yoy in November; electricity production accelerated to 9.1% yoy, from +6.8% in November. Meanwhile, retail sales missed expectations and slowed from November – in December, retail sales growth was 4.6% yoy, vs. +5.0% in November. Automobile sales growth slowed to +6.4% yoy (vs. +11.8% yoy in November). Fixed investment growth also weakened in December. On single month basis FAI growth was +5.1% yoy in December (vs. +9.4% yoy in November), and on a full year year-over-year basis, FAI growth was +2.9%yoy in 2020, below market expectations.

  

  “The quarter really seems to have shown the economy ended the year on a strong note, manufacturing is doing well,” said Cui Li, head of macro research at CCB International Holdings in Hong Kong said in an interview with Bloomberg Television. The softer-than-expected retail sales data in December may reflect the cooler weather and the resurgent virus in northern parts of China as some cities enforce new restrictions to control the outbreak.

  Separately, the unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.2% in December, while fixed asset investment added 2.9% over the full year, while real estate investment jumped 7% .

  Ning Jizhe, head of the National Bureau of Statistics, said the economy “recovered steadily” last year but added that the “changing epidemic dynamics and external environment pose a multitude of uncertainties”.

  China’s activity was boosted by shifts in orders as other countries struggled with virus outbreaks and further lockdowns, which was evident in the continued jump in China’s exports, while factory data had been encouraging during the prior quarter as November Official Manufacturing PMI printed its strongest reading in over 3 years and although it then eased in December, it still registered the 8th consecutive month in expansion territory.

  The GDP figures, which beat expectations, came days after China recorded its highest-ever monthly trade surplus in December, stoked by three consecutive months of double-digit exports growth. Exports rose 18% last month compared with the same period in the previous year.

  

  Meanwhile, global demand for Chinese-made goods is expected to remain strong as the pandemic continues to keep large parts of the world’s population locked down. Already the top exporter, the value of China’s goods shipments increased 3.6% in 2020, according to official data. Imports declined 1.1%, resulting in a $535 billion annual trade surplus, the highest since 2015.

  Of course, there is nothing organic about China’s resurgent growth and the fiscal and monetary stimulus to support the economy has been accompanied by a record surge in debt, a development that authorities are now seeking to address as the recovery takes hold. At a December meeting to lay out economic goals for 2021, the ruling Communist Party signaled that stimulus would be gradually withdrawn, although it would avoid any “sharp turns” in policy.

  In terms of forecasts, economists expect China’s GDP will expand 8.2% this year, continuing to outpace global peers, even as other large economies begin to recover with vaccines being rolled out. Chinese President Xi also recently touted positive growth whereby he expects China’s 2020 GDP to exceed CNY 100tln after around CNY 99tln in 2019. The country’s mandated return to growth last year attracted strong appetite from foreign investors, who injected about 1 trillion yuan ($154bn) into Chinese stocks and bonds  in 2020.

  As with anything China related, there is always the question how manipulated this “data” is: in China, where new cases of Covid-19 slowed to a trickle in the middle of 2020, but a recent outbreak in the northern province of Hebei has prompted a renewed wave of social restrictions and lockdowns. Last week, the country reported its first coronavirus death since April.

  

  The ongoing recovery in 2021 will depend on whether China can prevent a large-scale spread of virus infections, and on whether it can pass the baton of spending from local governments and large state companies to smaller businesses and consumers. Household spending and investment by manufacturing companies has lagged overall growth in 2020.

  In any case, the onshore yuan strengthened as much as 0.06% to 6.4779 versus the dollar after the release of GDP data, while the ChiNext Index of small caps gained 1.6%. The yield on the most actively traded contract of 10-year government bonds gained 2 basis points to 3.165%, set for the highest in two weeks.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 22:03

• Blue State Economies Will Soon Crumble – But Will They Take Red States With Them?
  Blue State Economies Will Soon Crumble – But Will They Take Red States With Them?

  Authored by Brandon Smith and originally published at Birch Gold Group,

  Over the past six to eight months, the U.S. has seen perhaps one of the largest migrations of people based on economic and ideological concerns in almost a century. Not since the Great Depression has there been so many Americans relocating in search of a better life. Today, however, those who relocate seem to be largely conservatives and moderates. There is a very good, multifaceted, reason for this.

  One of the best recent explanations for the conservative migration is visible in the near-180-degree turnaround by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo on his draconian lockdown mandates. All of a sudden, Cuomo has announced that New York simply cannot stay closed any longer and that businesses need to reopen quickly.

  What could have possibly forced the thick-skulled Cuomo to finally see the light?  I think it has a lot to do with the fact that New York has attempted to distribute millions of doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and they have only been able to give out 30% of them. This means that around 70% of people eligible to get the vaccine in New York are apparently refusing to take it (a smart move in my opinion considering the highly experimental and untested nature of the cocktail). Surprisingly, at least 30% of NY healthcare workers are also refusing to take the vaccine. Cuomo has resorted to threatening hospitals with fines if they do not distribute the vaccines fast enough.

  In his latest statement Cuomo is trying to send a message that New Yorkers need to take the vaccine so that a reopening can begin. In other words, “take the vaccine or the economy will collapse”.

  I don’t believe Cuomo is mending his totalitarian ways, but at least for now, I think he is realizing what most of us in the alternative economic field have been saying for the past year:  Blue state economies are dying because they are oppressive and this stifles trade and business.

  Beyond the business factor and the restrictions on people’s daily movements and activities, the lockdowns and subsequent financial crisis have triggered rising crime levels across the country, but predominantly in blue states and democratic controlled cities.

  According to the U.S. Postal Service, New York City alone saw over 300,000 residents pick up everything and leave from March to October. This is an unprecedented spike, an exodus the likes of which New York has not seen in a long time.

  On the other side of the country, California is witnessing its own exodus, and it started well before the pandemic struck. In 2019, California saw over 653,000 residents escape the state’s suffocating bureaucracy and high taxes. In 2020, the state has hit its lowest population growth rate in history, even after accounting for babies born. More than 200,000 people left the state than moved in in the past year, and before anyone claims that these people are “liberals” invading red states, even the California media admits they are mostly conservatives seeking to escape the socialist sinkhole.

  

  U-Haul, one of the largest moving companies in the nation, has compiled data on the top states which Americans are moving to during the pandemic. The list is loaded with well-known conservative strongholds and red states, with Tennessee, Texas and Florida at the top.

  But what does this mean for leftist states in economic terms?  First, a huge loss of tax revenue, and this is dangerous for blue states in particular. California was projecting a $5.6 billion surplus in January of last year, only to face a $54 billion deficit by August. The state’s net tax revenue fell by 42% from March to May year-over-year, far outpacing losses in the rest of the country. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom begged Congress for $14 billion in federal aid, claiming that the government has a “moral and ethical obligation to help the states”.

  And this seems to be exactly how states like California are surviving, by stealing tax dollars from people in other states that have been more responsible in caring for their economies.

  We often hear about states like California and New York as having GDPs comparable to entire countries. We hear about all the manufacturing and agricultural production, and a couple of years ago, there were even calls for secession in California on the grounds that “orange man bad” and that the state could fiscally support itself “easily.”

  Nothing could be further from the truth. What leftist cheerleaders often refuse to mention is the deep and insidious debt problems and deficits blue states suffer from. Looking at a list of the most indebted states in the U.S. in terms of total assets and liabilities, you will find that the vast majority of them are Democrat controlled.

  Furthermore, blue states tend to have the highest levels of unfunded pension liabilities. In other words, their public pension obligations are only partially funded and are suffering a net loss. California, Connecticut and Illinois top the list and the only red state that comes close in terms of percentages is Alaska. Red states top the list in terms of the best funded pensions and the lowest debt per capita.

  These debts are caused by irresponsible spending policies and endless socialist welfare measures, and as with most socialist systems, they always end up spending more money than they can bring in. They also end up wasting money more than they effectively spend money. This translates to much higher taxes, as blue states refuse to admit policy errors and fix their mistakes. Instead, they punish the citizenry with increased taxation. A list of the highest personal income taxes across the country is dominated by blue states.

  Blue states like Illinois also stack the list of highest property taxes.

  One might assume that with such high taxation that social welfare programs would be in place to help the needy and to reduce poverty, but this is not the case. California and New York have the highest population of homeless people by far (151,278 in CA and 92,091 in NY). The next highest homeless population is in a red state, Florida, with only 28,000.

  Add to this the fact that blue states have been the most lockdown-happy during the pandemic despite the fact that the lockdowns have done nothing to stop the spread of COVID-19, and now you know why people are leaving these places en masse.

  This dynamic has led to red states outperforming blue states across the board in terms of economic recovery. Job recovery in red states far outpaces blue states, along with recovery in GDP. As a result, a call has been rising for a “Blue State Bailout”, and with Biden ostensibly entering the White House they may very well get what they are asking for.

  The problem is, the amount of bailout money that would satiate the hunger of blue states would have to be in the multi-trillions. As more and more people and businesses leave these places for more free states, it’s inevitable that tax revenues will dry up. And, as leftists raise taxes to cover the deficit even more people will relocate. It is a vicious cycle that will lead to complete dependency on federal dollars for blue states to survive.

  Red states, on the other hand, will not be enforcing strict lockdown mandates. In fact, I suspect that even if Biden tries to institute a Level 4 federal lockdown that many red states will defy him and carry on with business as usual while blue states quickly bow and submit. The only practical option is for blue states to ignore the lockdowns and fully reopen, not just for a couple of months, but permanently. Will they do this?  I doubt it.

  It is also important to consider at a fundamental level the types of people that make up the populations of red states versus blue states. Blue states have built a culture of dependency and the majority of leftists have no useful skill sets that would allow them to adapt to an economic crisis. Meanwhile, red state culture encourages independence, self-reliance and productivity.

  The most likely reaction among blue states or the federal government under Biden will be to try to “redistribute” the wealth and stability from red states to blue states. This could happen in the form of stimulus measures that unfairly benefit blue states. The resulting dollar devaluation and price inflation might hit red states harder because they would not be receiving bailouts to offset the higher costs. In the worst-case scenario, in which a full spectrum financial collapse occurs, we may even see the federal government attempt to redistribute production and manufacturing from red states to blue states in the name of “national emergency.”

  There could also be an attempt to stop people from moving away from blue states entirely. We have already seen a beta test for this in California, where legislators are attempting to pass a bill which would legally require former residents to continue paying taxes to the state for years after they leave.

  Of course, this would lead to severe resistance from conservatives, but that is a discussion for another time. The bottom line is this: the economic and pandemic policies of blue states have failed miserably. Their only option is to see the error of their ways, become fiscally responsible and remove totalitarian lockdown measures, or, attempt to leech success from the red states like parasites. Which one do you think they will choose?

  *  *  *

  With global tensions spiking, thousands of Americans are moving their IRA or 401(k) into an IRA backed by physical gold. Now, thanks to a little-known IRS Tax Law, you can too. Learn how with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals how physical precious metals can protect your savings, and how to open a Gold IRA. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 21:30

• Armed Protesters Begin To Arrive At State Capitols Around The Nation
  Armed Protesters Begin To Arrive At State Capitols Around The Nation

  Update (1918 ET): Heading into the overnight, in a show of force, hundreds of National Guard troops protecting the US Capitol are marching in the city streets amid threats of armed protests. 

  America 2021: National Guard troops march in front of the U.S. Capitol.pic.twitter.com/5aO0YA04pW

  — Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) January 17, 2021

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

  At least 25,000 Guardsmen are protecting the Capitol complex. 

  *** 

  Armed protesters have arrived at multiple state capitol complexes across the country Sunday morning. This follows a special bulletin from the FBI last week that warned: “armed protests” were being planned at 50 state capitols and the US Capitol in Washington, DC, ahead of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20. 

  

  While the protesters are being identified across various platforms as members of a so-called “boogaloo” movement, they largely appear to be generic anti-government anarchists – some of whom call themselves “liberty boys,” and others who oppose the conservative Proud Boys. Their sudden emergence surrounding the inauguration is curious, to say the least.

  

  A field reporter at The Daily Caller, Jorge Ventura, reports from the Ohio Statehouse, where he notes that “580 National Guard members” were activated “to provide security around the Ohio Statehouse in downtown Columbus through Wednesday.”

  Boogaloo boys marching towards the Ohio Statehouse for an armed protest. Gov. authorized 580 National Guard members to provide security around the Ohio Statehouse in downtown Columbus through Wednesday pic.twitter.com/ujV68xAdHF

  — Jorge Ventura Media (@VenturaReport) January 17, 2021

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

  “We are not a pro-Trump group,” said one of the armed protesters at the Ohio demonstration. 

  “We are not a pro-Trump group” says one of the speakers for the Boogaloo Boys in front of the Ohio Statehouse pic.twitter.com/mHTMfSlLtk

  — Jorge Ventura Media (@VenturaReport) January 17, 2021

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

  “We are out here supporting the local BLM scene” says one of the Boogaloo Boys before marching towards the Ohio Statehouse building to protest pic.twitter.com/i7KQ3HohqD

  — Jorge Ventura Media (@VenturaReport) January 17, 2021

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

  An armed protester in Ohio told the “Proud Boys do not come here.” 

  “We hope the Proud Boys do not come here, we do not want you here,” armed boogaloo boys protesting outside Ohio Statehouse. Ohio State Highway Patrol and National Guard surround the area pic.twitter.com/99MEtOac3l

  — Lisa Bennatan (@LisaBennatan) January 17, 2021

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

  In Michigan, a dozen or so armed protesters are now showing up at the State Capitol.

  About a dozen people who appear to be boogaloo boys accompanied by a fair number of media members walk to the front of the Capitol pic.twitter.com/rUjWvP6F3C

  — Dave Boucher (@Dave_Boucher1) January 17, 2021

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

  “If you continue to oppress the American people, they will remain rational no longer.” A member of the Boogaloo Bois gives remarks outside the fenced-off Capitol steps #Lansing #Michigan #Capitol pic.twitter.com/Jo9Xxdhpdx

  — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) January 17, 2021

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

  Daily Mirror’s Derek Momodu tweeted, “this is very worrying…” as armed protesters gather in front of the Michigan State Capitol as Guardsmen are on “standby.” 

  

  “If you continue to oppress the American people, they will remain rational no longer,” said an armed protester in Michigan. 

  “If you continue to oppress the American people, they will remain rational no longer.” A member of the Boogaloo Bois gives remarks outside the fenced-off Capitol steps #Lansing #Michigan #Capitol pic.twitter.com/Jo9Xxdhpdx

  — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) January 17, 2021

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

  In New Hampshire, a handful of armed protesters showed up outside the Capitol.

  

  While a similarly small group began to assemble outside the Oregon Capitol. 

  

  The group in Oregon refers to themselves as the “liberty boys.” 

  This group call themselves “liberty boys”, boogaloo boys are an extremist movement born online.

  More on then in this piece by @Leah_Sottile https://t.co/4OwIpS8yOj pic.twitter.com/kMpI4ZzpyX

  — Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) January 17, 2021

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

  At the Illinois State Capitol, Guardsmen and State Troopers are heavily armed, waiting for protesters. 

  A heavily armed platoon of Illinois National Guard formed a perimeter to blockade all access roads leading up to the Illinois State Capitol. pic.twitter.com/VSRJ169B11

  — Mark Maxwell (@MarkMaxwellTV) January 17, 2021

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

  There’s a large police presence at the Minnesota State Capitol building as threats of armed protesters could assemble today.

  St. Paul MN — Large Police Presence At The Minnesota Capitol pic.twitter.com/fnFdI5Edvx

  — Tony (@Mrtdogg) January 17, 2021

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

  Boogaloo checklist: long gun, hawaiian shirt, Pall Malls, beef jerky. pic.twitter.com/GNtjAGeTv7

  — Jonathan Oosting (@jonathanoosting) January 17, 2021

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

  Armed protesters rally at the Texas Capitol. 

  

  More armed protesters at the Texas Capitol. 

  

  Bloomberg notes, “militia groups from both the left and right gathered outside the state capitol in Frankfort, Kentucky.” 

  U.S. state capitals stepped up security on Sunday for signs of the unrest following the January 6 Capitol riots, but only few turned out.

  Here, militia groups from both the left and right gathered outside the state capitol in Frankfort, Kentucky pic.twitter.com/q5RiIg7Uc2

  — Bloomberg Quicktake (@Quicktake) January 17, 2021

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

  Meanwhile, in Washington, DC, at least 25,000 Guardsmen and other law enforcement agencies have the US Capitol to White House area on lockdown. 

  

  On top of this all, civil flight observers have said, “amount of USAF cargo aircraft (C130s C17s KC135s KC46s) bringing National Guard troops to Washington DC/Capitol is truly impressive. Almost a constant air bridge for the past several days.”

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

  Last 24 Hours!! pic.twitter.com/4N5ZrBq4b2

  — John Brady (@Jbrady2852) January 17, 2021

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

  *Check back for more updates. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 21:20

• SEC Whistleblower Tips Have Soared 31% Since Most Employees Started Working From Home
  SEC Whistleblower Tips Have Soared 31% Since Most Employees Started Working From Home

  Sitting around at home with nothing to do during the pandemic? Why not become a corporate whistleblower! It allows you to exact revenge on your boss and co-workers for years of misery and can also pay well!

  That must be exactly what many are thinking, as it is being reported that since the work from home boom started, whistleblower tips to the SEC have soared. The SEC received 6,900 tips for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, which marked a 31% rise from the previous 12 months, Bloomberg reported. 

  The increase in tips “really started gaining traction in March when Covid-19 forced millions to relocate to their sofas from office cubicles,” the report notes.

  

  Jordan Thomas, a former SEC official who helped set up the agency’s whistle-blower program, said: “You’re not being observed at the photocopy machine when you’re working from home. It’s never been easier to record a meeting when you can do it from your dining room table.”

  Adam Waytz, a psychologist and professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, said: “When you feel disconnected from work, you feel more comfortable speaking up.”

  And the increase in tips has led to larger and more consistent payouts from the SEC. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the agency has paid out $330 million in awards, including one award of $114 million to a single tipster in October. The payments are likely tied to cases prior to the pandemic, but are indicative of a trend of growing payouts. 

  The SEC has been paying whistleblowers since the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, which was put into effect as a result of massive financial blowups like Madoff and Enron. Bloomberg wrote:

  Under the program, tipsters can receive financial awards if they voluntarily provide unique information that results in an enforcement action. Payouts can range from 10% to 30% of the money collected in cases where sanctions exceed $1 million. Awards are paid from a fund set up by Congress — not money owed to harmed investors.

  

  Whistleblowers are never named and, on occasion, when working with lawyers, the SEC may not even know the name of a whistleblower. 

  Joseph Grundfest, a former SEC commissioner, said: “Corporations and their lawyers are acutely aware of the fact that tips are flooding in and that whistle-blower awards have ballooned. You pay whistle-blowers more than $100 million, you’re going to get more whistle-blowers.”’

  “Making more awards — certainly larger awards — all those things do go toward incentivizing whistle-blowers to come forward,” former SEC Enforcement Director Stephanie Avakian said.

  “The problem is that they’re being flooded with tips and don’t have a robust mechanism for separating the wheat from the chaff,” Grundfest concluded. 

  Since the program’s inception it has paid out about $737 million.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 21:00

• Biden To 'Immediately' Send Congress Bill That Would Offer Citizenship To 11 Million Illegals
  Biden To ‘Immediately’ Send Congress Bill That Would Offer Citizenship To 11 Million Illegals

  President-elect Joe Biden will ‘immediately’ send a legislative package to Congress which would provide a pathway to citizenship for some 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the Los Angeles Times, according to “immigrants rights activists in communication with the Biden-Harris transition team.”

  

  The bill would also provide a shorter pathway to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of people living in the United States under a temporary protected status and/or who qualify under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program who were brought into the US as children.

  And in what the Times calls a “significant departure from many previous immigration bills under both Democratic and Republican administrations,” the Biden plan would contain zero provisions for stepped-up immigration enforcement and security measures, according to Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center Immigrant Justice Fund, who was informed of the details by Biden staffers.

  Both Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris have said their legislative proposal would include a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, and The Times has confirmed the bold opening salvo that the new administration plans in its first days doesn’t include the “security first” political concessions of past efforts.

  Hincapié, who was co-chair of the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force on Immigration — part of Biden’s outreach to his top primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and his progressive base — said that Biden’s decision to not prioritize additional enforcement measures was probably a result of lessons learned from the Obama administration’s failed attempt to appease Republicans by backing tighter immigration enforcement in hopes of gaining their support for immigration relief. –Los Angeles Times

  “On Inauguration Day, President-elect Biden will sign roughly a dozen actions to combat the four crises, restore humanity to our immigration system, and make government function for the people,” reads a Saturday memo by incoming Biden chief of staff, Ron Klain, who said the incoming president’s agenda included “the immigration bill he will send to Congress on his first day in office.“

  If Republicans don’t stop this in the Senate, it’s GG for the GOP https://t.co/LEE5OkqqpD

  — Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 16, 2021

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

  Under BIden’s plan – the most sweeping and comprehensive since President Regan’s 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act granting some 3 million people legal status (after which California flipped blue), immigrants would be eligible for legal permanent residence after five years, and US citizenship after three more years.

  Several immigration activists who spoke with The Times praised the reported scope and scale of the bill and expressed surprise at its ambition. A number of legislators and analysts had predicted that the new administration, at least in its first months in power, would be likely to pursue immigration measures that would stir the least controversy and could be achieved by executive actions rather than legislation. -LA Times

  Will it pass?

  Given the sweeping changes, Democrats are likely to face serious pushback despite holding slim majorities in both chambers of Congress – and the bill will likely face months of political debate as conservative members and immigration hard-liners push back.

  Meanwhile, Texas Democratic Rep. Juaquin Castro said in a Friday call with reporters that he’s formulating a bill which would offer illegals immediate protection from deportation and a fast-tracked path to citizenship for essential workers who are undocumented.

  “It’s time for essential workers to no longer be treated as disposable, but to be celebrated and welcomed as American citizens,” said Castro, adding “If your labor feeds, builds and cares for our nation, you have earned the right to stay here with full legal protection, free from fear of deportation.”

  And look at this – just in time:

  A Honduran migrant caravan is heading to the United States.

  Arriving just in time for Joe Biden’s inauguration.

  This is the future Democrats’ voted for.

  pic.twitter.com/sKy8NHJfkJ

  — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 15, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 20:45

• Conservatives Should Learn From The Left
  Conservatives Should Learn From The Left

  Authored by Heather Higgins via RealClearPolitics.com,

  As the political right struggles to regroup after the horrible events at the U.S. Capitol, it should learn from the masters. The left has a consistent pattern when responding to terrible behavior by activists associated with their cause — from the widespread destruction and violence last summer during protests of police brutality to mobbing Republican senators during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings to the Bernie Sanders acolyte who opened fire at GOP members of Congress in 2017.

  

  The left starts by driving the narrative that their protests or movements were mostly peaceful while amplifying participants’ concerns to give them legitimacy.

  They downplay any violence, positioning it as nothing to do with them, a distraction from the cause. Having disassociated themselves from the bad behavior, they never act embarrassed.

  Compare this to those on the right:

  Everyone has unambiguously condemned the rioters in the Capitol, as they should. But many have fallen into the trap of accepting that they ought to be embarrassed, as though the rioters represented them, or even most Trump supporters, neither of which is the case. Nor have they defended the right to protest and the importance of recognizing and hearing concerns. Failing to do so has allowed the false equivalence between the rioters and the Trump supporters who were protesting to advance their concerns about election fraud, even though the vast majority of those in Washington on Jan. 6 were peaceful people who revere the Constitution.

  The left has used those missteps to play a semantic game of expanding definitions and thus tar an ever widening circle. They start with the remarkable premise that there were no election shenanigans whatsoever, and consequently that it’s heresy to question rule changes or unrequested mailed ballots. Why? To label legitimate issues as merely a “fringe” contentions. 

  Over the course of a week we’ve watched this metastasizing of definitions — President Trump “should have known” what his statements would lead to became “he deliberately incited” the rioting. And assertions that “everyone should have known” was expanded to “everyone who supported Trump incited the violence,” which led to “those who were silent and didn’t oppose Trump are enablers” and — when you are on a roll, why stop? — that conservatives are nascent Nazis.

  With blame comes punishment — not just deserved penalties for the rioters but threatened retaliation, starting with employment prospects, against the peaceful protesters, those who worked for the administration, and now even anyone who supported Trump and his policies.

  They are also ratcheting up censorship of conservatives by de-platforming the president and tens of thousands of others, shutting down alternate platforms, and revoking book publishing deals, all by applying standards that magically do not pertain to others. 

  Most toxic is the assault on speech through redefinition — it is no longer what was said or intended, it is how it might be interpreted. That subjective non-standard gives an excuse to those on the left to define what constitutes permitted opinion, not just on this matter but a range of issues where disagreement will be labeled as dangerous. 

  The implications of that are dire. It will mean the left  can use social pressure against cowering corporations, and foundations, to cut off the oxygen of speech and commerce — not just  access to social media platforms or hosting servers, but also banking services and funding — for individuals and organizations with a different view. 

  To prevent this, the right needs to defend the peaceful participants and their right to protest, explain the roots of their deep legitimate concern (years of fake news, social media suppression, and election rule overrides and ballot proliferation), and use this as an opportunity to unite, not divide. 

  Some conservative leaders and commentators, especially Never Trumpers, seem to see this as an opportunity to purge the movement of everyone associated with Trump and mistakenly presume that by feeding him and his allies to the alligator, they will be allowed to escape and achieve the left’s promised unity.  

  But as the social media putsch shows, this kind of “unity” really means “accept your guilt and be silenced.” With Trump out of the White House, the alligator won’t go away; his menu will simply shift to any others who won’t shut up and “unify.” The penalty: their platforms, social standing, and sources of funding will all be cut off.

  Efforts to force the 74 million people who voted for Trump over Joe Biden to feel ashamed and responsible or to publicly punish and silence their advocates, will be devastating not just to the Republican Party but to our country. We must instead regroup around our positive agenda, defend the tremendous policy gains that have been made — and stand strongly for the right of free speech and association, applied with neutral rules to everyone, including conservatives.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 20:30

• Whole Foods CEO Suggests Americans Wouldn't Need Healthcare If They Ate Better 
  Whole Foods CEO Suggests Americans Wouldn’t Need Healthcare If They Ate Better 

  Whole Foods CEO John Mackey said Americans would not need healthcare if they ate better and lived healthier lives. 

  “I mean, honestly, we talk about healthcare. The best solution is not to need health care,” Mackey told Freakonomics Radio on Nov. 4 and was first reported on Monday by CNBC.

  “The best solution is to change the way people eat, the way they live, the lifestyle, and diet,” he said. “There’s no reason why people shouldn’t be healthy and have a longer healthspan. A bunch of drugs is not going to solve the problem.” 

  Whole Foods CEO John Mackey

  

  Mackey dropped some pretty alarming health statistics that show Americans make bad health choices. 

  “71% of Americans are overweight and 42.5% are obese. Clearly, we’re making bad choices in the way we eat,” he said. “It’s not a sustainable path. And so, I’m calling it out.” 

  The numbers also shed light on why the US has had a relatively difficult time containing the virus pandemic because obese Americans are more at risk of contracting the infection. 

  

  To make matters worse, lockdowns and restrictions have led the most obese nation in the world, the US, to become ever more overweight. About a quarter of Americans gained between five and ten pounds since the coronavirus lockdowns.

  The reason for the “Quarantine 15” weight gain has been changes in diet, lack of regular exercise and a more sedentary lifestyle.

  Mackey has been vocal about adult health for years. In 2009, he argued in a WSJ op-ed that “the last thing our country needs is a massive new healthcare entitlement.”

  “This begins with the realization that every American adult is responsible for his or her own health,” Mackey wrote. “We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health.”

  Suppose Americans listened to Mackey’s advice. Then how would big pharma make their billions of dollars from obese people who suffer from heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and high blood pressure? 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 20:00

• Russia Advances In The Field Of Autonomous Combat Robotic Platforms
  Russia Advances In The Field Of Autonomous Combat Robotic Platforms

  Via South Front.org,

  Russia has been testing autonomous combat robotic platforms.

  The experimental robotic platform “Marker” completed a trek of approximately 30 kilometers, entirely in autonomous mode, the Advanced Research Fund (FPI) reported on December 30th. The tests were carried out in the Chelyabinsk region.

  The route of the vehicle was laid through an unprepared territory – a forest-steppe with a snow cover. The autonomous platform motion control system, having received a route assignment with the coordinates of a given point, ensured the platform’s arrival at the finish line in an hour and a half. The vehicle relied on the data of the technical vision system built on new neural network algorithms.

  The autonomous control system of the platform movement provides autonomous laying and adjustment of the route of movement in the event of obstacles – trees, rises, ravines, bushes, etc.

  The technical characteristics of the platform provide the possibility of autonomous operation for up to 48 hours on paved roads and up to 24 hours on rough terrain. As part of the next tests, the “Marker” platform will have to cover 50, 100 and 200 kilometers.

  The “Marker” experimental robotic platform was developed as part of a project by the Advanced Research Foundation, which was launched in 2018. The goal of the project is to create and conduct a full-scale development of technologies and basic elements of ground-based robotics.

  The “Marker” in the version on a tracked platform completed movement trials in July 2019, and then moved towards the firing practice. the Marker platform was developed and produced by the NPO Androidnaya Tekhnika as part of the first stage of the FPI project. The “Marker” uses two types of platforms: tracked and wheeled. A total of five robotic complexes will be manufactured to test the technologies.

  The robotic platform “Marker” is a joint project of the Foundation for Advanced Study and NPO “Android Technology”. It is assumed that this combat robot will become the basis for working out the joint interaction of ground robots, unmanned aircraft and special forces. The “Marker” is positioned as a constructor for creating models of warfare in the future.

  The evolution of modern ground-based robotic systems for military purposes is moving towards increasing the ability to perform tasks in an autonomous mode with a gradual decrease in the involvement of the operator in the process of controlling. To increase the level of autonomy of ground-based robotic systems, the development of a number of key technologies is required, which together determine the appearance of promising robotic system. Therefore, it is relevant to develop robotics technologies and bring them to the level of readiness that allows the technologies being created to be applied on promising autonomous robotic systems in real conditions.

  To test the technologies being created, to bring their level of readiness, a mobile demonstrator of robotics technologies was created using the modular design principle, with an open information architecture of construction, which provides the possibility of carrying out a full-scale development of technologies and basic elements of ground-based robotics.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 19:30

• There's Now A 12 Minute $175 Chopper Ride From Westchester Or Greenwich To Manhattan
  There’s Now A 12 Minute $175 Chopper Ride From Westchester Or Greenwich To Manhattan

  The irony of New York City getting new helicopter travel options is that the traffic these rides once sought to avoid has thinned out significantly. As a result of both Covid-19 and a general exodus from the city that is taking place as a result of the wonderful job Mayor Bill de Blasio is doing, the once super-crowded streets of Manhattan have been downgraded to simply just crowded.

  Regardless, those with the means in NYC may be happy to hear there is a new 12 minute helicopter ride option for those who want to travel between Westchester County Airport and Manhattan. The ride, put into service by Blade Urban Air Mobility, can carry five and will cost $175, according to Bloomberg.

  Rob Wiesenthal, the company’s CEO, said: “We believe people will be willing to pay to go once a week by Blade, because we’re saving so much friction. These people are working remotely four days a week, and it can feel comfortable to do this once a week.”

  

  The program comes after the success of a pilot program in and out of the Hamptons last year. The chopper’s helipad will be in Ross’s terminal in Westchester.

  Blade is looking to introduce even more helipads that it calls “vertiports” alongside of electric choppers within four years. The expansion, especially in NYC, could come as more people start meandering back to the office daily for work. 

  Mitchell Moss, director of the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management, concluded: “The helicopter and vertical technology are going to surge, because of the savings in time. It’s one of the best investments, because you can be twice as productive when you’re in your Manhattan high rise office: You can do far more in face to face, which makes the helicopter worth it.”

  He concluded: “There’s a new hierarchy of how you commute. The helicopter is superseding the limousine and the SUV for hedge-fund executives and high-tech leaders.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 19:05

• Stockman: Why Does Sleepy Joe Think We Need Another $850 Billion Of Transfer Payments?
  Stockman: Why Does Sleepy Joe Think We Need Another $850 Billion Of Transfer Payments?

  Authored by David Stockman via EconomicPolicyJournal.com,

  In light of Sleepy Joe’s swell new $1.9 trillion package of more free stuff, it’s time to get out our magnifying glasses again. The purpose is to compute the size of the hole in  America’s collective paycheck that purportedly requires such continued, extraordinary beneficence from our not so rich Uncle Sam.  

  

  To repeat: There is no reason in the world why the February (pre-Covid) level of wage and salary disbursements is not a solid and appropriate benchmark for measuring the pocketbook hit from the Covid-Lockdowns that have wreaked havoc on the US economy since March. That is, from the point at which the evil Dr. Fauci convinced the Donald to pull the plug on MAGA and his own tenure in office, too (of course, 80-year old Dr.  Fauci is still there, fixing to bamboozle yet another notionally “elected” president).  

  Still, back in February the Donald was boasting to one and all that he had delivered the greatest economy the world had ever seen and Wall Street apparently agreed, pushing stocks high into the nose-bleed section of history.  

  As it happened, the February run rate (annualized) of wage and salary disbursements was $9.659 trillion, which computes to about $805 billion per month. So we would suggest that if $805 billion of monthly wages was enough to justify celebration of the  Greatest Economy Ever, then the shortfall from that benchmark is a solid measure of the hit to US worker earnings that has occurred since February.  

  Based on the red bars in the chart below and translated to actual monthly numbers, the  Covid-wage and salary loss computes as follows:  

  • March: -$25b;  

  • April: -$76b;  

  • May: -$61b;  

  • June: -$43b;  

  • July: -$31b;  

  • August: -$19b;  

  • September: -$12b;  

  • October: -$6b; 

  • November: -$3b;  

  • December est: $0b;  

  • 10-month total: -$276b 

  The total of $276 billion of lost paychecks compares to $8.05 trillion of wages and  salaries which would have been earned during that period at the February rate ($805  billion). So the cumulative shortfall through year-end amounted to just 3.4%. 

  More importantly, the $0-$6 billion monthly shortfall since September has been so small as to constitute a rounding error in the scheme of things, as suggested by the fact that American households spend far more—about $8 billion per month—-on pet food and pet care alone.  

  Yet Sleepy Joe has now teed up another $850 billion of direct aid to households, which in the aggregate are no longer suffering any material paycheck shortfall. And what is  especially egregious about filling a non-existent income hole in this manner is  that 53% of this amount goes to “stimmy” checks and child tax credits, which are  essentially not even mean-tested except at the tippy-top of the income scale ($200,000  for a married couple):  

  Sleepy Joe’s $850 Billion of Direct Handouts to Households: 

  • Stimmy checks and child tax credits: $450b;  

  • Unemployment benefits: $200b;  

  • Health insurance aid: $100b;  

  • Rental assistance: $35b;  

  • Child care aid: $40b  

  • Safety net: $20b  

  Still, to paraphrase Walter Mondale’s famous campaign slogan from 1984: Another  $850 billion for income replacement but “Where’s The Hole?” 

  Compensation of All US employees, Annualized Run Rate, February 2020- November 2020

  

  Of course, there are other ways to measure the hit to the national economy stemming from the Covid-Lockdown impact, as we will amplify below. But first it would be well to summarize the “solution” that Washington’s fiscally incontinent politicians have heaved at the “problem” during the last 11 months—a “problem” that they have never bothered to quantify.  

  With the new Biden package, spending authorized by the five major Covid relief  measures can be summarized as follows (billions):  

  • Families First act: $192b;  

  • CARES act: $2,200b;  

  • Paycheck Protection Program: $733b;  

  • Response and Relief Act: $935b;  

  • Biden Jan. 14th plan: $1,900b;  

  • Five package total: $5,960b. 

  That’s right. The Washington pols are fixing to heave nigh onto $6 trillion at a $274  billion hole in the nation’s wage bucket. That’s a solution 22X bigger than the putative problem!  

  Of course, we do not mean to dwell lightly on the “putative” part, nor embrace the notion that government owes citizens reparations for the damage its actions have caused.  

  Yes, the overwhelming share of the actual economic harm since March is due to the misguided (and unconstitutional) lockdown policies of the government and the vastly disproportionate and unwarranted public hysteria fanned by Dr. Fauci and the Virus  Patrol, not the disease itself. But if the state gets into the business of fully indemnifying the public for the endless harm wrought by its policies, insolvency would be thereafter guaranteed, and in short order, too.  

  Besides, why does Washington have the right to burden future taxpayers with permanent debt service payments in order to make-whole a $276 billion loss of income and 3.4% inconvenience among taxpayers today?  

  And don’t stiff us with the humanitarian relief bit. The simple fact is that the overwhelming share of this $276 billion of wage losses has been visited upon low-wage and part-time workers in the social-congregation sectors of the economy (bars,  restaurants, gyms, hotels, movies, ball parks etc.) that the Virus Patrol in its wisdom has shutdown. The right solution is to send the Virus Patrol packing and let these unfairly penalized employees go back to work.  

  Moreover, even if you want to plug that “hole” beyond what the in-place safety net is already providing (see below), well, then, tax the more affluent section of today’s citizenry to pay for it, not unknowing, unborn and voiceless future taxpayers.  

  Then again, the bipartisan duopoly is not about to give that fiscally honest approach the  time of day; they specialize in the joint gang-mugging of voiceless future taxpayers.  

  Even if you think that the total wage and salary loss computed above understates the  economic damage caused by the lockdowns, the massive fiscal overkill owing to the  Everything Bailouts cannot be gainsaid.  

  For instance, GDP is the most comprehensive measure of economic activity that we have  (despite its manifest flaws), but the loss of GDP after February has also been only about  3.6%. In fact, based on the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow forecast, we project that nominal  GDP during Q4 will post at about $21.650 trillion, a figure only 0.46% below the  Greatest Economy Ever level of Q4 2019.  

  So, again, if we assume that Q4 2019 is a reasonable pre-Covid benchmark for the level  of total economic activity in the USA, we get the following shortfall, including an  estimate for Q4 based on the Atlanta Fed’s latest outlook.  

  Quarterly GDP Change From Q42019 Benchmark: 

  • Q1 2020: -$47b;  

  • Q2 2020: -$559b;  

  • Q3 2020: -$144b;  

  • Q4 2020E: -$25b;  

  • 4-quarter total: -$775b

  So even if you want to count everything including losses from the $2.5 trillion of  imputed activity in the GDP, the pending $6 trillion of Everything Bailouts is 7.7X the  size of the problem!

  Quarterly GDP At Annual Rates

  

  Of course, the real point of the bailouts is to compensate the private sector for the economic harm done by the government in its exertions in furtherance of the public health. But when you look at the impact of the Covid-Lockdowns on value-added of the non-financial business sector, the hit compared to pre-Covid levels is also quite small.  

  Again, using Q4 2019 as the pre-Covid benchmark and actual results through Q3 2020  and the Atlanta Fed estimates for Q4, the loss in business output relative to Q4 2019 is  just $594 billion or 2.7% of total GDP. So by this measure of the “problem”, the  impending Everything Bailouts would amount to 10X the size of the hole in the bucket.  

  Likewise, our Atlanta Fed-based estimate of Q4 nonfinancial business value added of  $10.251 stands at fully 99.1% of the Q1 2019 level. That’s hardly a setback that warrants  burying future taxpayers in $6 trillion of new debt, and most especially not the $1.9  trillion part recommended by our day-late-and-dollar short incoming POTUS, who has  just emerged from his Delaware bunker.  

  Quarterly Change In Business Value-Added Versus Q4 2019 Benchmark: 

  • Q1 2020: -$23b;  

  • Q2 2020: -$347b;  

  • Q3 2020: -$142b;  

  • Q4 2020E: -$82b; 

  • 4-Quarter total: -$594b

  Quarterly Nonfinancial Business Sector Gross Value Added (Annualized):

  

  By contrast, it is well worth looking at the other side of the coin: Namely, the surge in transfer payments since last February stemming from a combination of the built-in safety net (principally unemployment insurance, foods stamps and Medicaid) and disbursements of stimmy checks, enhanced Federal UI benefits and the rest authorized by the Everything Bailouts.  

  At the pre-Covid level in February, total government transfer payments (including state  and local) were running at a $3.165 trillion annual rate or about $265 billion per  month. As shown in the chart below, however, that monthly figure skyrocketed by 107%  to $546 billion in the month of April alone.  

  And, no, that latter figures is not the annualized rate: In their infinite generosity,  government programs pumped more than one-half trillion dollars into the household  sector during April alone. That’s $18.2 billion per day! 

  Thereafter, the tsunami of transfer payments began to abate, but were still running at a  $400 billion monthly level in July and $306 billion level in November. Overall, the 10- month total of incremental transfer payments above the February level totaled $1.05  trillion.

  You can’t make this up. Transfer payments to households during the past 10 months have exceeded the loss of household wages and salaries ($276 billion) by nearly four times.  

  So the question recurs: Why does Sleepy Joe think we need another $850 billion of transfer payments to households on top of the immense generosity already dispensed per the chart below?  

  The answer is simple: He’s doing it because he can—because the nation-wreckers in the  Eccles Building have determined to purchase $120 billion of government debt and  GSE securities per month for the indefinite future. As JayPo rattled on at his presser this week, they are not even thinking about thinking about tapering this tsunami of fake money plucked from thin air by the Fed’s digital printing presses.  

  Accordingly, under this crooked regime of massive debt monetization, there is no here  and now economic sting to rampant Federal borrowing; no “crowding-out” as in times  of yore before the Fed went off the deep-end with Keynesian money-pumping; and no  

  surging interest rates to rouse Wall Street and the business community from their happy  slumber in the lap of ultra-cheap borrowing costs.  

  Stated differently, when it comes to the rampant fiscal incontinence in the Imperial City  enabled by the Fed, did the election outcome make any difference?  

  It did not. Sleepy Joe is about to give the once and former King of Debt a run for his money when it comes to the annals of fiscal infamy in America.

  Total Government Transfer Payments, Annualized

  

  Even if you set-aside things like increased Medicaid and food stamp spending embedded in the above figures for total government transfer payments and focus just on the change in Federal-state unemployment insurance disbursements since February, the sheer fiscal madness at loose on Capitol Hill is baldly evident.  

  To wit, prior to the Covid-Lockdown battering of the US economy, which has so far caused the filing of an incredible 70 million in new unemployment benefit claims, the  Federal-state unemployment systems was pumping out benefit payments at a $27.8  billion annual rate in February or about $2.3 billion per month. 

  Here is the subsequent increase in UI payments from both existing state programs and the Federal pandemic assistance benefits and $600 per month topper payments. They total $518 billion or nearly two-times the $276 billion cumulative loss of wages and salaries during the same 10-month period.  

  Moreover, the alacrity with which the system poured money into the ranks of unemployment claimants is a wonder to behold. By April the February payment level of  $2.3 billion had soared to $41 billion, per month and by July the figure came in at an astounding $117 billion per month.  

  That’s right. At the June peak rate of $117 billion per month ($1.4 trillion annualized per  the chart below), the monthly payment rate was 51X higher than it had been in  February, and exceeded the full year UI payout rate during the depths of the Great  Recession.

  Monthly UI Payments Annualized

  

  But consider this: If the Federal-State unemployment system was already overcompensating for actual lost wages and salaries by 2X, why did we need to send helicopter checks, or what Washington now fondly calls “stimmy checks”, to 155 million households on top of that, when most of these households had not lost their jobs or paychecks?  

  Nevertheless, here is the “stimmy check” and related non-means tested money in the  five Everything Bailouts including Sleepy Joe’s new edition to the Fiscal Demolition  Derby:  

  Non-Means-Tested Stimmy Funding: 

  • Families First act: $105b;  

  • CARES act: $315b;  

  • Response & Relief Act: $191b;  

  • Biden Jan. 14th plan: $625b;  

  • Total non-means tested stimmy: $1.235 trillion.

  In short, the wage loss hole in the bucket was already filled two-times over by the  increase in UI benefit payments since February, but this massive drop of cash on the  American public will have filled it again by another 4.5X. 

  As we said, free lunches for one and all……except, except the debt is never going away  and future generations will surely rue the day. 

  * * *

  The above originally appeared at David Stockman’s Contra Corner.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 18:40

• Parler Back From The Dead As CEO Posts New Message
  Parler Back From The Dead As CEO Posts New Message

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours)

  

  Parler’s website suddenly appeared online Sunday with a message from its CEO, John Matze, who said, “Hello world, is this thing on?”

  The message suggests Parler was able to find another hosting service, coming about a week after Amazon Web Services booted the social media website from its services, taking the site down. It came as Parler—billed as a “free speech” platform—was seeing an unprecedented surge in users as prominent conservatives, among others, were being banned from Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms.

  Matze also issued a temporary status update.

  “Now seems like the right time to remind you all—both lovers and haters—why we started this platform,” Matze. “We believe privacy is paramount and free speech essential, especially on social media. Our aim has always been to provide a nonpartisan public square where individuals can enjoy and exercise their rights to both. We will resolve any challenge before us and plan to welcome all of you back soon. We will not let civil discourse perish!”

  

   

  Amazon Web Services’ rationale behind jettisoning Parler was due to a lack of moderation and came in the backdrop of the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riots. Parler, in a court filing, citing text messages between Matze and an Amazon representative, claimed Amazon was primarily concerned with whether President Donald Trump would migrate to Parler after his Twitter account was banned last week.

  The same filing asserted that Amazon didn’t appear to care much about alleged violent threats that were made by Parler users.

  Last week, Parler asked a federal court in Washington state to block Amazon’s decision, while maintaining that Amazon engaged in monopolistic practices by booting the platform. Twitter is also a major client of Amazon Web Services.

  

  According to a WHOIS search, Parler appears to be hosted by Epik, which also hosts social media website Gab.

  While it did not confirm Parler was seeking its services, Epik in a statement last week blasted Big Tech companies’ “kneejerk reaction” of “simply deplatforming and terminating any relationship that on the surface looks problematic or controversial.” The statement noted that Epik is “not quick to abandon our administrative positions,” as it attempted to contrast it and Amazon.

  Other than Amazon’s decision, Google and Apple removed Parler from its respective app stores.

  Earlier on Sunday, Matze said there was no indication Amazon, Google, and Apple would pull their services.

  In the days up to the suspension, “Amazon, as usual, [was] basically saying, ‘Oh, I never saw any material problems. There’s no issues.’ You know, they played it off very nonchalantly. And so we had still even, you know, on the 8th and the 9th, you know, we had no real indication that this was, you know, deadly serious,” Matze told Fox News.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 18:34

• Fox News Ratings Plummet After Abandoning MAGA Viewership
  Fox News Ratings Plummet After Abandoning MAGA Viewership

  Before the 2020 election, Fox News was dominating its cable rivals – in large part due to Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, whose pro-Trump messaging and coverage of the Russiagate and Biden scandals helped lead the network to its #1 ratings spot for several years.

  

  Then, after host Chris Wallace ‘moderated’ the first Presidential debate by overtly protecting Joe Biden while attacking Trump, the network’s establishment bias upstaged even their ratings darlings. Disgusted MAGA viewers began turning to alternatives such as One America News and Newsmax for pro-Trump coverage after Fox made clear where they stand.

  According to the Daily Beast, Fox News’ ratings have plummeted – as the network finished third to both CNN and MSNBC in the ratings on Friday for the third straight day, their poorest showing since September 2000.

  On Wednesday, CNN averaged 5.941 million total viewers and 2.074 million in the key 25-54 demographic for the entire day, compared to MSNBC’s 4.543 million viewers overall and 1.106 million demo audience and Fox News’ total audience of 3.464 million and 852,000 in the demo.

  The disparity increased on Thursday, with CNN drawing 3.854 million total viewers, MSNBC averaging 3.321 million, and Fox pulling in 1.935 million for the day. CNN also led in the demo, nabbing 1.193 million with MSNBC finishing second at 653,000 and Fox bringing in the rear at 384,000.

  The streak continued on Friday as CNN finished first once again with 3.121 million total viewers, followed by MSNBC’s 2.816 million and FNC’s 1.702 million. In the total day demo, CNN drew 878,000 viewers, compared to MSNBC’s 512,000 and Fox News’ 320,000. MSNBC, meanwhile, experienced its highest-rated week ever, averaging a total of 3.1 million viewers. –Daily Beast

  Fox is trying to salvage their ratings disaster. Last Monday they announced a massive overhaul of its daytime and early primetime weekday lineup – shifting Martha MacCallum from 7 p.m. to 3 p.m., and moving anchors Dana Perino and Bill Hemmer out of their early afternoon broadcasts for a co-anchored segment from 9-11 a.m. with a rebooted America’s Newsroom.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 18:15

• The Trial Of Citizen Trump Would Raise Serious Constitutional Questions
  The Trial Of Citizen Trump Would Raise Serious Constitutional Questions

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in USA Today on the upcoming Senate trial of President Donald Trump. The Hill recently ran my second column on why the best defense of Trump could be no defense — to skip the Senate trial and force a threshold vote on the constitutionality of the trial of an ex-president. Here is my column:

  With the second impeachment of President Donald Trump, the Congress is set for one of the most bizarre moments in constitutional history: the removal of someone who has already left office. The retroactive removal would be a testament to the timeliness of rage. While it is not without precedent, it is without logic.

  The planned impeachment trial of Donald Trump after he leaves office would be our own version of the Cadaver Synod.  In 897, Pope Stephen VI and his supporters continued to seethe over the action of Pope Formosus, who not only died in 896 but was followed by another pope, Boniface VI.  After the brief rule of Boniface VI, Pope Stephen set about to even some scores. He pulled Formosus out of his tomb, propped him up in court, and convicted him of variety of violations of canon law. Formosus was then taken out, three fingers cut off, and eventually thrown in the Tiber River.

  

  While some may be looking longingly at the Potomac for their own Cadaver Synod, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats have stated that their primary interest is in the possible disqualification of Trump from holding future federal office. Disqualification however is an optional penalty that follows a conviction and removal. It may be added to the primary purpose of removal referenced in the Constitution. The Trump trial would convert this supplemental punishment into the primary purpose of the trial.

  This did happen before but that precedent is only slightly better than the Cadaver Synod. That case involved William Belknap who served as Secretary of War to President Ulysses S. Grant. Belknap resigned after allegations of corruption — just shortly before a House vote of impeachment. The Senate held a trial but acquitted him. Twenty nine of 66 voting senators disagreed in a threshold motion that Belknap was  “amenable to trial by impeachment . . . notwithstanding his resignation.”

  In fairness to the Democrats, I have long rejected the argument that there comes a point when it is too late to impeach a president while he is in office. As I said in both the Clinton and Trump impeachment hearings, the House is under a duty to impeach if it believes that a president has committed a high crime and misdemeanor. If that occurred on the last day of a term, it would still be warranted.

  My objection to this second impeachment was that it proceeded without any deliberation of the traditional impeachment process. It was a snap impeachment, which is to the Constitution what Snapchat is to conversations. It reduces the process to a raw, brief and partisan vote. This could have been avoided. A hearing could have been held in a day to allow the language of the article to be amended and the implications of the impeachment considered. It would also have allowed for a formal demand for a response from the president.

  Instead, the impeachment was pushed through on a partisan muscle vote with only ten Republicans supporting the single article. It was an ironic moment. In the last Trump impeachment, I chastised the Democrats for pushing through an impeachment on the slimmest record and the shortest time frame of any presidential impeachment. They insisted that there was no time for witnesses before the House Judiciary hearing, but later waited weeks to submit the articles to the Senate. Now they have outdone that record with an impeachment with no traditional record in a matter of a couple of days. The Senate will not sit until January 19th and any trial would likely occur after January 20th.

  I have long wrestled with the notion of a retroactive impeachment trial. I can see the value of establishing that a president was not just accused but convicted of unconstitutional acts. There is also the value of disqualification of such an individual from future office. However, what was an intriguing academic puzzle is now a pressing constitutional concern.

  The impeachment trial of a private citizen raises a host of constitutional and practical problems. For example, a president can rely on publicly-funded lawyers like the White House Counsel and can assert presidential privileges. After leaving office, an ex-president would not only pay for his own defense, but he will lose the ability to make privilege determinations. Indeed, many such assertions would be subject to the review of his successor, Joe Biden. It would be like Pope Stephen making determinations on critical evidence of Pope Formosus after pulling him out of the crypt.

  The main issue however would be whether this is really an impeachment trial, as opposed to some curious constitutional post-mortem on a passed presidency. That question could face Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts if he has summoned for this role. A chief justice does not simply show up at anything deemed an impeachment trial. He must make an independent judgment over his carrying out a constitutional function.  Even if he rules that this is a valid trial, that ruling could be rejected by the Senate in a motion to dismiss the article. In the Clinton impeachment, Democrats demanded such a threshold vote before a trial. Of course, since there is no president to try for impeachment, the Senate may not even ask Roberts to preside — a telling departure that only undermines the trial as a whole.

  This impeachment should end with the Trump administration. I do not fault those who view the president’s conduct as impeachable. The speech was reckless and wrong. My primary objection was to the use of a snap impeachment and the language of the article of impeachment. That is now part of Trump’s presidential legacy. The question is now what will be the troubling constitutional legacy left by the Senate in the trial of an ex-president.

  In my view, a retroactive removal vote would combine with the use of a snap impeachment to fundamentally altering the role of impeachment in the United States. It would take a rush to judgment and turn it into a parade of constitutional horribles. Any party could retroactively impeach or remove a former president for the purpose of disqualifying him from office. Thus, if a party feared a one-term president’s possible run, they could hold use impeachment to eliminate the political threat. With the snap impeachment, it would be worse than creating a type of “no confidence vote” under our Constitution. After a non confidence vote in the United Kingdom, a former prime minister can still run again for office.

  A conviction would also not bring the closure as many may hope. Such disqualification would be one of the few impeachment issues that could be challenged in court. Trump would have standing to sue for his right to run again and he could well win. He would then be more popular than ever with many citizens eager to defy the Washington establishment. There is another path. The Senate could end the trial with a threshold vote and let history and the voters be the final judge of Donald J. Trump.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 17:50

• Incoming $1400 "Stimmy" Checks Could Push The S&P Over 4,000
  Incoming $1400 “Stimmy” Checks Could Push The S&P Over 4,000

  There’s no doubt that the $600 stimulus checks that went out earlier this month put a charge into the market. Will the coming $1,400 checks push the market even higher? We think so.

  We believe that another round of stimulus – at more than 2x the amount of the previous round – is an obvious catalyst that will move the market higher once again. We noted as such on January 13 when we posted to Twitter that the top 3 banks were “probably right” in suggesting calendar spreads because stimulus would pave the path for the S&P to breach 4,000.

  So… top 3 bank pitching calendar spreads because $2K stimmy hits in March which will be catalyst for SPX 4K. They are probably right

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 13, 2021

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

  This question was also explored by Bloomberg on Sunday morning, who arrived at a similar conclusion. Noting that the recent $600 checks caused option trading to explode and penny stock volume to skyrocket, the report points out that people “can’t help notice how tiny traders with money to spend keep turning up in the vicinity of almost every market spectacle these days”.

  Then, the obvious question becomes: where does that extra money come from? 

  Brrr…

  Peter Cecchini, founder and chief strategist of AlphaOmega Advisors LLC, commented: “If the additional $1,400 goes to the same income levels it did before, we are highly likely to see additional speculation in stocks, which could continue to inflate an already-existing bubble. If it goes to people with below-average incomes, speculation will be less likely.”

  Data suggests that people who got a stimulus check, across all income groups, traded 30% more in the first 10 days of January than at the start of December. Those who earn less than $75,000 per year saw a 53% jump in their trading, Bloomberg wrote.

  And the coming $1,400 will hit bank accounts during a “full-blow market mania”. Speculation is rampant not just in risky asset classes like cryptocurrencies, but in penny stocks, dubious startup companies and cash burning entities across all exchanges in the U.S. – we are at peak euphoria. In fact, the options market saw its second busiest day ever for bullish equity calls this week and penny stock volume is up 6x from last year.

  Retail stocks, as we have noted many times on Zero Hedge, are blowing away hedge fund favorites and the S&P 500 index:

  

  And while people certainly need the stimulus to help offset rising costs and job losses, many will instead divert their checks to the market. 

  23-year-old Ava Frankel of Boston, who works in the financial services sector, said: “I told my friends, if you’re going to spend your stimulus check on shoes, you might as well just put it in Robinhood instead. The $600 check was just something extra I didn’t need so I just threw it in the stock market.”

  Frankel put her entire $600 check in to a SPAC that is reportedly in talks with Lucid Motors and says she would consider doing the same with the next check she gets. “I would love to see a pullback in the tech sector because I would like to add to my positions in the tech names,” she also said. 

  Chris O’Keefe of Logan Capital Management concluded: “If there is a bubble being created within the financial markets, to some degree, those checks do add to it because I think they’re going to chase performance. It used to be you added money to the economy and people went out and bought things — cars and furniture — now it seems to amplify what’s going on in the financial markets.”

  Or, in other words:

  Stimmy, stimmy stimmy can’t you see, sometimes your fiat just hypnotize me.

  — Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) January 14, 2021

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 17:25

• Ice Cream From China Contaminated With COVID: Officials
  Ice Cream From China Contaminated With COVID: Officials

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  Officials in a Chinese municipality said that three samples of ice cream tested positive for the CCP virus, and thousands of boxes were confiscated, according to state-run media.

  

  Storage of the ice cream, produced by Tianjin Daqiaodao Food Co., was sealed after samples sent by the firm to a local disease control center last week tested positive for the virus.

  Officials said that the company’s more than 1,662 workers were placed under quarantine due to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus—also known as the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19.

  Authorities in Tianjin said the company produced more than 4,836 boxes of COVID-contaminated ice cream, according to state media. Hundreds of boxes of ice cream entered the market.

  The Tianjin Municipality is located in northeastern China and borders Hebei Province and Beijing.

  According to reports in October 2020, CCP authorities had detected and isolated the virus on the outer packaging of frozen cod during efforts to trace the virus in an outbreak in Qingdao.

  Officials’ claims about the virus being found in frozen food could be a tactic to blame other countries for COVID-19 cases in the country. In November, regime authorities said that allegedly COVID-contaminated food was imported from other countries in what some experts said was an attempt to blame those countries for the outbreak.

  State media reports over the weekend said the raw material used to produce the ice cream came from Ukraine and New Zealand.

  The ice cream development comes as CCP authorities relocated about 20,000 people in Shijiazhuang, the capital of Hebei Province, to other areas for quarantine several days ago. The outbreak, according to officials, also spread to Qiqihar—one of the largest cities in northern China in Heilongjiang Province.

  The new wave of the COVID-19 outbreak in Shijiazhuang was concentrated in Zengcun township of Gaocheng district, and has spread to other parts of China.

  The Epoch Times learned on Jan. 11 that after many residents in Zengcun were sent to quarantine sites, nearly 20,000 people who had remained were urgently notified by local authorities to be transferred to quarantine centers in remote areas.

  And leaked government documents obtained by The Epoch Times showed that officials in Hebei are anticipating a surge in CCP virus cases and are making preparations to curb its spread.

  Chinese officials in Heilongjiang Province on Jan. 14 told all 38 million residents to self-quarantine at home, although they didn’t say for how long.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 17:00

• Luke Gromen: The Fed Has No Good Options Right Now As Yields Rise And Deficits Explode
  Luke Gromen: The Fed Has No Good Options Right Now As Yields Rise And Deficits Explode

  One of the biggest questions right now, especially as yields climb as Joe Biden promises trillions of dollars in additional COVID-19-inspired stimulus spending, is when the Fed and the Treasury, soon to be run by Janet Yellen, will conspire to stop the rise in yields and stave off another eruption of market chaos. With US deficits rising thanks to COVID, and the Fed reviving QE thanks to COVID, the global dollar-based financial system is in trouble, if for no other reason than that Europe, Japan and China are spending so much more domestically, they won’t have as much left over to spend on buying Treasury bonds to finance the US deficit and build up their foreign-exchange reserves.

  One of the biggest questions right now, especially as yields climb as Joe Biden promises trillions of dollars in additional COVID-19-inspired stimulus spending, is what’s going on with Treasury yields, and why hasn’t the US dollar strengthened like it’s “supposed to do” (according to the textbook). But in reality, situations can be a lot more complicated than one might expect.

  With US deficits rising thanks to COVID, and the Fed reviving QE thanks to COVID, the global dollar-based financial system is in trouble, if for no other reason than that the global economy is slowing (meaning Europe, Japan and China won’t have as much left over to pour back into Treasuries).

  And with countries like Russia moving unprecedented amounts of their foreign exchange reserves into gold, like Russia, which now holds more gold in its central bank reserves than at any point in its modern history, there’s a real mutiny against the dollar that’s driving the pace of de-dollarization.

  During the latest MacroVoices interview with Luke Gromen, a macro analyst who founded his own shop back in 2014, the longtime macro analyst shared his long-term outlook for the dollar, gold and Treasuries, and how global central banks will drive macro market dynamics during the post-COVID era.

  At one point early on during the interview, Gromen said “[w]hat’s been interesting to me in this whole process is that the dollar hasn’t responded to these yield increases at all. And I think Louis Gave said it best a couple of weeks ago in an interview, he said when I see a nation who has rising yields and a falling currency, alarm bells go off. That’s a symptom of a balance of payments problem.”

  Using Occam’s Razor, it’s clear: the reason the dollar is sinking is because the puppeteers who run the economy Jerome Powell and the rest of the Fed’s board of governors need it to sink so the US brings more dollars back in trade.

  And I think that’s a way – from the yield increases, which I think the Occam’s razor explanation for why yields are rising, particularly post-election, is on expectation of the stimulus.

  I think the reason behind the reason is that the reason we need the stimulus is because the US has a balance of payments problem in the aftermath of COVID. When you look at the hole that was blown in the US fiscal budget after COVID, it really looks, to our eyes, irrecoverable without some massive stimulus or a big devaluation in the dollar or something of that sort.

  As Gromen reminds us, central banks started pulling back on QE back in 2014 when the Fed said it would start tapering its asset purchases.  But even before COVID struck, purchases started trending higher. 

  

  

  The discussion then circles back to “deficits don’t matter…until they do.”

  Erik: Now, a phrase that I’ve heard you use a lot before, Luke, is deficits don’t matter until they do. The implication being that, at some point, if you no longer have the position of prominence that the US has enjoyed, with the rest of the world buying up its debt, all of a sudden the game is different.

  But, on the other hand, you can spend pretty much an unlimited amount of money if the Fed just buys all the Treasuries and you don’t have to depend on outside investors for that.

  How do you see this increased spending, lots and lots of stimulus planned, a growing political sentiment around MMT to say let’s just spend whatever we need to, we can always print the money to buy the bonds if necessary?

  How long does that game go on until deficits do matter?

  Luke: I think they’ve started to matter already. I think they started to matter in 3Q14 when global central banks stopped buying Treasuries on net.

  If you look at what they have bought from 3Q14 to present on net, they have not added any Treasury bonds on net to their FX reserves, which I think that is really the kickoff of when they started to matter.

  There have been on this front a couple of interesting op-eds in the Wall Street Journal in the last month, one by former Goldman CEO and Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, one by former Fed governor Kevin Warsh last week.

  And both of them I think are really important op-eds because they both suggest that the Fed and the US government have a problem, which is that the US needs to refinance (call it) $7 to $8 trillion net this year.

  So, what does this mean for yields and the dollar?

  Readers can listen to the full interview below, courtesy of MacroVoices:

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 16:35

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Gray Curtain Descends, Part 2
  The Gray Curtain Descends, Part 2

  Authored by Robert Gore via Straight Line Logic

  Read Part 1 here…

  It’s secession or war…

  Four days after the election, a woman calling herself OHMama posted “I Am Done” on The Burning Platform website. It was the site’s most read article of 2020. SLL and many other websites reposted it. It was raw, explosive anger and a profoundly moving lament; OHMama was clearly at the end of her rope. The closing paragraph packed a wallop.

  I was raised to be a lady, and ladies don’t curse, but fuck these motherfuckers to hell and back for what they’ve done to me, and mine, and my country. All we Joe Blow Americans ever wanted was a little patch of land to raise a family, a job to pay the bills, and at least some illusion of freedom, and even that was too much for these human parasites. They want it all, mind, body and soul. Damn them. Damn them all.

  OHMama gave voice to what’s beneath the surface for so many of us—abject disgust, barely contained fury, and dread of what’s to come. She claimed her own life to live it as she sees fit, and damn them, damn them all, who presume to rule us.

  

  That anger surfaced in Washington on January 6. The protest and raid of the Capitol were illuminating in several ways. They defined the two sides: the government, its string-pullers, and its allies versus those who despise and oppose them.

  The Saul Alinsky line was crossed, setting an important precedent. His acolytes insist their enemies live by their own rules while exempting themselves from any rules other than those that secure power. Playing by the rules when the opposition doesn’t is a guaranteed loser. Caring what they think of you is craven. Cowering when they call you hypocrites is unilateral surrender. Going forward, Alinsky’s acolytes may face an opposition that plays by the same rules they do—those necessary to secure power.

  The Capitol raid scared the crap out of uniparty politicians, witness the hysterical overreaction. Given what they and their accomplices have done to Americans and people around the world, they should live in perpetual, mortal terror. Unfortunately, their cowardice outruns their brains. Instead of responding to the message they’ll shoot the messenger and clamp down harder.

  Legacy media was filled with paeans to our “sacred” government and its “temples,” deploring the “sacrilege” of those who “desecrated” and “defiled” them. What absolute tripe! Washington is a Corruptocracy, a moral cesspool. Anything sacred would have been vandalized or torn down by the mobs allowed to run riot last year. They would have toppled the Washington Monument if they could have figured out how.

  Americans who build businesses or pursue careers honestly producing goods and services for voluntary trade are engaging in activities far more sacred than anything that goes on in the capital. Millions of parents instill moral principles in their children, only to see those principles defiled daily by the government. Washington delenda est—if it were leveled and sown with salt America and the world would be better for it.

  The corruptocrats’ ability to shore up the debt-riddled global financial and economic systems with ever more debt has astounded skeptics, among them SLL. The debt load is many times annual global production and debt service is sucking up that production like a tapeworm sucks up its victim’s meals. Every financial asset is a debt or equity claim, and virtually every income stream and real asset—factories, real estate, houses, warehouses, inventories, office buildings, malls, etc.—has been pledged or mortgaged, often several times over.

  We saw the global daisy chain unravel in 2008 and 2009 and the system is daisy-chainier now. If you’re looking for canaries in the coal mine, watch the yields on sovereign debt. Once they really start to climb it’s game over. The devastation will be unprecedented and epic.

  Collapse will decimate over-indebted, non-productive governments that have made promises they can’t keep to millions of their citizens. That may be part of a plan to destroy national governments and generate clamor for totalitarian global government. Yet, every tyranny confronts the question: who is going to host its predation and parasitism if the disobedient but productive (there is a correlation) have been imprisoned or executed? Slavery is notoriously unproductive.

  Globo-government will be in the same position as the national governments it supersedes—bankrupt, bereft of resources, and unable to produce anything other than fiat debt instruments. Dispensing a steadily depreciating universal basic income will be problematic. Not that it will bother globo-government if billions of its wards die of poverty and starvation. The bigger concern will be securing the resources necessary for surveillance and suppression of the remaining enslaved.

  Enfeebled or failed governments of any stripe engender both chaos and opportunity. Collapse and chaos will be huge blows to governments, the perpetual enemies of liberty, but could be a game changer for the liberty-minded, who are well-advised to wait for the bubble to burst.

  Chaos will require preparation by those who want to capitalize on the opportunity. Many alternative media sites stress personal preparation and establishing local networks, and offer valuable strategies and advice. Readers are invited to list their favorites in the comments section. No one can prepare for every contingency, but if you haven’t prepared for the most obvious ones—grid down, lack of access to food and water, etc.—now is the time to do so.

  If governments are the enemy and are destined to collapse, then the opposition should do everything possible to hasten that collapse. In the US, twenty-five million people, about a third of Trump’s voters, simultaneously withdrawing their financially intermediated assets would spread panic across our massively over-leveraged, inextricably interconnected globe. (For more, see Revolution in America, Robert Gore, SLL, January 7, 2015.)

  There’s a powerful inducement for preemptive withdrawal: the front of the line is the best place to be during a bank run (other than not being in line at all). The bank run is inevitable, the question is whether or not you want to be its victim. This strategy is legal, effective, nonviolent, and hits governments where they are weakest—their insolvency and inability to produce.

  Our opponents have clearly defined goal—absolute power—and they are absolutely committed to subjugating or eliminating anyone who stands in their way. Until recently most of those on our side didn’t even realize we were at war.

  Before such a war goes kinetic (the modern term for old-fashioned war where people get killed) and in the hope that it doesn’t, we need a clearly defined goal and a strategy to achieve it. The goal is the fundamental right of every human: the liberty to peaceably live one’s own life and pursue one’s own happiness. The strategy is more complicated.

  Peacefully splitting the US into two or more countries when it is so irretrievably and irreconcilably riven is almost breathtaking in its common sense. You go your way and we’ll go ours appeals to both logic and justice. What could be fairer than to give people a choice?

  Our side should never stop advocating for a peaceful split and our own territory. This does not mean advocating for insurrection and revolution, which would imply replacing the current government with one of our own. Why would we want to take possession of a cesspool government and rule over so many who hate us? Secession and liberty, not insurrection and revolution, are the goals. Leave the present government to the corruptocrats, their minions, and their dependents.

  Most productive people would opt for liberty. Absolute power would have to feed, subjugate, and terrorize masses of subsistence-level slaves. It would be counting on enslaving the productive without reckoning on what replacing incentives with fear and coercion would do to their willingness to produce or their desire to stay. The totalitarians cannot allow a free alternative to coexist just across the border. Unfortunately, peaceful secession is a remote possibility, which means contemplating the alternative.

  The government’s many senseless wars have demonstrated the effectiveness of guerrilla warfare against forces superior in every conventional metric: manpower, firepower, and technology. Among tens of millions of potential secessionists, many of them well-armed, there are members or veterans of the military with counterinsurgency experience. They’ve gone to school on guerrillas and their tactics. They’ll likely provide secessionist military leadership once the totalitarians’ war (and they will start it) goes kinetic.

  Modern, decentralized technologies and weaponry will be a key component of secessionist strength. The war will be won more with brains and creativity than troop strength or bravado. Teams that can design and assemble weaponized drones and robots, experts in artificial intelligence, remote-control munitions specialists, and computer hackers will be more important military assets than platoons of AR-15 toting commandos.

  These technologies will be essential to counter the opposition’s surveillance capabilities, infrastructure, and command and control systems. Secessionists who ignore next-generation technologies, believe they won’t be deployed against them, or fail to realize their offensive potential will be fighting the last war…and they will lose. These technologies are relatively cheap compared to traditional superpower weaponry; their biggest expense is the brainpower they incorporate. It’s a safe bet that among 70 plus million Trump voters and otherwise disaffected that kind of brainpower can be found.

  Don’t assume that those within the present power structure, or the emerging globalist one, won’t use every weapon in their arsenal to preserve their hold on power, even at the cost of their own and humanity’s extinction. While the police and military may refuse to fire on their own kin and countrymen, it’s impossible to overestimate the suicidal depravity of the so-called humans issuing their orders. Thus, while conventional armaments, remote technologies, committed secessionists, and guerrilla warfare will be important and essential when kinetic war breaks out, they won’t, in and of themselves, guarantee victory. Too much faith that they will could in fact lead to the opposite outcome.

  Along with a straightforward assessment of the opposition’s weaknesses and strengths and a realistic strategy for capitalizing on the former and neutralizing the latter, it’s time to convert current rage into a full-scale political movement. That doesn’t mean the pound-your-head-against-the-wall strategy of trying to win rigged elections. It does mean informing, persuading, and recruiting—the nitty gritty of building a political movement. Much of that building will have to be underground as public dissidence is canceled, corrected, and punished. One of the Viet Cong’s key assets was its political arm, the National Liberation Front, to which they gave much of the credit for their success in the Vietnam war.

  Most of the necessary technical brainpower will be found among the young. Right now, the average secessionist is over sixty, voted for Trump, owns plenty of firearms, and has vague notions of a mass movement of the like-minded either miraculously defeating the government or going out in a bolt-hole blaze of glory. That’s not a strategy, it’s a death wish.

  It’s easier to carp about snowflakes and SJWs than it is to reach out and educate the open-minded among the young (yes, they are out there) to show them that they will be the primary victims of totalitarianism. The gray curtain is descending over their futures. They have to be inspired by the vision of something far better—their own freedom—if that gray curtain is not to become their gray shroud. You can do worse than give them copies of the Declaration of Independence, The Road to Serfdom, and Atlas Shrugged.

  It’s not necessary to change the thinking of every member of Generations X, Y, and Z, or even a majority. What’s essential is to make connections and form alliances with some of the best, brightest, and bravest, to inspire their commitment to their own freedom and future. Start with your own children and grandchildren, and remember that listening is a big part of persuasion. To be understood one must first understand.

  Nothing will be fair about the coming fight. It’s no use whining about the other side’s lack of principles, its lies, hypocrisy, unfairness, ruthlessness, and control of virtually every important institution. They’re evil totalitarians, what the hell do we expect? Their principle is absolute power and they’ll do whatever is necessary to acquire and keep it.

  Ashli Babbitt’s death, if it is to mean anything at all, should be the cold slap of reality across the faces of those who haven’t grasped the nature of what we face. To ignore the risk that breaching an Imperial Sanctum would be met with violence was pure foolishness. The demonstrators who entered the Capitol could have been murdered en masse. Any expectation that their murderers would receive justice from the Corruptocracy would be delusional naiveté.

  No more foolishness or naiveté. Any supposedly peaceful protest will be infiltrated by agent provocateurs bent on making trouble for our cause (including the protests being advertised for next week). The totalitarians will do what they do until they’re completely defeated. This is war, which calls for the unremitting exercise of cold, ruthless rationality. We will administer justice and show mercy when appropriate, but we will expect or receive neither from the other side.

  Let’s get on with it.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/17/2021 – 00:00

• 2020 Saw Unprecedented Murder Spike In Major U.S. Cities
  2020 Saw Unprecedented Murder Spike In Major U.S. Cities

  In late December the Associated Press reported that 2020 was on track to become the deadliest year in U.S. history with the total number of deaths forecast to rise 15 percent compared to 2019, primarily due to the coronavirus pandemic. There were also several other smaller contributory factors, however, including higher death tolls from heart & circulatory diseases as well as from the country’s opioid crisis. Additionally, as Staista’s Niall McCarthy notes, the U.S. also experienced its most violent year in decades with an unprecedented rise in homicides.

  The Gun Violence Archive reported that more than 19,000 people died in shootings or firearm-related incidents in 2020, the highest figure in over two decades.

  New Orleans-based crime analyst Jeff Asher took a closer look at the number of murders in 57 major American cities and he found that the number of offenses grew in 51 of them. He only focused on agencies where data was available and most of them had figures through November or December of 2020.

  Growth in violent crime varied by city with Seattle seeing a 74 percent spike in homicides between 2019 and 2020 while Chicago and Boston saw their offenses grow 55.5 percent and 54 percent, respectively. Elsewhere, Washington D.C. and Las Vegas saw growth in their murder offences, albeit at a slower pace of less than 20 percent.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  New York’s homicide count went up by nearly 40 percent with Mayor Bill de Blasio stating that the figures should worry all New Yorkers and it has to stop.

  He attributed the situation “in part, to the coronavirus and to the fact that people are cooped up”, according to NPR, adding that “it’s certainly related to the fact that the criminal justice system is on pause and that’s causing a lot of problems”.

  The rise in homicide has not been confined to cities and Asher says that the problem is also increasingly rural. He told NPR that the numbers for 2020 are by no means final and that the official end of year statistics will tell a startlingly grim story. He also said that the U.S. is on course for the largest one-year rise in its murder count ever recorded.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 23:30

• What's The True Agenda Behind The Movement To Abolish The Electoral College?
  What’s The True Agenda Behind The Movement To Abolish The Electoral College?

  Authored by Trent England via InsideSources.com,

  One of Georgia’s 16 presidential electors cast her Electoral College vote for Joe Biden but says, if she had it her way, the United States would do away with the constitutional election process altogether—a radical and dangerous position. 

  “I support abolishing the Electoral College,” former Atlanta City Council President Cathy Woolard said during a recent interview.

  “I think all too often the popular vote has been overturned by the Electoral College and that doesn’t seem right to me.” 

  It may not seem right to Ms. Woolard, but the Electoral College purposefully forces would-be presidents to build nationwide coalitions, courting diverse voters across the country. It should remain in place. Otherwise, politicians would ignore the needs of people in ‘flyover country’ and focus even more on big cities and the coasts.  

  

  Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was another elector who, like Ms. Woolard, called for eliminating the Electoral College even as she cast one of New York’s electoral votes for Democrat President-elect Joe Biden. 

  “I believe we should abolish the Electoral College and select our president by the winner of the popular vote, same as every other office,” she said in a tweet. “But while it still exists, I was proud to cast my vote in New York for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.” 

  Clinton is missing the fact that the presidency is not like other offices. Most major democratic nations use a two-step process (usually a parliamentary system) to elect their top executive. Our Electoral College, like those other systems, balances the interests of everyone across a diverse country while limiting the power of big-city elites.

  Our system also limits the power of Washington, D.C. As Thomas S. Kidd, history professor at Baylor University, says, “2020 has shown that the states still possess powerful checks on national executive power. That’s a good thing, and we should be exceedingly cautious about cutting the states out of the process of electing the president (i.e. the Electoral College).” 

  Complaints about the Electoral College often stem from Clinton’s loss in 2016. At various times, Clinton has blamed former FBI Director James Comey, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), President Barack Obama, Russia and, of course, the Electoral College for her loss.  

  Really it was Clinton’s own decisions that cost her the presidency, and the Electoral College worked just right. By design, the Electoral College rewards candidates who do the hard work of winning over Americans in many states, not just winning huge margins in a few states or giant cities. The American Founders believed the president should be a national candidate, not a regional one.  

  In 1888, Grover Cleveland won the popular vote but was blown out in the Electoral College because his support was concentrated in the South; he won huge margins there but lost almost everywhere else. Similarly, Clinton ran up huge margins in coastal states while failing to connect with middle America.  

  Clinton dismissed struggling voters as “deplorables” and lost their votes as a consequence. Marc Thiessen of The Washington Post argues, “Clinton still can’t seem to tell the difference between a white nationalist and working-class voters who are upset because their family incomes are stagnant or falling, they feel shut out of the labor force, and their communities are mired in substance abuse and despair. These ‘forgotten Americans’ had legitimate grievances that Democrats ignored.” 

  The Clinton campaign also squandered its monetary advantage by failing to invest enough in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania. According to one liberal activist, the candidate’s team was, “very surgical and corporate. Their thing was, ‘We don’t have to leave [literature] at the doors, everyone knows who Hillary Clinton is.’” 

  Joe Biden corrected Clinton’s errors, cultivating a working man persona and investing heavily in turning out the vote in key states. He received the Democratic nomination in part because primary voters believed he would appeal to those “forgotten Americans” who Clinton had ignored and demeaned.  

  In both 2016 and 2020, the Electoral College worked as intended. Serious presidential candidates were forced to build diverse coalitions rather than relying on one region or demographic group. For close to 250 years, the Electoral College has fostered a healthy and vibrant electoral system, and we shouldn’t throw that away because Hillary Clinton mismanaged her campaign.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 23:00

• Bill Gates Becomes America's Largest Farmland Owner While 'Great Reset" Says Future Is 'No Private Property'
  Bill Gates Becomes America’s Largest Farmland Owner While ‘Great Reset” Says Future Is ‘No Private Property’

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  While Americans are being told by ‘Great Reset’ technocrats that the future is one without private property, Bill Gates and other billionaires have been buying up huge amounts of farmland.

  

  Indeed, Gates is now the biggest owner of farmland in America, according to a Forbes report.

  “After years of reports that he was purchasing agricultural land in places like Florida and Washington, The Land Report revealed that Gates, who has a net worth of nearly $121 billion according to Forbes, has built up a massive farmland portfolio spanning 18 states.”

  “His largest holdings are in Louisiana (69,071 acres), Arkansas (47,927 acres) and Nebraska (20,588 acres). Additionally, he has a stake in 25,750 acres of transitional land on the west side of Phoenix, Arizona, which is being developed as a new suburb.”

  Gates now owns 242,000 acres of farmland across the U.S., mostly “through third-party entities by Cascade Investments, Gates’ personal investment vehicle.”

  America’s biggest owner of farmland is now Bill Gates https://t.co/j9gW4zQ0Yh pic.twitter.com/0tZLJcGXfg

  — Forbes (@Forbes) January 14, 2021

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

  According to Forbes, it is not known what Gates is doing with the land and Cascade Investments refused to comment on the issue.

  In terms of individual land owners, Gates is still far behind media mogul John C. Malone, who is in top spot with 2.2 million acres of ranches and forests and CNN founder Ted Turner, who owns 2 million acres of ranch land.

  Amazon’s Jeff Bezos is also “investing in land on a large scale,” according to the report.

  What billionaire philanthropists and technocrats are acquiring land at an accelerating speed, they appear to be telling the general public that in the future private property will virtually cease to exist.

  In his books, World Economic Forum founder and globalist Klaus Schwab makes clear that the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ or ‘The Great Reset’ will lead to the abolition of private property.

  That message is echoed on the WEF’s official website, which states, “Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city – or should I say, “our city”. I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.”

  Apparently, you won’t be allowed to own any private property and your only recourse will be to live in a state of permanent dependency on a small number of rich elitists who own everything.

  That used to be called feudalism, which is a form of slavery.

  *  *  *

  New limited edition merch now available! Click here. In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 22:45

• Biden To 'Immediately' Send Congress Bill That Would Offer Citizenship To 11 Million Illegals
  Biden To ‘Immediately’ Send Congress Bill That Would Offer Citizenship To 11 Million Illegals

  President-elect Joe Biden will ‘immediately’ send a legislative package to Congress which would provide a pathway to citizenship for some 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the Los Angeles Times, according to “immigrants rights activists in communication with the Biden-Harris transition team.”

  

  The bill would also provide a shorter pathway to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of people living in the United States under a temporary protected status and/or who qualify under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program who were brought into the US as children.

  And in what the Times calls a “significant departure from many previous immigration bills under both Democratic and Republican administrations,” the Biden plan would contain zero provisions for stepped-up immigration enforcement and security measures, according to Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center Immigrant Justice Fund, who was informed of the details by Biden staffers.

  Both Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris have said their legislative proposal would include a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, and The Times has confirmed the bold opening salvo that the new administration plans in its first days doesn’t include the “security first” political concessions of past efforts.

  Hincapié, who was co-chair of the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force on Immigration — part of Biden’s outreach to his top primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and his progressive base — said that Biden’s decision to not prioritize additional enforcement measures was probably a result of lessons learned from the Obama administration’s failed attempt to appease Republicans by backing tighter immigration enforcement in hopes of gaining their support for immigration relief. –Los Angeles Times

  “On Inauguration Day, President-elect Biden will sign roughly a dozen actions to combat the four crises, restore humanity to our immigration system, and make government function for the people,” reads a Saturday memo by incoming Biden chief of staff, Ron Klain, who said the incoming president’s agenda included “the immigration bill he will send to Congress on his first day in office.“

  If Republicans don’t stop this in the Senate, it’s GG for the GOP https://t.co/LEE5OkqqpD

  — Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) January 16, 2021

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

  Under BIden’s plan – the most sweeping and comprehensive since President Regan’s 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act granting some 3 million people legal status (after which California flipped blue), immigrants would be eligible for legal permanent residence after five years, and US citizenship after three more years.

  Several immigration activists who spoke with The Times praised the reported scope and scale of the bill and expressed surprise at its ambition. A number of legislators and analysts had predicted that the new administration, at least in its first months in power, would be likely to pursue immigration measures that would stir the least controversy and could be achieved by executive actions rather than legislation. -LA Times

  Will it pass?

  Given the sweeping changes, Democrats are likely to face serious pushback despite holding slim majorities in both chambers of Congress – and the bill will likely face months of political debate as conservative members and immigration hard-liners push back.

  Meanwhile, Texas Democratic Rep. Juaquin Castro said in a Friday call with reporters that he’s formulating a bill which would offer illegals immediate protection from deportation and a fast-tracked path to citizenship for essential workers who are undocumented.

  “It’s time for essential workers to no longer be treated as disposable, but to be celebrated and welcomed as American citizens,” said Castro, adding “If your labor feeds, builds and cares for our nation, you have earned the right to stay here with full legal protection, free from fear of deportation.”

  And look at this – just in time:

  A Honduran migrant caravan is heading to the United States.

  Arriving just in time for Joe Biden’s inauguration.

  This is the future Democrats’ voted for.

  pic.twitter.com/sKy8NHJfkJ

  — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 15, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 22:30

• An OrWELLSian Purge? Why H.G. Wells' "The Shape Of Things To Come" Has Arrived Today
  An OrWELLSian Purge? Why H.G. Wells’ “The Shape Of Things To Come” Has Arrived Today

  Authored by Cynthia Chung via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  It is no coincidence that our entertainment industry today, so heavily saturated with the influence of Wells’ propaganda, is obsessed with the theme of a post-apocalyptic world…

  “It has become apparent that whole masses of human population are, as a whole, inferior in their claim upon the future, to other masses, that they cannot be given opportunities or trusted with power as the superior peoples are trusted, that their characteristic weaknesses are contagious and detrimental to the civilizing fabric, and that their range of incapacity tempts and demoralizes the strong. To give them equality is to sink to their level, to protect and cherish them is to be swamped in their fecundity. “

  – H.G. Wells’ in “Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress upon Human Life and Thought” 1901

  In “The Shape of Things to Come: The Ultimate Revolution” (published in 1933), H.G. Wells writes of the future predicting, rather optimistically, that there will be another world war in just a few years, followed by epidemic and famine. In this fictional future, war continues for thirty years into the 1960s, despite the people having forgotten why they started fighting. Humanity enters a new Dark Age. In a last bid for victory, the enemy deploys a biological weapon resulting in the “wandering sickness,” producing the first zombies, and by 1970 the global population has dropped to a little under one billion.

  Though this is depicted as horrific, it is at the same time depicted as a necessity – a “great reset,” to restore the “balance” so to speak. It is only with this reduced population size that the world can begin to build itself back together from the chaos that it was, and enter into its new phase of evolution as a biologically superior species (the inferior having been culled by war and disease), managed by a bureaucratic system under the form of a world government.

  This is the sci-fi fantasy of H.G. Wells and is the central theme to everything he wrote including his works of non-fiction. The subject on ways to reduce the world population was a troubling dilemma for Wells…not the reducing part, but the thought that there would be those so foolish as to forbid it.

  You see, it was considered by some that the human species had found itself in a crisis by the 1900s. Europe, up until the 17th century had a population size that never exceeded roughly 100 million. But nearly doubled to 180 million in the 18th century, and doubled again to 390 million in the 19thcentury. H.G. Wells wrote of this “the extravagant swarm of new births” as “the essential disaster of the nineteenth century.” Not war, not disease, not starvation, not abject poverty, but population growth was determined as the disaster of an entire century.

  Today the world population is 7.9 billion people, a far cry from Wells’ hopeful 1 billion. However, there is good news! The worldometers.info site predicts a decreasing net change in population growth, such that by year 2050 the yearly change will be 0.50% of what it is now! In other words, the rate of population growth will be cut in half 29 years from now! Those are striking projections and would entail a massive cap on growth! Obviously, this is a projection based off of the presumed success of “educational reforms.” Though I do wonder…what will we do if not all of the individuals agree to abide by these reforms? And what will we do if not all of the nations agree to abide by these reforms? Will we enforce it nonetheless, and if so…by what methods?

  

  The Ghosts of Wells’ Past

  “The knowledge of today is the ignorance of tomorrow”

  – H.G. Wells

  The Wells that we have come to know today started his journey as a young boy winning a scholarship to study at the prestigious Normal School of Science (now called the Royal College of Science). His subject of choice was biology and his teacher, and quickly thereafter mentor, was none other than Thomas Huxley, otherwise known as “Darwin’s bulldog” (his words).

  Through Huxley, Wells’ conception of the nature of humankind was formed with its foundation built upon the philosophies of Charles Darwin and Thomas Malthus.

  Because Wells is so very influenced by these men, in fact they form the very basis for his ethics; I thought it apt to share with you a few quotes.

  In Thomas Malthus’ “Essay on the Principle of Population” (1799), he wrote:

  “We should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague.” [emphasis added]

  This approach seems not too different from a proposal to crowd people into a building with kindling and then proceed to light it on fire. After all, fire is a natural phenomenon. A much quicker and more effective remedy, I would think, if one is to take such an approach…

  In Charles Darwin’s “The Descent of Man” (no not his autobiography! Though he was very much spiritually conflicted with the social consequences of his philosophies…) stated his thoughts on directed breeding as such:

  “No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man itself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.” [emphasis added]

  To the credit of Darwin (though the damage was already done), he included a disclaimer in his “The Descent of Man,” that if humankind were to take upon itself the enforcement of the so-called “forces of nature,” it would be at the cost of our “most noble qualities”, as Darwin states:

  “Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.” [emphasis added]

  Out of Malthus, Huxley and Wells, Darwin was by far the most troubled by the social consequences of what he believed to be an unavoidable necessity. Yet he could never resolve why something necessary could be so morally destructive and this failure to rectify the two opposing veins of thought would cost him dearly. In his later years he described his spiritual crippling inability to find joy in anything he once did, as he states in his autobiography:

  “I have said that in one respect my mind has changed during the last twenty or thirty years. Up to the age of thirty, or beyond it, poetry of many kinds…gave me great pleasure, and even as a schoolboy I took intense delight in Shakespeare, especially in the historical plays…music [was a] very great delight. But now for many years I cannot endure to read a line of poetry: I have tried lately to read Shakespeare, and found it so intolerably dull that it nauseated me. I have also almost lost my taste for…music…My mind seems to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts, but why this should have caused the atrophy of that part of the brain alone, on which the higher tastes depend, I cannot conceive… The loss of these tastes is a loss of happiness, and may possibly be injurious to the intellect, and more probably to the moral character, by enfeebling the emotional part of our nature.”

  What is the value of life, if in striving for our supposed “survival” we lose our most noble qualities? Why should we sacrifice our best qualities in a humiliating trade-off for a “contingent benefit” and “an overwhelming evil”?

  Britain’s Ministry of Propaganda

  Soon after the outbreak of the First World War (1914), the British government discovered that Germany had a Propaganda Agency- and thus it was only reasonable that a British War Propaganda Bureau be established. David Lloyd George, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was to head the task.

  On Sept. 2nd, 1914, H.G. Wells (who was 48 by then) was invited amongst twelve other participants (including Arthur Conan Doyle and Rudyard Kipling) to discuss ways of best promoting Britain’s interests during the war. All the writers present at the conference agreed to the utmost secrecy and it was not until 1935 that the activities of the War Propaganda Bureau became known to the general public. It was agreed that pamphlets and books would be written to promote the government’s view of the situation.

  Other than writing books for the Ministry of Propaganda, Wells also did some dabbling as a journalist under the supervision of Lord Northcliffe, the owner of The Times and the Daily Mail (the largest circulating newspaper in the early 20th century), among other newspapers.

  Northcliffe’s newspapers propagandized for creating a Minister of Munitions, which was held first by David Lloyd George (1915), and played an instrumental role in getting him appointed as Prime Minister of Britain in 1916. Lloyd George then appointed Lord Northcliffe as Director of Propaganda.

  Thus, H.G. Wells not only participated in the British War Propaganda Bureau but worked directly under the Director of Propaganda. And thus, much of his writing from 1914 on, should be regarded in service (and certainly not counter) to the interests of the British Empire.

  Among the plethora of books Wells wrote, was “The New World Order,” (1940). It appears that Wells was indeed the first to pioneer the now-infamous term.

  Wells’ Vision for a New Republic vs the People of the Abyss

  In Wells’ “Anticipations” published in 1901, he writes the “vicious, helpless and pauper masses” have appeared, spreading as the railway systems have spread, and representing an integral part of the process of industrialization, like the waste product of a healthy organism. For these “great useless masses of people” he adopts the term “People of the Abyss” and he predicts that the “nation that most resolutely picks over, educates, sterilizes, exports or poisons its People of the Abyss” will be in the ascendant.

  The ethical system laid out in Wells’ New Republic forbids the further growth of the “People of the Abyss”. In the past, Nature killed these off, and in some cases killing will still be necessary. And we should not be appalled by this task, as per Mr. Wells. Death for such people will mean merely “the end of the bitterness of failure, the merciful obliteration of weak and silly and pointless things.” Clearly the effecting of this will be morally justifiable according to Wells:

  “The new ethics will hold life to be a privilege and a responsibility, not a sort of night refuge for base spirits out of the void; and the alternative in right conduct between living fully, beautifully and efficiently will be to die. For a multitude of contemptible and silly creatures, fear-driven and helpless and useless, unhappy or hateful happy in the midst of squalid dishonour, feeble, ugly, inefficient, born of unrestrained lusts, and increasing and multiplying through sheer incontinence and stupidity, the men of the New Republic will have little pity and less benevolence.” (5) [emphasis added]

  If “the whole tenor of a man’s actions” shows him to be unfit to live, the New Republicans will exterminate him. They will not be squeamish about inflicting death because they will have a fuller sense of the possibilities of life.

  “They will have an ideal that will make killing worth the while.” The killing, Wells explains, will not be needlessly brutal. “All such killing will be done with an opiate.”

  Whether this will be administered forcibly or whether the victim will be persuaded to swallow it, he does not reveal. Selected criminals will be destroyed by the same means. The death penalty will also be used to prevent the transmission of genetic disorders. People suffering from genetically transmissible diseases will be forbidden to propagate, and will be killed if they do.

  As for the “swarms of black, and brown, and dirty-white, and yellow people”, who do not meet the new needs of efficiency, will, he insists “have to go”. It is “their portion to die out and disappear”.

  In 1938, Wells’ “War of the Worlds” was broadcasted as a radio drama and narrated by Orson Welles. Apparently, during the broadcast it had not made itself clear to its audience that it was in fact a radio drama and not the actual news. Suffice to say the reporting of a man-eating alien invasion caused quite the panic in its London boroughs, and I am sure the British Propaganda Bureau got quite the chuckle out of it. It was great news for them, for it showed how easy it would be to control the narrative even if it were to be carried out to an absurd degree. It confirmed to them that the public will believe anything.

  Wells wrote of the panic caused by the radio drama in the London boroughs:

  “If one could have hung that June morning in a balloon in the blazing blue above London, every northward and eastward road running out of the infinite tangle of streets would have seemed stippled black with the streaming fugitives, each dot a human agony of terror and physical distress…Never before in the history of the world had such a mass of human beings moved and suffered together…without order and with a goal, six million people, unarmed and unprovisioned, driving headlong. It was the beginning of the rout of civilization, of the massacre of mankind.” [emphasis added]

  I think it no coincidence that our entertainment industry today, so heavily saturated with the influence of Wells’ propaganda, is obsessed with the theme of a post-apocalyptic world, the ever-revolving death game where its avatars are tested on their ability to survive at all cost. Through these adventures, we the audience are brought along and are taught how to feel the thrill of the hunt, the catharsis of the bludgeoning, the release that comes from mayhem. For we are the children of the ultimate revolution… the dawn of the great Purge.

  Modern Religion: A Collective Orwellian Mind

  In H.G. Wells’ “Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution”, he makes no qualms in declaring his trilogy: “The Outline of History” (1919), “The Science of Life” (1929), and “The Work, Wealth, and Happiness of Mankind” (1932) as the new Bible:

  “I have told already how I have schemed out a group of writings to embody the necessary ideas of the new time in a form adapted to the current reading public; I have made a sort of provisional “Bible,” so to speak, for some factors at least in the Open Conspiracy.”

  The reader should be aware that Julius Huxley was a co-author of “The Science of Life”. Julian was also a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society, serving as its Vice-President from 1937-1944 and its President from 1959-1962. Interesting life choices from the authors of the new Bible.

  Of Wells’ vision for a “Modern Religion” he wrote:

  ‘…if religion is to develop unifying and directive power in the present confusion of human affairs it must adapt itself to this forward-looking, individuality-analyzing turn of mind; it must divest itself of its sacred histories…The desire for service, for subordination, for permanent effect, for an escape from the distressful pettiness and mortality of the individual life, is the undying element in every religious system.

  The time has come to strip religion right down to that [service and subordination is all Wells wants to keep of the old relic of religion]…The explanation of why things are is an unnecessary effort…The essential fact…is the desire for religion and not how it came about…The first sentence in the modern creed must be, not “I believe,” but “I give myself.” ‘ [emphasis added]

  And to what are we to “give ourselves” to without any questions asked, but with a blind faith to worship what we are told is the good?

  Wells explains it to us thus:

  “The character of the Open Conspiracy will now be plainly displayed. It will have become a great world movement as wide-spread and evident as socialism or communism. It will have taken the place of these movements very largely. It will be more than they were, it will be frankly a world religion. This large, loose assimilatory mass of movements, groups, and societies will be definitely and obviously attempting to swallow up the entire population of the world and become the new human community.”

  Conclusion

  In Alfred Hitchcock’s film “The Rope” (1948), two Harvard students murder one of their friends as an experiment in committing the “perfect murder” and a display of their intellectual superiority. They stuff the body in a large chest in the middle of the dining room and hold a party, the idea being that all of their guests will be too daft as to figure out that they are dinning in a room with a fresh corpse, that is, everyone except Rupert Cadell (played by James Stewart), a former teacher of theirs. Rupert, they recognise will be their real challenge and their greatest proof of intellectual superiority if they succeed in pulling the wool over his eyes.

  In fact, it was Rupert who taught the two men this manner of thinking that “murder is a crime for most men, but a privilege for the few.” This is reasoned by the belief that “moral concepts of good and evil do not pertain to the superior being.”

  This subject is discussed at the dinner party, the guests think at first Rupert is kidding, but he assures them that the world would be a better place if the superior were permitted to commit murder, and that such a murder would be an “art form.” He states “think of what this would mean for unemployment, poverty, waiting in long lines.” He thinks open season for murder would be too much, and suggests shorter durations such as “cut a throat week” or “strangulation day.”

  As the evening progresses, Rupert, the astute man that he is, observes a series of odd behaviour from the two men. David (the murdered young man) was in fact invited to the party, his father and his fiancé are amongst the guests and there is a growing concern for why David has not shown up.

  Long story short – after all the guests had left, only Rupert and the two young killers remain in the apartment. Rupert discovers that they have murdered David (who was also a student of Rupert’s), and he opens the chest to find the body. Horrified and disgusted, he asks “why did you do it?” They of course responded, “we simply acted out what you always talked about.”

  Confronted with the reality of his words, Rupert is ashamed at being partially responsible for this macabre scene. However, Rupert states, “there was always something deep within me that prevented me from ever acting out my words,” in other words, he never thought it possible that anyone would actually have it in them to act them out.

  It is in this moment that Rupert realises that it is not in fact the superior being who is capable of committing murder, but the criminally insane. That the idea of purging the world of its “inferiors,” would in fact rid the world of its most loving and moral beings, their traits regarded as intolerably foolish and weak.

  In the end, we would be left with the worst of humankind, a human race that had cannibalised itself.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 22:00

• "Tough Months Ahead" – NYC's Lackluster Recovery Continues To Decimate Businesses And Livelihoods
  “Tough Months Ahead” – NYC’s Lackluster Recovery Continues To Decimate Businesses And Livelihoods

  Indoor dining is banned; offices are empty; city dwellers are fleeing the metro area. 

  The virus pandemic has deeply scarred New York City’s economy that will have long-lasting effects. Many small and medium-sized firms, entire industries, and livelihoods continue to unravel as the economic toll continues to rise nearly one year after the pandemic began. 

  Bloomberg reports the Bronx’s unemployment rate stands around 16%, which is much higher than the national average of 6.7%. The virus-induced downturn could result in at least 33% of the city’s businesses going under as the vaccine rollout has been incredibly slow. 

  “It is really going to be tough still in the coming months,” said Tim Tompkins, former head of the Times Square Alliance, which hosted its annual New Year’s Eve celebration without the public for the first time in more than a century.

  Jobless rates across all five of the city’s boroughs remain stubbornly high but off the highs seen in June.

  

  New Yorkers shouldn’t be shocked if a multi-year economic downturn unfolds. 

  “This is an event that struck right at the heart of New York’s comparative advantages,” Mark Zandi, the chief economist for Moody’s Analytics, recently said. “Being globally oriented, being stacked up in skyscrapers and packed together in stadiums: the very thing that made New York the pandemic undermined New York, was upended by it.” 

  Zandi said while the US economy “will be a long slog” from here, with estimates of a downturn lasting until 2023 – New York might not experience a recovery until 2025. 

  Zandi said NYC’s recovery could take two years longer than the rest of the country as the virus-induced downturn has severely damaged five key industries – restaurants, hotels, the arts, transportation, and building services – most of which heavily rely on travel and tourism. 

  Airbnb Chief Executive Officer Brian Chesky explained that a significant problem is developing for large cities. He said this summer people would vacation not in big cities like New York but in small towns and rural communities. The shift in domestic travel trends will continue to pressure New York City’s key industries, resulting in stubbornly high unemployment. 

  A recovery in the city is unlikely this year. As explained by the World Bank Chief Economist Carmen Reinhart on Wednesday, don’t confuse the latest economic rebound with a “recovery.” 

  Making matters worse, New Yorkers are leaving en masse – reports already indicate 300,000 people have fled the metro area because of the virus pandemic, social unrest, and increasing violent crime. 

  With the services industries decimated and a rapidly shrinking city, remaining businesses may add back fewer than 30% of the 662,000 jobs lost in 2020. 

  What does this mean? 

  Some New Yorkers’ livelihoods will be permanently destroyed as hundreds of thousands will be financially devastated as the labor market shrinks. Many have resorted to food banks and government assistance programs to survive. The situation is even becoming even direr for the working-poor as they owe a whopping $2 billion in back rent. 

  New York financial district gets it. They are also leaving as they understand the city is descending into years of socio-economic chaos. 

  Wall Street firms are packing up their bags and moving elsewhere. Other firms are shrinking their corporate footprint as work-at-home dominates. 

  The latest high-frequency data shows foot traffic inside the financial district is rolling over as Manhattan transforms into a ghost town once more. Check out some of the data showing recovery is nowhere in sight to begin the new year:

  

  Apple mobility data for New York City is rolling over. 

  

  All of this has crushed the residential and commercial real estate markets. 

  Manhattan apartment rents have dived to decade lows as inventory swells to record highs. As for Manhattan’s office space supply, well, inventory has hit highs not seen since the 2000s.

  There are concerns that some CMBS tranches heavily exposed to New York City hotels and shopping malls could experience defaults as there is no significant improvement in the metro area’s economic recovery. 

  To sum up, Paul Joseph Watson said, “New York City is dead, and it’s not coming back.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 21:30

• What Will WHO Experts Find During Their Wuhan Trip?
  What Will WHO Experts Find During Their Wuhan Trip?

  Authored by Wang Youqun, op-ed via The Epoch Times,

  On Jan. 14, a team of experts from the World Health Organization was finally allowed to travel to Wuhan and investigate the origin of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. The announcement issued by the National Health Commission on Jan. 11 contained only a short sentence. It did not mention the length of the trip, nor specified a detailed itinerary. This trip takes place more than a year after the virus first emerged. It has since spread to 191 countries and regions.

  Can WHO experts find the source of the CCP virus in Wuhan?

  I think it is unlikely.

  The reasons are as follows:

  First, tracing the virus origin and tracing who’s responsible for its global spread are closely linked.

  If Wuhan is found to be the source of the global pandemic, but the CCP allowed virus carriers to fly from Wuhan to other parts of the world—causing at least 93 million infections and over 2 million deaths to date—the CCP will be held accountable. This is something the CCP is absolutely unwilling to face.

  On May 19, 2020, under strong pressure from the international community, the World Health Assembly passed a resolution to investigate the source of the virus. However, for the WHO experts to go to Wuhan, the CCP dragged its feet again and again for more than 7 months. Why did it take so long? Some experts believe that it is to clean up all the evidence at the scene of the virus outbreak.

  Since the outbreak in 2020, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department repeatedly offered to send experts to China, but was rejected time and time again. In the end, China only agreed that the U.S. experts would go to China with the WHO expert team. In February 2020, after a 9-day trip, Canadian Bruce Aylward, the team leader of the WHO China Joint Mission, was asked by reporters in Geneva why he did not go through quarantine after visiting Wuhan. His answer accidentally revealed the fact that he had not been to any “dirty areas” of the Wuhan hospital. In other words, the expert group only went where the CCP allowed and anything they saw and heard was carefully arranged.

  

  Also, the CCP will silence all relevant personnel. Yan Limeng, a virologist at the University of Hong Kong School of Public Health fled to the United States to reveal the truths about the CCP virus. Officials from the Ministry of National Security went to her hometown of Qingdao to harass her family. She said that since mid-May, the CCP began to attack her on the internet, spread rumors, and destroy her reputation. The CCP set up a fake Facebook account with her name and resume, she alleged. The CCP lied about her being kidnapped in the United States, and claimed that she was lying and mentally ill. Yan’s mother was subsequently arrested.

  The CCP has brutally clamped down on those Chinese citizens who requested to investigate the source of the virus and hold leaders accountable. For example, Ren Zhiqiang, former business tycoon and “red princeling,” was sentenced to 18 years for his outspoken criticism of the CCP; Zhang Zhan, a citizen journalist who went to Wuhan to investigate the epidemic, was sentenced to four years in prison; and citizen journalist Fang Bin has disappeared, with many suspecting that he has been detained by authorities.

  The CCP has repeatedly retaliated against Australia, which proposed an independent investigation into the source of the virus. The Chinese regime has banned imports of Australian barley, imposed tariffs of 107.1 to 212.1 percent on Australian wine, blacklisted six Australian beef suppliers, and placed other restrictions on imports of Australian coal, cotton, and lobster.

  The CCP continues to blame other countries on the source of the virus. On March 12, 2020, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian posted a tweet claiming, without evidence, that the virus was brought into Wuhan by the U.S. army. After that, the “blaming” wars commenced. Chinese state media have claimed, on different occasions, that the virus originated in Italy, Spain, Germany, France, India, Bangladesh, Australia, Italy, Russia, Greece, and Czech Republic.

  Since the Australian government proposed in April last year that a global independent investigation into the source of the virus must be conducted, the international community has begun the research.

  In early July last year, the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response was set up with the former Prime Minister of New Zealand Helen Clark and the former President of Liberia Ellen Johnson Sirleaf serving as co-chairs.

  And some experts and officials outside of China have raised the possibility that the CCP virus leaked out of a virology lab in Wuhan.

  Wuhan Virus: CCP covered it up. CCP disappeared the doctors who knew. CCP still refuses to let the world in to see what it wrought. CCP lied about where the virus came from. pic.twitter.com/jVCETwUokO

  — Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 16, 2021

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

  The CCP will definitely do everything possible to conceal the truth about the source of the virus – deceit is in its nature. But nothing can be kept hidden forever. The truth will eventually come to light.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 21:00

• Goldman Sounds The Alarm On Stocks: When Euphoria Is This High, "It's A Good Time To Reduce Risk"
  Goldman Sounds The Alarm On Stocks: When Euphoria Is This High, “It’s A Good Time To Reduce Risk”

  The past few months can best be characterized as a period of unprecedented market optimism and sheer euphoria, and we have done just that with several recent articles…

  • Dec 1: Market Euphoria Surpasses Dot Com Levels: What’s An Investor To Do?

  • Dec 2: Citi Warns Most “Euphoric” Market Since Dot Com Bubble

  • Dec 6: JPMorgan Warns Crowded Trades And Euphoric Consensus Are The Biggest Threats For Markets

  • Dec 15: Record Wall Street Euphoria Triggers First BofA “Sell Signal” Since February 2020

  • Dec 17: Euphoria Goes To 11: Futures, Global Markets, Bitcoin Soar As Dollar Collapse Continues

  … and so on. But whereas in the recent past, the euphoria was always bounded by the upper limit reached during the insatiable buying spree of the dot com bubble, the first week of 2021 is when we went off the chart. Literally. As we showed last week, Citi’s latest Panic/Euphoria model hit a record reading of 1.83 versus an upwardly revised 1.69 in the prior week. 

  

  What does this mean? It’s simple: as Citi chief economist Tobias Levkovich wrote last Friday when looking at market returns following previous euphoria extremes, there is now a “100% historical probability of down markets in the next 12 months at current levels.”

  Judging by the market action in the subsequent week which saw the S&P slide 1.5%, the Citi economist may be right, and the selloff is only just starting. Then again, the market has a tendency to do the opposite of what consensus expects it to do – and right now consensus among even the most bullish banks is that the next move in stocks will be lower – which is why the fact that Citi’s call for a selloff becoming consensus, make us wonder if the next move in stocks won’t be much higher instead.

  Case in point, in the latest Goldman Portfolio Research Strategy report, Christian Mueller-Glissman writes that Goldman’s Risk Appetite Indicator (RAI) reached a reading of 1 this week – the highest in 4 years and just shy of an all time high – after a large increase in risk appetite since Q4 last year.

  

  How did we get to such a high reading?

  As Goldman explains, this was largely on the back of growth optimism in 2021, and while the bank expects monetary policy to remain supportive, “we see less potential for much more positive impulses from here. Following the news of a successful COVID-19 vaccine in November, growth optimism has broken out and shifted further into positive territory since Q4 as markets have become more optimistic on the prospects for reflation.” These various dynamics are shown below:

  

  The Goldman strategist then notes that he has “seen a similar bullish shift in other sentiment and positioning indicators” and explains that while “sentiment and positioning alone are seldom a catalyst for a reversal, at extremes they increase that risk in the event of shocks.” Furthermore, “they are often a better contrarian signal on the way down as markets tend to overshoot faster during ‘risk off’ episodes – on the flipside risk appetite tends to build up slowly and can remain positive for a long time with a supportive macro backdrop.”

  

  At this point, Goldman basically repeats what Citi said last week, warning that “from RAI levels close to 1 the asymmetry to add risk is worse: subsequent equity returns, especially in the near term, tend to be more negatively skewed and there is increased risk of drawdowns.”

  

  Furthermore, at current RAI levels the market is more vulnerable to negative growth nor rate shocks in the near term, such as monetary and fiscal policy disappointments or more negative COVID-19 news. The key driver of risk appetite in the coming months is likely to be growth and reflation sentiment –we don’t expect more positive impulses from monetary policy.

  That said, Goldman isn’t telling its clients to sell just yet because as Glissman writes, “risk appetite can stay at elevated levels for prolonged periods as long as the macro backdrop remains supportive” and explains further:

  the RAI only tends to be at extremes for short periods of time: for example, the RAI has spent just 1.1% of the time below -2 and 1.7% of the time above 1. Still, adjusting equity allocations tactically based on RAI signals has enhanced returns: Exhibit 17 and Exhibit 18 show strategies that only invest 80% in the S&P 500 (the rest in T-Bills) if the RAI is high and 120% (with leverage) if it is very low. But the improved performance was captured only on a few days – for example, the RAI on average time spent only 6 consecutive days above 0.9.

  

  On the other hand, “periods when the RAI declined back to zero from elevated levels have on average delivered positive, albeit slower, returns for risky assets.”

  This is Goldman’s base case for the rest of 2021, and is why the bank remains pro-risk in its asset allocation, and expects the S&P to rise to 4,100 by the end of the year, and 4,400 in two years.

  

  Which is odd, because Glissman also warns that a backtest of extreme RAI readings, shows that it is a good contrarian signal.

  The problem is that while the right move here may well be to sell, the question is when: as Goldman explains, market timing with the RAI alone is difficult as it tends to spend little time at extremes. Still, not even Glissman can deny that what is coming won’t be pleasant – contrary to the recos from Goldman’s chief equity strategist David Kostin – and concludes that “when the RAI is above 0.9 and until it normalizes below 0.75, it has been a good time reduce risk tactically.”

  So… time to buy?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 20:30

• Tech Supremacy: Silicon Valley Can No Longer Conceal Its Power
  Tech Supremacy: Silicon Valley Can No Longer Conceal Its Power

  Authored by Niall Ferguson via The Spectator,

  ‘To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle,’ George Orwell famously observed. He was talking not about everyday life but about politics, where it is ‘quite easy for the part to be greater than the whole or for two objects to be in the same place simultaneously’.

  The examples he gave in his 1946 essay included the paradox that ‘for years before the war, nearly all enlightened people were in favour of standing up to Germany: the majority of them were also against having enough armaments to make such a stand effective’.

  

  Last week provided a near-perfect analogy. For years before the 2020 election, nearly all American conservatives were in favour of standing up to big tech: the majority of them were also against changing the laws and regulations enough to make such a stand effective. The difference is that, unlike the German threat, which was geographically remote, the threat from Silicon Valley was literally in front of our noses, day and night: on our mobile phones, our tablets and our laptops.

  Writing in this magazine more than three years ago, I warned of a coming collision between Donald Trump and Silicon Valley. ‘Social media helped Donald Trump take the White House,’ I wrote. ‘Silicon Valley won’t let it happen again.’ The conclusion of my book The Square and the Tower was that the new online network platforms represented a new kind of power that posed a fundamental challenge to the traditional hierarchical power of the state.

  By the network platforms, I mean Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Google and Apple, or FATGA for short — companies that have established a dominance over the public sphere not seen since the heyday of the pre-Reformation Catholic Church. FATGA had humble enough origins in garages and dorm rooms. As recently as 2008, not one of them could be found among the world’s largest companies by market capitalisation. Today, they occupy first, third, fourth and fifth places in the market cap league table, just above their Chinese counterparts, Tencent and Alibaba.

  What happened was that the network platforms turned the originally decentralised worldwide web into an oligarchically organised and hierarchical public sphere from which they made money and to which they controlled access. That the original, superficially libertarian inclinations of these companies’ founders would rapidly crumble under political pressure from the left was also perfectly obvious, if one bothered to look a little beyond one’s proboscis.

  Following the violent far-right rally at Charlottesville in August 2017, Matthew Prince, chief executive of the internet service provider Cloudflare, described how he had responded: ‘Literally, I woke up in a bad mood and decided someone shouldn’t be allowed on the internet.’ On the basis that ‘the people behind the [white supremacist magazine] Daily Stormer are assholes’, he denied their website access to the internet. ‘No one should have that power,’ he admitted. ‘We need to have a discussion around this with clear rules and clear frameworks. My whims and those of Jeff [Bezos] and Larry [Page] and … Mark [Zuckerberg] shouldn’t be what determines what should be online.’

  But that discussion had barely begun in 2017. Indeed, many Republicans at that time still believed the notion that FATGA were champions of the free market that required only the lightest regulation. They know better now. After last year’s election Twitter attached health warnings to Trump’s tweets when he claimed that he had in fact beaten Joe Biden. Then, in the wake of the storming of the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters, Twitter and Facebook began shutting down multiple accounts — including that of the President himself, now ‘permanently suspended’ from tweeting. When Trump loyalists declared their intention to move their conversations from Twitter to rival Parler — in effect, Twitter with minimal content moderation — Google and Apple deleted Parler from their app stores. Then Amazon kicked Parler off its ‘cloud’ service, effectively deleting it from the internet altogether. It was a stunning demonstration of power.

  It is only a slight overstatement to say that, while the mob’s coup against Congress ignominiously failed, big tech’s coup against Trump triumphantly succeeded. It is not merely that Trump has been abruptly denied access to the channels he has used throughout his presidency to communicate with voters. It is the fact that he is being excluded from a domain the courts have for some time recognised as a public forum.

  Various lawsuits over the years have conferred on big tech an unusual status: a public good, held in private hands. In 2018 the Southern District of New York ruled that the right to reply to Trump’s tweets is protected ‘under the “public forum” doctrines set forth by the Supreme Court’. So it was wrong for the President to ‘block’ people — i.e. stop them reading his tweets — because they were critical of him. Censoring Twitter users ‘because of their expressed political views’ represents ‘viewpoint discrimination [that] violates the First Amendment’.

  In Packingham vs North Carolina (2017), Justice Anthony Kennedy likened internet platforms to ‘the modern public square’, arguing that it was therefore unconstitutional to prevent sex offenders from accessing, and expressing opinions on, social network platforms. ‘While in the past there may have been difficulty in identifying the most important places (in a spatial sense) for the exchange of views,’ Justice Kennedy wrote, ‘today the answer is clear. It is cyberspace —the “vast democratic forums of the internet” in general … and social media in particular.’

  In other words, as President of the United States, Trump could not block Twitter users from seeing his tweets, but Twitter is apparently within its rights to delete the President’s account altogether. Sex offenders have a right of access to online social networks; but the President does not.

  This is not to condone Trump’s increasingly deranged attempts to overturn November’s election result. Before last week’s riots, he egged on the mob; he later said he ‘loved’ them, despite what they had done. Nor is there any denying that a number of Trump’s most fervent supporters pose a threat of further violence. Considering the bombs and firearms some of them brought to Washington, the marvel is how few people lost their lives during the occupation of the Capitol.

  Yet the correct response to that threat is not to delegate to Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter’s Jack Dorsey and their peers the power to remove from the public square anyone they deem to be sympathetic to insurrection or otherwise suspect. The correct response is for the FBI and the relevant police departments to pursue any would-be Trumpist terrorists, just as they have quite successfully pursued would-be Islamist terrorists over the past two decades.

  The key to understanding what has happened lies in an obscure piece of legislation, almost a quarter of a century old, enacted after a New York court held online service provider Prodigy liable for a user’s defamatory posts. Congress then stepped in with the 1996 Telecommunications Act and in particular Section 230, which was written to encourage nascent firms to protect users and prevent illegal activity without incurring massive content management costs. It states:

  1. No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

  2. No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of … any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.

  In essence, Section 230 gives websites immunity from liability for what their users post if it is in any way harmful, but also entitles websites to take down with equal impunity any content that they don’t like the look of. The surely unintended result of this legislation, drafted for a fledgling internet, is that some of the biggest companies in the world enjoy a protection reminiscent of Joseph Heller’s Catch-22. Try to hold them responsible as publishers, and they will say they are platforms. Demand access to their platforms and they will insist that they are publishers.

  This might have been a tolerable state of affairs if America’s network platforms had been subject to something like the old Fairness Doctrine, which required the big three terrestrial TV networks to give airtime to opposing views. But that was something the Republican party killed off in the 1980s, seeing the potential of allowing more slanted coverage on cable news. What goes around comes around. The network platforms long ago abandoned any pretence of being neutral. Even before Charlottesville, their senior executives and many of their employees had made it clear that they were appalled by Trump’s election victory (especially as both Facebook and Twitter had facilitated it). Increasingly, they interpreted the words ‘otherwise objectionable’ in Section 230 to mean ‘objectionable to liberals’.

  Throughout the summer of last year, numerous supporters of Black Lives Matter used social media, as well as mainstream liberal media, to express their support for protests that in many places escalated into violence and destruction considerably worse than occurred in the Capitol last week. One looked in vain for health warnings, much less account suspensions, though Facebook says it has removed accounts that promote violence.

  Compare, for example, the language Trump used in his 6 January speech and the language Kamala Harris used in support of BLM on Stephen Colbert’s show on 18 June. Neither explicitly condoned violence. Trump exhorted the crowd to march to the Capitol, but he told them to ‘peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard’. Harris condemned ‘looting and… acts of violence’, but said of the BLM protestors: ‘They’re not going to stop. They’re not. This is a movement. I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop, and everyone, beware. Because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before election day in November, and they are not going to stop after election day. And everyone should take note of that on both levels.’ What exactly was the significance of that ‘beware’?

  Earlier, on 1 June, Harris had used Twitter to solicit donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which posted bail for people charged with rioting in Minneapolis after the death of George Floyd. It would be easy to cite other examples. ‘Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence,’ Nikole Hannah-Jones of the New York Times told CBS in early June, at a time when multiple cities were being swept by arson and vandalism. Her Twitter account is still going strong.

  The double standard was equally apparent when the New York Post broke the story of Biden’s son Hunter’s dubious business dealings in China. Both Twitter and Facebook immediately prevented users from posting links to the article — something they had never done with stories damaging to Trump.

  You don’t need to be a Trump supporter to find all this alarming. Conservatives of many different stripes — and indeed some bemused liberals — have experienced the new censorship for themselves, especially as the Covid-19 pandemic has emboldened tech companies to police content more overtly. In the UK, TalkRadio briefly vanished from YouTube for airing anti–lockdown views that violated the company’s ‘community guidelines’. A recording of Lionel Shriver reading one of her Spectator columns on the pandemic was taken down for similar reasons. Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, two Oxford academics, fell foul of Facebook’s censors when they wrote for this magazine about a briefly controversial paper on the efficacy of masks in Denmark.

  You might think that FATGA have finally gone too far with their fatwa against a sitting president of the United States. You might think a red line really has been crossed when both Alexei Navalny and Angela Merkel express disquiet at big tech’s overreach. But no. To an extent that is remarkable, American liberals have mostly welcomed (and in some cases encouraged) this surge of censorship — with the honourable exception of the American Civil Liberties Union.

  True, during last year’s campaign the Biden team occasionally talked tough, especially about Facebook. However, it is increasingly clear that the most big tech has to fear from the Biden-Harris administration is protracted antitrust actions focused on their alleged undermining of competition which, if history is any guide, will likely end with whimpers rather than bangs. Either way, the issue of censorship will not be addressed by antitrust lawsuits.

  It is tempting to complain that Democrats are hypocrites — that they would be screaming blue murder if the boot were on the other foot and it was Kamala Harris whose Twitter account had been cancelled. But if that were the case, how many Republicans would now be complaining? Not many. No, the correct conclusion to be drawn is that the Republicans had their chance to address the problem of over-mighty big tech and completely flunked it.

  Only too late did they realise that Section 230 was Silicon Valley’s Achilles heel. Only too late did they begin drafting legislation to repeal or modify it. Only too late did Section 230 start to feature in Trump’s speeches. Even now it seems to me that very few Republicans really understand that, by itself, repealing 230 would not have sufficed. Without some kind of First Amendment for the internet, repeal would probably just have restricted free speech further.

  As Orwell rightly observed, ‘we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality.’

  Those words sum up quite a lot that has gone on inside the Republican party over the past four years. There it was, right in front of their noses: Trump would lead the party to defeat. And he would behave in the most discreditable way when beaten. Those things were predictable. But what was also foreseeable was that FATGA — the ‘new governors’, as a 2018 Harvard Law Review article called them — would be the true victors of the 2020 election.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 20:00

• UFO In Cape Hatteras? Viral Video Sparks Debate Of Mysterious Flying Object
  UFO In Cape Hatteras? Viral Video Sparks Debate Of Mysterious Flying Object

  Days before the CIA released a large cache of files involving unidentified flying objects (UFOs), following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by podcaster John Greenwald Jr., social media was a buzz about a UFO last week over North Carolina’s Outer Banks area. 

  According to the regional newspaper The News & Observer, photographer Wes Snyder captures what appears to be a mysterious object in the night sky. 

  

  “The object was visible for just under 3 minutes total, so I doubt it’s a meteor, (or) shooting star as those typically only last a few seconds,” Snyder posted on YouTube.

  Judging by the video, the object appears to have corners. Here’s the video in full. 

  “I spent a night at the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse shooting time-lapse photos to create an upcoming video. While I was looking through my footage, I realized there was something in the video that I could not explain,” he wrote on Facebook. “It’s much larger than your typical plane appears, and it’s moving way faster than clouds.”

  

  Snyder said the best explanation is that it may be “space junk or a satellite burning up in the atmosphere.”

  Comments on Snyder’s Facebook post agreed that it certainly wasn’t a meteor. 

  “It’s not a meteor,unless somebody reported one crashing somewhere within the surrounding towns or counties, cuz it was way to close. Anybody with common sense knows that it cannot a shooting star. WavyTv 10 did a special a while back about the pilots at Norfolk Air Force Base and the unidentifiable things they have witnessed over the years. So I’m gonna say it’s Extraterrestrial. I bet that the airport on Hatteras Island would have some sort of record of it. So would NASA and the Air Force Base,” wrote Regan Wynne.

  Someone else wrote, “I’d say the best bet would be a stage of the space x rocket.” 

  Another said, “Space station or a satellite fly by.” 

  Authorities have yet to identify what exactly flew by the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse. 

  But with the recent CIA dump of UFO files, it certainly makes you wonder if life beyond Earth actually does exist. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 19:30

• Iran Releases Rare Footage Of Prior IRGC Ballistic Missile Attack On US Forces
  Iran Releases Rare Footage Of Prior IRGC Ballistic Missile Attack On US Forces

  Via AlMasdarNews.com,

  Iran’s military has published on social media a new video clip of the Iranian missile strike on the Ain Al-Assad base in western Iraq, where US forces are stationed.

  This attack, which took place on January 8th, 2020, was carried out by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on the US forces at the Ain Al-Assad base, targeted one of the largest installations in the country.

  The video shows an Iranian operations room and the moment of pressing the launch button for the missiles that fell on the base where many US personnel were stationed in the Al-Anbar Governorate of western Iraq, causing huge explosions at the site, where the flames escalated to tens of meters.

  The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps carried out this powerful attack on the US forces in response to the assassinations of Major General Qassem Soleimani of the IRGC’s Quds Force and Abu Mahdi Al-Mohandis of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units.

  Later in the year, the US military deployed Patriot missiles to the country, amid the increase in attacks on the Green Zone in Baghdad, which have been blamed on the Iraqi forces allied with Iran.

  

  Via NPR/Planet: A satellite photo from the commercial company Planet shows damage to at least five structures at the Ain al-Assad air base in Iraq.

  While Iran had previously published footage of the missiles soaring through the air from Iranian airspace (see below), the new video published Friday is the first to provocatively show the command center and under-surface rocket silos from where they were launched.

  IRGC Launches Attack on US Ein Al-Assad Air Base in Iraq in Retaliation for Assassination of Top Iranian Commander pic.twitter.com/34fwNvsoMf

  — Fars News Agency (@EnglishFars) January 8, 2020

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

  Tensions have remained high between the US and Iran, as several reports surfaced last month about the American President Donald Trump’s interest in possibly striking the nuclear facilities of the Islamic Republic.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 19:00

• LA County First In US To Top 1MM Cases: Live Updates
  LA County First In US To Top 1MM Cases: Live Updates

  Summary:

  • LA County tops 1MM cases
  • Global deaths top 2M
  • Norway sees cases of vaccine-related health complications rise to 80
  • 29 people over 75 have died after receiving the first vaccine dose
  • India vaccinates 165K+ as vaccine rollout begins
  • US hospitalizations, cases continue to slow
  • Ireland blames Christmas for latest outbreak
  • Russia lifts some travel bans
  • Israel rolls out COVID “breathalyzer”

  * * *

  Update (1830ET): As the COVID-19 picture has improved across the US, LA County has just crossed the 1MM case mark, becoming the first county in the country to cross that benchmark. Public health officials have also confirmed that there’s at least one case confirmed case of the new mutant first discovered in the UK. The man who first had the strain is now quarantining in Oregon. .

  “The presence of the U.K. variant in Los Angeles County is troubling, as our healthcare system is already severely strained with more than 7,500 people currently hospitalized,” said Dr. Barbara Ferrer, LA county’s public health director, in a statement. “Our community is bearing the brunt of the winter surge, experiencing huge numbers of cases, hospitalizations and deaths, five-times what we experienced over the summer.”

  On Saturday, Los Angeles reported 1,003,923 confirmed Covid-19 infections and 13,741 deaths.

  California has reported more than 2.9MM confirmed cases, according to NBC News counts. Texas, with 2MM cases, and Florida, with 1.5MM, are the next two states with the most infections. New York, which was one of the country’s first and biggest hot spots, has recorded 1.2MM.

  * * *

  Global coronavirus deaths have passed 2MM as of Saturday morning, while the US has topped 23.5MM. As daily case totals slowed in the US, Norway revealed that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine contributed to the deaths of more than 2 dozen people. But the biggest news overnight comes from Norway, where the government says 29 elderly people have died, and 80 have seen their health seriously impacted, due to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

  Of course, readers of Zero Hedge won’t find this at all surprising. And deaths haven’t been confined to Norway, either. Another 55 have been reported in the US as well.

  But in the US and most of Europe, the vaccine story hasn’t registered like fears of the mutated COVID-19 strains. B117, the strain first discovered in the UK, is believed to have contributed to the higher death rate in the UK.

  India, meanwhile, is embarking on the largest vaccination campaign in the world, according to Bloomberg (at this point, it’s pretty clear that China has vaccinated millions more than the official numbers from Bloomberg and other US media outlets have published). On Friday, hospitals and vaccination centers across all of India’s major cities vaccinated 165,714 Indian patients who fit the priority category.

  While PM Narendra Modi has insisted that Indians must ignore anti-vaccine propaganda, questions about the vaccine’s safety have swirled since India’s drug regulator gave the green light to Bharat Biotech International’s indigenously produced Covaxin shot this month even though it has yet to clear final-stage trials.

  Global cases have topped 93.4MM people, and a growing number appears to be caused by the newer mutated strain, since the virus is “evolving”‘ much more quickly than the scientific community had expected. In Vienna, 17% of new cases are believed to be caused by the British variant. The number was derived from a survey of a random sample of COVID patients (closely examining a sample’s genetic makeup is more time-consuming and costly than simply running a test).

  

  Circling back to the US, while deaths have moved higher over the past couple of weeks, new cases and hospitalizations are falling.

  

  The chart below reflects the rate in average hospitalizations across the US.

  

  Some more encouraging data: cases are falling in all four US regions (the northeast, southeast, midwest and the west).

  

  Here are some more stories from overnight and Saturday morning:

  Ireland is blaming Christmas and related gatherings for the fact that the country is now seeing the highest rate of new cases in the world. Rampant infections since Christmas forced Micheál Martin’s government into a series of drastic lockdown measures that have closed schools, construction, hospitality and retail, leaving tens of thousands jobless again (Source: FT).

  Russia decided to restart flights to Vietnam, India, Finland, Qatar on Jan. 27 after reviewing its stance on the pandemic. But Russia’s ban on flights to and from the UK will remain in place until Feb. 1 (Source: Bloomberg).

  Portugal on Saturday reported the biggest daily increase in confirmed coronavirus cases since the start of the outbreak. There were 10,947 new cases in a day, more than the previous record of 10,698 announced on Thursday, taking the total to 539,416. The total number of deaths rose by 166 to 8,709, also a record daily increase (Source: Bloomberg).

  Scentech Medical has developed a test that works like a blood-alcohol breathalyser that detects Covid-19 with 98% accuracy in preliminary testing, the Jerusalem Post reported on Saturday (Source: Bloomberg).

  * * *
  Looking ahead, the there’s no question that the news out of Norway has rocked the world’s hope that the vaccine will end the COVID pandemic. The WHO and others have repeatedly warned that even people who have already vaccinated are still vulnerable, particularly if they have only had one dose.

  The question is, will that stop the world from adopting “immunity passports”?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 18:48

• 89 Year Old Donald Tober, Who Popularized Sweet N' Low, Jumps To His Death From Park Ave. Apartment
  89 Year Old Donald Tober, Who Popularized Sweet N’ Low, Jumps To His Death From Park Ave. Apartment

  An 89 year old business magnate who was “struggling with Parkinson’s disease” leapt to his death from the top of his Park Ave. apartment building last week, 

  Donald Tober, who was CEO and co-owner of Sugar Foods – the company best known for Sweet n’ Low – jumped from his building just after 5AM on Friday, according to the NY Post.

  He was found “in the courtyard of the luxury Upper East Side building between 65th and 66th streets”, the report notes. 

  Tober was responsible for taking the Sweet n’ Low brand and making it into a restaurant and home mainstay. His company also produced “Sugar in the Raw” and “N’Joy” coffee creamer. 80% of all foodservice establishments used Sweet n’ Low by the mid 1990’s, the Post said. 

  He had described his company in 1995 by saying: “Basically, we’re concerned with everything that surrounds the coffee cup. We’re tightly focused.”

  

  “Donald IS Sweet’N Low,” the company’s President, Steve Odell, had said at the time. “Don’s had as much to do with building Sweet’N Low into a household name as anyone ever has with a product. Every packet of Sweet’N Low sold today can be traced back to a single sales call that he probably made or at least had a part in.”

  Odell continued: “He was bigger than life. He made everybody feel special — everybody. He’s an icon and he’ll always be.”

  “I talked to him yesterday and certainly, no. There was no indication whatsoever,” he said, when asked about the suicide. 

  Odell concluded: “He was much more than just one product. A thousand people a second use our products. Donald left us with eight words, and we live them every day. The first two words are ‘Be prepared.’ The second are ‘Show up.’ The third two words are ‘On time.’ And the last two are ‘Follow through.’”

  “He did that every day, all day, through his career.”

  Rest easy, Donald. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 18:30

• 55 Americans Have Died Following COVID Vaccination, Norway Deaths Rise To 29
  55 Americans Have Died Following COVID Vaccination, Norway Deaths Rise To 29

  Amid increasing calls for suspension of the use of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines produced by companies such as Pfizer, especially among elderly people, the situation in Norway has escalated significantly as the Scandi nation has now registered a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first COVID-19 vaccination shot.

  

  As Bloomberg reports, this adds six to the number of known fatalities in Norway, and also lowers the age group thought to be affected from 80.

  Until Friday, Pfizer/BioNTech was the only vaccine available in Norway, and “all deaths are thus linked to this vaccine,” the Norwegian Medicines Agency said in a written response to Bloomberg on Saturday.

  “There are 13 deaths that have been assessed, and we are aware of another 16 deaths that are currently being assessed,” the agency said.

  All the reported deaths related to “elderly people with serious basic disorders,” it said.

  “Most people have experienced the expected side effects of the vaccine, such as nausea and vomiting, fever, local reactions at the injection site, and worsening of their underlying condition.”

  Norway’s experience has prompted the country to suggest that Covid-19 vaccines may be too risky for the very old and terminally ill… the exact group that ‘the science’ shows are actually at risk from this virus.

  Pfizer and BioNTech are working with the Norwegian regulator to investigate the deaths in Norway, Pfizer said in an e-mailed statement. The agency found that “the number of incidents so far is not alarming, and in line with expectations,” Pfizer said.

  However, it’s not just Norway as The Epoch Times’ Zachary Stieber reports that fifty-five people in the United States have died after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, according to reports submitted to a federal system.

  Deaths have occurred among people receiving both the Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, according to the reports.

  

  In some cases, patients died within days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.

  One man, a 66-year-old senior home resident in Colorado, was sleepy and stayed in bed a day after getting Moderna’s vaccine. Early the next morning, on Christmas Day, the resident “was observed in bed lying still, pale, eyes half open and foam coming from mouth and unresponsive,” the VAERS report states. “He was not breathing and with no pulse.”

  In another case, a 93-year-old South Dakota man was injected with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on Jan. 4 around 11 a.m. About two hours later, he said he was tired and couldn’t continue with the physical therapy he was doing any longer. He was taken back to his room, where he said his legs felt heavy. Soon after, he stopped breathing. A nurse declared a do-not-resuscitate order.

  In addition to the deaths, people have reported 96 life-threatening events following COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as 24 permanent disabilities, 225 hospitalizations, and 1,388 emergency room visits.

  It’s not just the old and frail, in Israel, which proudly lays claim to the greatest vaccination effort in the world (largest percentage of the population inoculated),

  As RT reports, at least 13 Israelis have experienced facial paralysis after being administered the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine, a month after the US Food and Drug Administration reported similar issues but said they weren’t linked to the jab.

  Israeli outlet Ynet reported, citing the Health Ministry, that officials believe the number of such cases could be higher.

  “For at least 28 hours I walked around with it [facial paralysis],” one person who had the side effect told Ynet. 

  “I can’t say it was completely gone afterwards, but other than that I had no other pains, except a minor pain where the injection was, but there was nothing beyond that.”

  Ynet quoted Prof. Galia Rahav, director of the Infectious Diseases Unit at Sheba Medical Center, who said she did not feel “comfortable” with administering the second dose to someone who had received the first jab and subsequently suffered from paralysis.

  “No one knows if this is connected to the vaccine or not. That’s why I would refrain from giving a second dose to someone who suffered from paralysis after the first dose,” she told the outlet.

  Finally, as we noted yesterday following the news of rising post-vaccination deaths in Noway, health experts from Wuhan, China, called on Norway and other countries to suspend the use of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines produced by companies such as Pfizer, especially among elderly people.

  China’s Global Times reports Chinese experts said the death incident should be assessed cautiously to understand whether the death was caused by vaccines or other preexisting conditions of these individuals.

  Yang Zhanqiu, a virologist from Wuhan University, told the Global Times on Friday that the death incident, if proven to be caused by the vaccines, showed that the effect of the Pfizer vaccine and other mRNA vaccines is not as good as expected, as the main purpose of mRNA vaccines is to heal patients.

  …

  A Beijing-based immunologist, who requested anonymity, told the Global Times on Friday that the world should suspend the use of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine represented by Pfizer, as this new technology has not proven safety in large-scale use or in preventing any infectious diseases.

  Older people, especially those over 80, should not be recommended to receive any COVID-19 vaccine, he said.

  

  All of which is a problem since it is the elderly who are at most risk (quite frankly at any real risk at all) and thus who need the protection the most.

  The Chinese health experts instead say that the most elderly and frail should be recommended to take medicines to improve their immune system.

  Of course, one cannot help but note the irony of scientists from the source of the plague that has killed millions around the world and destroyed lives/economies almost everywhere, is now calling for the cessation of the process to protect against the plague.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 18:01

• Designed To Fail, Failure Guaranteed
  Designed To Fail, Failure Guaranteed

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  Yet it still comes as a great surprise to everyone when ‘doing more of what’s failed spectacularly’ ends up collapsing the whole rotten structure.

  

  Systems and nations are designed to fail without anyone even noticing: nobody set out to design the current broken system to fail at critical points, but now failure can’t be avoided because the incentive structure has locked in embedded processes that enrich self-serving cartels and insiders at the expense of the nation and its populace.

  Nobody chose America’s insanely perverse healthcare system–it arose from a set of initial conditions that generated perverse incentives to do more of what’s failing and protect the processes that benefit cartels and insiders at the expense of everyone else.

  In other words, the system that was intended to benefit all ends up benefiting the few at the expense of the many.

  The same question can be asked of America’s broken higher education system: would any sane person choose a system that enriches insiders by indenturing students via massive student loans (i.e. forcing them to become debt serfs)?

  Students and their parents certainly wouldn’t choose the current broken system, but the lenders reaping billions of dollars in profits would choose to keep it, and so would the under-assistant deans earning a cool $200K+ for “administering” some embedded process that has effectively nothing to do with actual learning.

  The academic ronin a.k.a. adjuncts earning $35,000 a year (with little in the way of benefits or security) for doing much of the actual teaching wouldn’t choose the current broken system, either.

  Now that the embedded processes are generating profits and wages, everyone benefiting from these processes will fight to the death to retain and expand them, even if they threaten the system with financial collapse and harm the people who the system was intended to serve.

  How many student loan lenders and assistant deans resign in disgust at the parasitic system that higher education has become? The number of insiders who refuse to participate any longer is signal noise, while the number who plod along, either denying their complicity in a parasitic system of debt servitude and largely worthless diplomas (i.e. the system is failing the students it is supposedly educating at enormous expense) or rationalizing it is legion.

  If I was raking in $200,000 annually from a system I knew was parasitic and counter-productive, I would find reasons to keep my head down and just “do my job,” too.

  At some point, the embedded processes become so odious and burdensome that those actually providing the services start bailing out of the broken system. We’re seeing this in the number of doctors and nurses who retire early or simply quit to do something less stressful and more rewarding.

  These embedded processes strip away autonomy, equating compliance with effectiveness even as the processes become increasingly counter-productive and wasteful. The typical mortgage documents package is now a half-inch thick, a stack of legal disclaimers and stipulations that no home buyer actually understands (unless they happen to be a real estate attorney).

  How much value is actually added by these ever-expanding embedded processes?

  By the time the teacher, professor or doctor complies with the curriculum / “standards of care”, there’s little room left for actually doing their job. But behind the scenes, armies of well-paid administrators will fight to the death to keep the processes as they are, no matter how destructive to the system as a whole.

  This is how systems and the nations that depend on them fail. Meds skyrocket in price, student loans top $1 trillion, F-35 fighter aircraft are double the initial cost estimates and so on, and the insider solutions are always the same: just borrow another trillion to keep the broken system afloat for another quarter.

  Yet it still comes as a great surprise to everyone when doing more of what’s failed spectacularly ends up collapsing the whole rotten structure.

  Consider a spacecraft as a metaphor for a system which is designed not to fail but that can fail anyway. There are two basic ways the spacecraft can fail: a single essential component can fail, or a single failure can trigger a domino-like cascade which leads to the entire craft failing.

  If the craft’s single oxygen tank ruptures, the crew dies. 99% of the spacecraft is still working perfectly, but the system failed in its primary purpose: keeping the crew alive.

  If an electrical failure causes a cascade of subsystem failures, you end up with the same result: a powerless craft and a dead crew.

  But 99% of the system is working just fine is little solace to the expired crew.

  *  *  *

  If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  My recent books:

  A Hacker’s Teleology: Sharing the Wealth of Our Shrinking Planet (Kindle $8.95, print $20, audiobook $17.46) Read the first section for free (PDF).

  Will You Be Richer or Poorer?: Profit, Power, and AI in a Traumatized World (Kindle $5, print $10, audiobook) Read the first section for free (PDF).

  Pathfinding our Destiny: Preventing the Final Fall of Our Democratic Republic ($5 (Kindle), $10 (print), ( audiobook): Read the first section for free (PDF).

  The Adventures of the Consulting Philosopher: The Disappearance of Drake $1.29 (Kindle), $8.95 (print); read the first chapters for free (PDF)

  Money and Work Unchained $6.95 (Kindle), $15 (print) Read the first section for free (PDF).
   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 18:00

• Billionaire Benjamin de Rothschild Dies At 57
  Billionaire Benjamin de Rothschild Dies At 57

  Billionaire Baron Benjamin de Rothschild, chairman of the iconic Edmond de Rothschild Holding and the 22nd richest man in France with a net worth of €4.3 billion, has died at 57.

  

  “Ariane de Rothschild and her daughters are deeply saddened to announce the death of husband and father, Benjamin de Rothschild, following a heart attack in the family home in Pregny (Switzerland) in the afternoon of January 15, 2021” the family said in a press release on Saturday.

  ⚫️🇫🇷DISPARITION – 22ème fortune de France, le Baron Benjamin de Rothschild a succombé hier à une crise cardiaque à l’âge de 57 ans (famille à l’AFP). pic.twitter.com/4xzP3xwyXS

  — 🌐Le Globe (@LeGlobe_info) January 16, 2021

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

  The namesake company confirmed his death on Saturday, offering condolences to his wife, children and family. In a statement on its website it said that the entrepreneur developed the entity “in an exceptional way during all these years” and was “passionate about finance, speed, sailing and automobiles, wine enthusiast, Benjamin de Rothschild was also an active philanthropist.”

  Visionary entrepreneur, passionate about finance, speed, sailing and automobiles, wine enthusiast, Benjamin de Rothschild was also an active philanthropist, namely involved in developing innovation within the Adolphe de Rothschild Foundation Hospital. With his unique character, Benjamin de Rothschild never ceased to transform and modernise his legacy, in line with the family’s values.

  Born on July 30 1963, Benjamin de Rothschild was the son of Edmond – scion of the Rothschild banking family of France – and Nadine de Rothschild. He headed the group created by his father since 1997. Benjamin de Rothschild was chairman of the board of directors at Edmond de Rothschild Holding SA, the umbrella entity of the Edmond de Rothschild Group, specializing in private banking and asset management.

  

  Benjamin de Rothschild most recently made the news in early 2019 when he took the Swiss Bank Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A. private. The Swiss branch of the sprawling Rothschild banking dynasty – once one of the world’s richest families, and according to some, still the richest – was created by Baron Edmond de Rothschild, whose parents fled to Switzerland during World War II. He created the group in 1953, later buying a Swiss private bank and branching out into asset management.

  The banking dynasty has spawned countless labyrinthine and convoluted financial entities which have helped obfuscate its financial exposure. The Edmond de Rothschild Group has financial assets distributed around the globe and in the form of investments in hedge funds via a fund of funds operation with over 173 billion francs in AUM.

  

  The Chateau de Pregny –  also known as the Rothschild Castle – where the banker died, is located near Lake Geneva.

  

  The estate has belonged to the family since it was built in 1858 by the Swiss banker, Adolphe Carl de Rothschild. He bequeathed to a cousin, Maurice de Rothschild of the Rothschild banking family of France, who in turn left it to his son, Edmond Adolphe de Rothschild. The property remains in the family and as at 2013 is the principal residence of Edmond’s widow, Nadine.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 17:54

• TSA To Reveal Security Plan For Air Cargo Industry
  TSA To Reveal Security Plan For Air Cargo Industry

  By Eric Kulisch, of American Shipper,

  Companies that purchase and provide transport on all-cargo aircraft will be closely watching whether the Transportation Security Administration on Wednesday offers an alternative security arrangement many believe is designed to help one company — Amazon — avoid screening every outbound shipment for explosives.

  

  How to comply with pending international airfreight security standards is reopening a  long-running policy debate over whether supply chains are best protected through a risk-based approach or comprehensive physical checks. Freight forwarders, pilots and some security experts say everyone should adhere to the same screening standards, but major cargo airlines argue the system should be flexible to prevent airport backlogs and contain costs.

  Carriers such as Atlas Air, FedEx and UPS view a trusted trader approach as a way to spread the security burden and benefit of manufacturers, e-commerce retailers and other shippers — not just Amazon.

  “Anytime you can push the screening responsibility upstream it’s a good thing for the carrier because it’s an on-time business. If you don’t get cargo on the plane when it departs the customer isn’t happy and Atlas isn’t happy because we’re losing revenue,” Gary Wade, Atlas Air’s vice president of global security, said in an interview. “Secure throughput is key for us.”

  The International Civil Aviation Organization is requiring member states by June 30 to screen 100% of all export cargo before loading on commercial freighters, creating an equivalency with the passenger environment in which for a decade all cargo, domestic or international, has been screened prior to loading. Until now, the primary focus of security measures for freighters has been preventing the “jack-in-the-box” threat — someone stowing away in a crate and accessing the cockpit from the main deck.

  National authorities, however, can also allow regulated companies — airlines and logistics providers —  that apply approved security controls throughout the supply chain to have their shipments cleared to fly. A third option would allow manufacturers, retailers or other entities outside the TSA’s normal regulatory reach to prove they have highly secure facilities that provide an equivalent level of security as a substitute for X-ray scanning, explosive trace detection or sniffer dogs.

  That appears the direction TSA officials are headed. 

  The agency has six months to develop and implement a rulemaking that addresses how freighter operators should screen cargo and other options. It likely will expand the Certified Cargo Screening Program (CCSP) that allows logistics providers, ground handlers, shippers or independent security companies that follow TSA-approved criteria to inspect the cargo themselves and tender it to the airlines following strict chain-of-custody requirements. 

  The CCSP program was established to prevent airlines, many of which have constrained airport warehouses, from getting crushed with inspection responsibilities and being unable to load planes on time. Three years ago, the TSA also created a popular third-party canine screening program that allows airlines and forwarding agents to use certified companies with bomb-sniffing dogs in lieu of physical screening.

  And during a virtual meeting with industry representatives Wednesday, TSA officials are scheduled to unveil a proposal for secure packing facilities whereby manufacturers, fulfillment centers and other entities with strict security protocols can have shipments deemed secure that are exempt from 100% screening. Security criteria are expected to cover building access, personnel security, in-transit security, employee training and information technology. The facilities would also be subject to periodic TSA audits and inspections.

  Amazon loophole?

  Some stakeholders believe the alternative security framework is being pushed by Amazon and that the online retail giant will be the only one to qualify as a secure package facility. 

  The Airforwarders Association and others say the TSA should expand the CCSP to allow greater participation by manufacturers, suppliers, e-commerce fulfillment centers and others. Going beyond that would create an uneven playing field and possible security gaps, they claim.

  But several airlines, in comments submitted last year to the TSA, also expressed strong support for self-policing by shippers as a way to ease their burden as the ultimate party responsible for ensuring security.

  They recommended against a one-size-fits-all approach because of the large variety of cargo, airlines and shippers in the system.

  “We firmly believe that an alternative framework is necessary in part because … requiring 100% screening of export cargo moving on all-cargo aircraft would not be justified under any cost/benefit review,” Atlas Air wrote. “If the risk is relatively small, the benefits gained from applying a draconian measure like 100% screening of all U.S. outbound air cargo transported on all-cargo carriers will not be great and cannot be justified when compared with the anticipated costs. Given the fact that available data indicate that there have been no attempts by terrorists to introduce explosives into cargo outbound from the United States, the finding that there is relatively low risk mandates the conclusion that TSA should move forward with its program to provide an alternative to a 100% screening regime.”

  The Air Line Pilots Association countered that improvised explosive devices in 2010 got onto two planes — one flown by FedEx and one by UPS — in the Middle East and reached the U.S., showing there is a terrorist threat to all-cargo aircraft even if the bombs were discovered and malfunctioned. The union complained that the options for third-party screening and security packing facilities both “allow the commercial entities who benefit from the rapid and efficient movement of cargo, to police their own operations with limited oversight, which has previously proven to be a significant vulnerability.”

  Purchase, New York-based Atlas, which operates 117 freighter aircraft — including 44 747 jumbo jets — recommended the alternative approach mirror the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism, a government program under which ocean shippers with approved supply chain security plans and vetted transportation partners, can avoid port inspections of their containers and other trade facilitation benefits. 

  Carriers noted that flexibility is the only way to meet the mandate because many types of cargo — pharmaceuticals, hazardous materials, perishable foods, live animals or items shipped in steel drums — are too big to pass through existing X-ray machines or can’t be recognized by them or canines. And packages below a certain size or weight are incapable of containing dangerous explosives.

  Atlas is one of Amazon Air’s key flying partners, with about 25 aircraft under lease-operating agreements. Amazon also owns 5% of Atlas and has warrants allowing it to increase its share. Wade said the companies cooperated on developing an alternative screening proposal, but that Amazon has not asked for help pitching the idea.

  UPS Airlines also strongly supports an alternative approach, saying companies with adequate security controls should be able to inject cargo into the air transport system without the need for additional screening.

  “If the entity applies the required security protocols established by TSA, including chain of custody from the warehouse or fulfillment center to the air carrier, the consignment should be deemed secure,” it said. But most companies will rely on certified cargo screening facilities and airlines to secure their export cargo because of the substantial capital and human resources needed to meet TSA standards for security controls, the express carrier predicted.

  One well-connected industry source, who spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to upset professional ties with multiple parties, suggested FedEx and UPS could easily accommodate outbound screening of international shipments, but worry a scan-all mandate will become a slippery slope leading to calls for similar rules on the domestic side, where much greater volumes, aircraft and flights are involved.

  Opponents also raise concern that other countries may not allow shipments from the alternative program to enter. While ICAO gives countries the option to use an enhanced trusted shipper approach, the European Union and other states are requiring 100% screening and could expect the same treatment in return.

  Wade dismissed that notion, saying, “I don’t know that they’re going to refuse commerce based on someone not dotting the ‘i’ the way they did.” 

  With so much still unknown about what the regulatory requirements will be, cargo airlines are trying to figure out how much they will have to screen and how much volume will be handled by the freight forwarding community and the alternative program.

  Atlas Air plans to use outsourced canine teams, “but we’re just not sure how much we’re going to have to do,” Wade said. “At least it won’t be all on us.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 17:10

• Tesla Tells Employees To "Liquidate" Model S, X Inventory Hours After NHTSA Recall
  Tesla Tells Employees To “Liquidate” Model S, X Inventory Hours After NHTSA Recall

  On January 14, we wrote an article explaining that the NHTSA had asked Tesla to recall about 158,000 Model S and Model X units that could potentially suffer from failing display consoles. When a display console in a Tesla fails, drivers can experience “loss of audible and visual touchscreen features, such as infotainment, navigation, and web browsing and loss of rear camera image display when in reverse gear,” the regulator said at the time.

  Then, something interesting happened. About 24 hours later, on January 15, pro-Tesla blog electrek put out an article noting that Tesla was telling its employees to “liquidate” their Model S and Model X inventory by the end of the month – which is about 2 weeks away.

  The blog had “learned from sources familiar with the matter” that the company was telling employees “to sell all Model S and Model X inventory in stores across all markets.”

  The goal, the report said, is for Tesla to have “absolutely no Model S or Model X in inventory by the end of the month.” The blog speculates that the inventory liquidation could be due to an upcoming refresh. Meanwhile, the Semi and the Roadster we were promised years ago have still not hit the road. 

  

  “The move is unusual at the beginning of a new quarter and it intensifies rumors of a design refresh,” the blog says. More unusual than the move was its timing, we first thought. 

  Recall, we wrote about the forced recall last week, when the NHTSA told Tesla that: “The lack of a functioning windshield defogging and defrosting system may decrease the driver’s visibility in inclement weather, increasing the risk of a crash. If Tesla decides not to conduct the requested recall, it must provide ODI with a full explanation of its decision, including any additional analysis of the problem beyond Tesla’s past presentations.”

  The agency also said Tesla’s over-the-air fixes for the problem weren’t enough. “[T]hese updates are procedurally and substantively insufficient,” the NHTSA concluded.

  Tesla had reportedly “balked” at moving forward with the recall, according to NBC, who said: “Experts say the letter means that Tesla has resisted doing a recall that NHTSA feels is necessary.”

  And so now, the game plan goes from balking at the recall, to getting all of the affected models out of showrooms and into the hands of customers? Sounds like par for the course for Tesla. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/16/2021 – 16:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Here's How Much Your Income Will Change Under The Biden Tax Plan
  Here’s How Much Your Income Will Change Under The Biden Tax Plan

  While the market has so far focused exclusively on the temporary economic sugar high that the Biden fiscal stimulus will unleash on the US economy, which however may be far below Biden’s bogey of $1.9 trillion with Goldman now expecting just $1.1 trillion being enacted due to republican opposition, traders are starting to focus on the cost side of the “cost-benefit” analysis.

  And, as Deutsche Bank’s Jim Reid writes, while “for now it’s all about the size of the stimulus juices flowing into the economy” the pips will likely be squeezed later in the year as the Democrats craft broader infrastructure and tax legislation.

  That’s why today’s Chart of the Day from Reid shows the distributional impact of Biden’s pre-election tax plan, according to the Tax Policy Center.

  At the moment, economists see a joint infrastructure and tax reform bill being passed in late 2021; at that point revenue rises will potentially offset half of the extra spending, although maybe only raising a quarter of the revenue estimated by the tax plan that today’s chart was based on.  This is based on the political realities of a split senate and the then looming mid-terms.

  In short: the chart shows whose income group will benefit, and which will end up with the tax bill, after Biden’s record stimulus is enacted.

  

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 23:58

• Is Impeachment More Dangerous Than Trump?
  Is Impeachment More Dangerous Than Trump?

  Authored by Michael Tracey via UnHerd (emphasis ours),

  The most apt parallel for the second impeachment of Donald Trump may not be any other of the three previous presidential impeachments, including his own just over a year ago. It may instead be the PATRIOT Act, which was passed in the heated emotional aftermath of the September 11 attacks, with negligible debate afforded to the long-term implications of what Congress was enacting. Reason and deliberation had given way to a collective desire for security and revenge, and thus the most sweeping curtailment of civil liberties in the modern historical record was approved. Those who departed from the swiftly assembled consensus could expect to be denounced as sympathisers to terrorists.

  

  Likewise, if you deign to raise concerns about the implications of this sudden impeachment sequel — or any of the other extraordinary actions taken in the past week, such as an ongoing corporate censorship purge of unprecedented proportions — you can expect to be accused of defending or supporting the “domestic terrorists” who carried out the mob attack on the Capitol.

  Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, rationalised rushing through Wednesday’s impeachment resolution at spell-binding speed — by far the fastest impeachment process ever — on the grounds that Trump posed a “clear and present danger” to the country, and needed to be removed immediately. “Imminent threats” of various stripes also have a long history of being cited to justify sweeping emergency action, such as the invasion of Iraq. Often upon further inspection, the purported “threat” turns out to have been not so “imminent”, or in fact to have never existed at all.

  But as rushed as the impeachment was, if the purported emergency conditions were truly so dire as Pelosi maintained, she could have theoretically summoned the House to convene the day after the mob attack and impeach Trump right away. Congress convened the very next day after the attack on Pearl Harbor to declare war on Japan, for example. Instead, Pelosi waited a full week, and gave everyone the weekend off in the interim. Trump, alleged to be in the process of orchestrating a violent “coup”, was allowed to remain in office unimpeded with access to the nuclear codes for seven days.

  Nonetheless, with a total of two hours of perfunctory debate — and no hearings, fact-finding or meditation on the relevant Constitutional Law considerations — Trump was impeached for the second time. As such, the text of the impeachment article will now be permanently embedded in the fabric of American governance.

  One wonders who even had a chance to actually sit down and read it. The article, which charges Trump with “incitement of insurrection”, is far-reaching in its potential implications. “Incitement” is an extremely narrowly circumscribed doctrine in US law, and for good reason: anyone who engages in inflammatory but protected political speech could theoretically be said to have engaged in criminally punishable “incitement” without the shield of the First Amendment. If someone who hears your speech chooses on their volition to engage in violent or criminal conduct, you in almost all circumstances cannot be prosecuted.

  This new impeachment changes that equilibrium. The one quote cited from Trump in the article to demonstrate his alleged “inciting” speech was: ‘‘If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.’’ That line — which could have been uttered by Trump in about a thousand different contexts over the past five years — is alleged to have “foreseeably resulted in… lawless action”.

  I witnessed countless instances of political speech expressed by activists, journalists, and others during last summer’s protests and riots which under the same standard could have been deemed to have “foreseeably resulted” in “lawless action”, such as attacks on police or destruction of property. But there was always a presumption that the speech was nonetheless protected under the First Amendment. The new “Trump standard” codified by this impeachment could have drastic implications for the the future, should it be applied more widely throughout US jurisprudence. Impeachable “incitement” is also unlikely ever to include statements by a president “encouraging” violence by way of, say, military force.

  Still, Trump’s statements on 6 January  — just like a seemingly infinite number of others over the past five-plus years — could surely be worthy of political rebuke or censure. Indeed, Trump has already been rebuked. He’s been roundly condemned by his own party and administration. His main communications platform, Twitter, has banished him. His high-profile supporters are being systematically nuked from social media writ large. He’s been made to issue several humiliating statements conceding defeat and “disavowing” the MAGA mob which marched in his name. The bozo rioters at the Capitol were undoubtedly inflamed by a barrage of lies and conspiratorial delusions that Trump churned out on an almost hourly basis since losing the election — that’s beyond dispute.

  But it was still clear pretty soon after the mob intrusion began last week that the most significant consequences from what occurred would arise not from the intrusion itself, which was dispersed by agents of the state in a matter of hours. Rather, the real consequences would stem from the predictably rash over-reaction. The more extreme the characterisation of last Wednesday’s events, the more emotional ammunition that lawmakers have to demand whatever extreme remedial action they had been ideologically committed to pursuing anyway. This goes well beyond the expedited impeachment, and into the corporate censorship purge which has now radically altered the principles undergirding the open internet.

  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the most high-profile member of the Left-wing Congressional “#squad”, has claimed that she narrowly escaped assassination at the Capitol and has thus been “traumatised”. Evidently she will be publicly working through this “trauma” on Instagram. It is also her contention that half of the House of Representatives (over 200 people) had been on the verge of mass execution. This style of political rhetoric has already been marshalled by “AOC” and others to demand corporate censorship on a vast scale, and successfully so; last week she tweeted pressure on Apple and Google to expel the alternative social media platform Parler from their app stores, and the corporations quickly obliged.

  Amazon, falling like a domino, then completely terminated Parler from its web hosting service — effectively killing the site. As perhaps the country’s most influential Democrat by online following, AOC is someone who these tech corporations have an interest in appeasing, especially as Democrats enter full control of the federal government on 20 January. Her exceedingly dramatic recounting of what transpired during the mob intrusion is a powerful tool in her arsenal.

  Curiously, the most putatively “progressive” members of Congress seem to be the most exercised about resurrecting concepts that sound like Woodrow Wilson suppressing dissidents in wartime. Mondaire Jones, a highly touted “progressive” incoming freshman Congressman, took to fulminating on the House floor during the impeachment proceeding about “treason and sedition”.

  Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney further declared from the floor of the House that Trump had “wilfully incited an armed insurrection”. Which is again another curious characterisation, because while a Capitol Police officer was in fact killed in the melee, the only person against whom armed, deadly force was used against was Ashli Babbitt, a Trump-supporting Afghanistan and Iraq War veteran who was shot dead at point-blank range by an officer.

  Any rational observer who has the capacity to detach from the temporary passions of the moment should be able to recognise that the United States government was never at risk of being “overthrown” by the chaotic band of yahoos who stormed the Capitol. All they accomplished was to delay the certification of Joe Biden’s victory by a few hours. They also humiliated the man they apparently thought they were valiantly coming to the defence of; even Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader of the House, took to the floor during the impeachment session to declare that “Antifa” was not to blame for the chaos which unfolded, and blamed Trump as bearing responsibility for the events. Indeed, the full force of state and federal law enforcement power is now being deployed against the intruders, and many — perhaps hundreds — will be going to prison.

  Reminiscent of the post 9/11 period, the “crisis” of the past week has been seized upon to execute a pre-existing agenda. Impeachment, purges, the militarisation and lockdown of the Capitol — it’s only the beginning, and it’s all happening with hardly even a peep of criticism or moment for reflection. Given this historical continuity with the events of 2001, it was therefore fitting when Steny Hoyer, the Democratic Majority Leader in the House, went out of his way Wednesday afternoon to herald the valour of Liz Cheney — daughter of the architect of US policy after 9/11, Dick — who was one of the ten Republicans to vote along with Democrats to impeach.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 23:40

• M1 Abrams Tank Gets New Round That Can Destroy Almost Anything 
  M1 Abrams Tank Gets New Round That Can Destroy Almost Anything 

  The US Army’s main battle tank, the M1 Abrams, is about to receive a new multipurpose super tank round that can breach concrete walls, pulverize obstacles, and destroy bunkers, according to Forbes. 

  The Advanced Multi-Purpose, or AMP, is specially designed for the M1 Abrams to replace the rapidly aging inventory of tank munitions. 

  The new round is long overdue as tank crews on the modern battlefields in the Middle East have been confronted by new evolving threats. 

  

  Unlike the M829 depleted uranium round, which can punch through almost anything – it tends to have difficulties blowing up vehicles or houses, as it just zips right through those types of targets. The new AMP can destroy everything the M829 cannot. 

  “The AMP adds an important new capability. The existing canister round is only for short-range use with a maximum reach of about 500 meters. This makes it useless for dealing with one of the biggest threats to tanks, infantry equipped with anti-tank guided missiles like the Russian-made AT-14 Kornet, used in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. When used in airburst mode, the AMP can target groups of personnel at ranges of up to 2,000 meters: even if it does not disable a missile team, the round is likely to distract them enough so that they are not able to keep a missile on course.”

  Another important new capability is breaching walls. Currently, making a breach an infantry assault requires engineers to get next to the wall and emplace explosives. Three rounds of AMP will create a thirty-by-fifty-inch hole clean through a double-thickness reinforced concrete wall, big enough for troops to advance through. This includes cutting through the steel reinforcement bars, and breaching can be carried out from several hundred meters away,” said Forbes. 

  Forbes described the new round has “three different fusing options” for blowing up different targets. 

  “With Point Detonation, the round explodes on contact with the target — this mode will make it effective against targets like light armored vehicles. Set to Point Detonation-Delay, the round does not explode immediately on contact – this is the mode used against obstacles and bunkers, as it gives enough time to penetrate deeply into concrete or other material before exploding. In the Airburst mode, the round explodes at a pre-set height above the ground, spraying the area below with tungsten shrapnel – this is the antipersonnel mode,” said Forbes.

  Watch the new AMP round in action.

  To sum up, the AMP round is a significant advancement in tank ammunition technology as it provides additional capabilities to defeat opponents on the modern battlefield. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 23:20

• Woke Elementary: Critical Race Theory & California's "Inconvenient Minority"
  Woke Elementary: Critical Race Theory & California’s “Inconvenient Minority”

  Authored by Christopher Rufo via City-Journal.org,

  An elementary school in Cupertino, California – a Silicon Valley community with a median home price of $2.3 million – recently forced a class of third-graders to deconstruct their racial identities, then rank themselves according to their “power and privilege.”

  

  Based on whistleblower documents and parents familiar with the session, a third-grade teacher at R.I. Meyerholz Elementary School began the lesson on “social identities” during a math class. The teacher asked all students to create an “identity map,” listing their race, class, gender, religion, family structure, and other characteristics. The teacher explained that the students live in a “dominant culture” of “white, middle class, cisgender, educated, able-bodied, Christian, English speaker[s],” who, according to the lesson, “created and maintained” this culture in order “to hold power and stay in power.”

  Next, reading from This Book Is Antiracist, the students learned that “those with privilege have power over others” and that “folx who do not benefit from their social identities, who are in the subordinate culture, have little to no privilege and power.” As an example, the reading states that “a white, cisgender man, who is able-bodied, heterosexual, considered handsome and speaks English has more privilege than a Black transgender woman.” In some cases, because of the principle of intersectionality, “there are parts of us that hold some power and other parts that are oppressed,” even within a single individual.

  Following this discussion, the teacher had the students deconstruct their own intersectional identities and “circle the identities that hold power and privilege” on their identity maps, ranking their traits according to the hierarchy. In a related assignment, the students were asked to write short essays describing which aspects of their identities “hold power and privilege” and which do not. The students were expected to produce “at least one full page of writing.” As an example, the presentation included a short paragraph about transgenderism and nonbinary sexuality.

  The lesson caused an immediate uproar among Meyerholz Elementary parents.

  “We were shocked,” said one parent, who agreed to speak with me on condition of anonymity.

  “They were basically teaching racism to my eight-year-old.”

  This parent, who is Asian-American, rallied a group of a half dozen families to protest the school’s intersectionality curriculum. The group met with the school principal and demanded an end to the racially divisive instruction. After a tense meeting, the administration agreed to suspend the program. (When reached for comment, Jenn Lashier, the principal of Meyerholz Elementary, said that the training was not part of the “formal curricula, but the process of daily learning facilitated by a certified teacher.”)

  The irony is that, despite being 94 percent nonwhite, Meyerholz Elementary is one of the most privileged schools in America. The median household income in Cupertino is $172,000, and nearly 80 percent of residents have a bachelor’s degree or higher. At the school, where the majority of families are Asian-American, the students have exceptionally high rates of academic achievement and the school consistently ranks in the top 1 percent of all elementary schools statewide. In short, nobody at Meyerholz is oppressed, and the school’s high-achieving parents know that teaching intersectionality instead of math is a waste of time—and potentially dangerous.

  One parent told me that critical race theory was reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

  “[It divides society between] the oppressor and the oppressed, and since these identities are inborn characteristics people cannot change, the only way to change it is via violent revolution,” the parent said.

  “Growing up in China, I had learned it many times. The outcome is the family will be ripped apart; husband hates wife, children hate parents. I think it is already happening here.”

  The small fight at Meyerholz reflects a larger development: for the first time, Asian-Americans on the West Coast have become politically mobilized. In 2019, Asian-Americans ran a successful initiative campaign against affirmative action in Washington State; in 2020, Asian-Americans ran a similar campaign in California, winning by an astonishing 57 percent to 43 percent margin. In both cases, they defended the principles of meritocracy, individual rights, and equality under the law—and roundly defeated a super-coalition of the states’ progressive politicians, activists, universities, media, and corporations.

  The stakes are high for the Asian-American community. For progressives insisting on the narrative of “white supremacy” and “systemic racism,” Asian-Americans are the “inconvenient minority”: they significantly outperform all other racial groups, including whites, in terms of academic achievement, college admissions, household income, family stability, and other key measures. Affirmative action and other critical race theory-based programs would devastate their admissions to universities and harm their futures.

  At Meyerholz Elementary, the Asian-American families are on high alert for critical race theory in the classroom. Since their initial victory, they have begun to consider campaigning against the school board.

  “We think some of our school board members are [critical race theory] activists and they must go,” said one parent.

  The capture of our public institutions by progressives obsessed by race and privilege deserves opposition at every level. The parents of Cupertino have joined the fight.

  This article is part of an ongoing series on critical race theory in American schools.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 23:00

• Stanford Scientist Can Tell If You're A Liberal Just By Looking At Your Face
  Stanford Scientist Can Tell If You’re A Liberal Just By Looking At Your Face

  Since the beginning of the 21st century, the surveillance state has utilized technology derived from Silicon Valley, such as facial recognition algorithms, to enhance society’s control. 

  Authoritarian regimes and unscrupulous corporations are leveraging these technologies to track citizens, stalk criminals, and monitor employees, but what if this technology, rapidly advancing in the last couple of years, can determine a person’s political views? 

  Imagine this; obviously, the Washington Metropolitan Area is lined with surveillance cameras, with some cameras that may already be employing facial recognition algorithms. Hypothetically speaking, what if these cameras could recognize an angry mob and accurately (to some degree) identify their political views by observing their faces and then alert authorities of potential social unrest in a specific area. 

  While that technology has yet to be deployed, it may certainly exists. 

  Researchers have developed a facial recognition algorithm that they claim can determine a person’s political views with reasonable accuracy. 

  Stanford University’s Michal Kosinski conducted a study published on Monday in the Nature journal Scientific Reports.

  “Ubiquitous facial recognition technology can expose individuals’ political orientation, as faces of liberals and conservatives consistently differ,” Kosinski said.

  He trained the facial recognition algorithm to accurately guess a person’s political view with an accuracy rating of about 72%. To do this, the researcher trained an algorithm with over one million profiles from social media websites across the US, UK, and Canada. 

  “Political orientation was correctly classified in 72% of liberal-conservative face pairs, remarkably better than chance (50%), human accuracy (55%), or one afforded by a 100-item personality questionnaire (66%). Accuracy was similar across countries (the U.S., Canada, and the UK), environments (Facebook and dating websites), and when comparing faces across samples. Accuracy remained high (69%) even when controlling for age, gender, and ethnicity,” he said.

  Kosinski said the algorithm is “high predictability” in determining political views from viewing faces, which implies a notable difference between the facial images of conservatives and liberals. 

  One of the most significant facial features that differentiate both political parties’ faces – aside from gender, age and race was head orientation and emotional expression. He also said liberals were more likely to stare directly at the camera and more likely to look surprised than disgusted.

  

  Here are the procedures used to predict political orientation from facial images. And by the way, she’s a liberal. 

  

  It was also explained that liberals tend to smile “more intensely and genuinely,” leaving them with a different wrinkle pattern as they age. Meanwhile, conservatives “tend to be healthier, drink less alcohol and smoke less, and have a different diet” – attributes that affected the skin’s health and texture.

  The thought that algorithms can determine your political views from a quick scan of your face is a frightening one. 

  Kosinski is known for his work with the data-mining firm Cambridge Analytica ahead of the 2016 US Presidential election. 

  He also worked as an adviser on Faception, a company that uses facial recognition algorithms to determine if someone is a terrorist, pedophile, or a criminal.

  China has been deploying facial recognition cameras for years to monitor its citizens. This sort of surveillance is coming to America – by the way – it’s already here. 

  Perhaps wearing a face mask could render facial recognition cameras useless… 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 22:40

• Americans Are Being Divided As The War On Domestic Terror Expands
  Americans Are Being Divided As The War On Domestic Terror Expands

  Authored by Derrick Broze via TheLastAmericanVagabond.com,

  Americans appear too divided and distracted to recognize that the architects of the Patriot Act and the failed War on Terror now have their sights set on the American homeland.

  

  The first week of 2021 kicked off with chaos at the Capitol in Washington D.C. Was it a protest, a riot or an insurrection? Were there provocateurs, and if so, were they Antifa, the cops, and/or the Feds? As usual, everyone on the internet thinks they know the answer within ten minutes. Unfortunately, this genuinely leads to the spreading of unfounded theories – many based on nothing but speculation and emotion. But while the public is debating over theories and arguing amongst themselves, the newly emboldened Military Industrial Complex is eagerly anticipating the incoming Biden Administration as an opportunity to expand the War on Domestic Terror.

  In the immediate aftermath of the “storming of the Capitol”, the media pundits, intelligence community, and politicians began foaming at the mouth in excitement over the chance to push through Domestic Terror legislation. Michigan representative Elissa Slotkin, also former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense and CIA analyst, said, “the post 9/11 era is over. The single greatest national security threat right now is our internal division. The threat of domestic terrorism.” Slotkin went on to say that she urges the Biden administration to “understand that the greatest threat now is internal.”

  The post 9/11 era is over. The single greatest national security threat right now is our internal division. The threat of domestic terrorism. The polarization that threatens our democracy. If we don’t reconnect our two Americas, the threats will not have to come from the outside. pic.twitter.com/ADgGcf7qEo

  — Rep. Elissa Slotkin (@RepSlotkin) January 8, 2021

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

  TLAV writer Whitney Webb responded to Slotkin’s comment by reminding the audience that, “before Congress, Elissa worked for the CIA and the Pentagon and helped destabilize the Middle East during the Bush and Obama admins. What she says here is essentially an open announcement that the US has moved from the “War on [foreign] terror” to the “War on domestic terror”.”

  The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) also reportedly released a bulletin warning that “domestic extremists” are planning a nationwide protest to stop Joe Biden from being sworn in as President. According to ABC News, “The FBI has also received information in recent days on a group calling for “storming” state, local and federal government courthouses and administrative buildings in the event President Donald Trump is removed from office prior to Inauguration Day. The group is also planning to “storm” government offices in every state the day President-elect Joe Biden will be inaugurated, regardless of whether the states certified electoral votes for Biden or Trump.”

  Since the bulletin has not been publicly released the report should be viewed skeptically. However, it’s only one of many emerging reports and articles stoking the flames of civil war and internal chaos. The fact of the matter is that this is not a new attempt to demonize the American people. This current effort is simply a continuation of the effort to label Americans as terrorists that has been taking place since at least the mid-1990’s following the Oklahoma City bombing false flag. These efforts were expanded further after the attacks of 9/11. In fact, as most readers know by now, it was Joe Biden who wrote the anti-terror legislation in the 90’s which became the basis for the Patriot ACT after 9/11.

  While the “War on Terror” launched by the George W. Bush administration was focused on imaginary enemies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Iran, Syria, and elsewhere, there has also been a steady push to focus on the American public. In the first years of the Obama administration we saw the rise of the “Tea Party” movement, the American Libertarian movement, and Liberal Progressives who opposed the war machine, the surveillance state, and the militarization of the police. Organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) did their best to label activists “extremists” for constitutionally protected activism and organizing. In 2010, the SPLC even came up with a “Patriot Hit List” of so-called extremists.

  The post-9/11 era saw the creation of Fusion Centers; centralized systems that pool and analyze intelligence from federal, state, local, and private sector entities. The National Network of Fusion Centers was created after the 9/11 attacks to provide for more streamlined communication between federal and local agencies. The Fusion Centers have been criticized as violations of civil liberties and a danger to separation of federal and local governments. They have been exposed for targeting of protesters of the Dakota Access Pipeline and most infamously, in 2009 it was revealed that the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) was targeting supporters of third party candidates, Ron Paul supporters, anti-abortion activists, and “conspiracy theorists” as potential domestic extremists.

  The 2010’s also saw the passing of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act which included provisions allowing for indefinitely detaining Americans who have been labeled potential terrorists. Under these provisions, Americans lose the ability to have access to a lawyer and the right to a speedy trial. The measures were approved every year during the Obama and Trump administrations.

  The truth is that the United States has long been pushing for a focus on Domestic Terror and Extremism, and regardless of what really happened at the Capitol on January 6, the event is being used as a way to justify the push for strengthening domestic terror legislation.

  Another organization that is helping propel the “rise of domestic terror” narrative is the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), an organization with deep ties to the intelligence community and Western Military Industrial Complex. In October, the CSIS released a study claiming that two-thirds of the terrorist plots and attacks in the United States in the first eight months of 2020 were carried out by white supremacists and like-minded extremists. Coincidentally, journalist John Vibes recently reported that, “the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is listed as the “most recent employment” for three selections on Biden’s Department of Defense agency review team: Kathleen Hicks, who is a former defense official under President Barack Obama, as well as Melissa Dalton, and Andrew Hunter.”

  The most likely candidate for new domestic terror legislation is the “The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act”, originally passed by the House in 2020, would create “dedicated domestic terrorism offices within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and require the Federal Government to take steps to prevent domestic terrorism.”

  Illinois Senator Dick Durbin has already promised to reintroduce the bill in the coming days. “Senate Democrats, along with the Biden administration, will work together to investigate, expose, and hold accountable domestic terrorism threats in our country,” Durbin and Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a joint statement. The bill also has support from the Anti-Defamation League and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

  Another domestic terror bill that has previously been considered is the “Confronting the Threat of Domestic Terror Act”. The bill was introduced by Rep. Adam Schiff, who claimed that “the legislation is narrowly crafted and includes protections to ensure it is not misused.” However, the American Civil Liberties Union warned, “people of color and other marginalized communities have long been targeted under domestic terrorism authorities for unfair and discriminatory surveillance, investigations, and prosecutions. Law enforcement agencies’ use of these authorities undermines and has violated equal protection, due process, and First Amendment rights.”

  This is a crucial time for the American experiment. Will the American people allow themselves to be divided to the point of calling for domestic terror legislation to be used on their neighbors, co-workers, friends and family? With the public inundated with fears of civil war, stolen elections, rampant disinformation, and general exhaustion with COVID-19 measures, it appears to be a very critical moment which may decide whether America is destined for a renewed desire for liberty, truth, and free speech, or an accelerated push towards tyranny.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 22:20

• Amidst The Pandemic, Women Rush To Sell Explicit Photos Of Themselves On OnlyFans
  Amidst The Pandemic, Women Rush To Sell Explicit Photos Of Themselves On OnlyFans

  Perhaps someone needs to ask Jerome Powell during his next congressional testimony: What kind of a recession are we in when women can’t even successfully sell nude photos online anymore?

  Such is the case for a number of women who, the midst of trying to earn money during the pandemic, have turned to OnlyFans to try and sell explicit photos of themselves. Many of these women are still struggling, despite their extra “efforts”, according to the New York Times, who profiled several new creators who have taken to the platform to “provide for themselves and their families”. 

  The NYT claims the pandemic has taken “a particularly devastating toll on women and mothers” because the pandemic has “wiped out” industries like restaurants and healthcare, where women “dominate”.

  Angela Jones, an associate professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Farmingdale, said: “A lot of people are migrating to OnlyFans out of desperation. These are people who are worried about eating, they’re worried about keeping the lights on, they’re worried about not being evicted.”

  One of these creators was Lexi Eixenberger, who started an account in November. The 22 year old has been laid off three times during the pandemic and was forced to drop out of dental hygiene school. She has only made about $500 from the platform so far.

  

  Jones said of the platform: “It is already an incredibly saturated market. The idea that people are just going to open up an OnlyFans account and start raking in the dough is really misguided.”

  The biggest successes on the platform are “often models, porn stars and celebrities who already have large social media followings,” the NYT says. They are able to use their other social media accounts as a funnel for business on OnlyFans. 

  One success story has been Savannah Benavidez, who has made $64,000 in just 6 months. She quit her job as a medical biller after her 2 year old son’s day care shut down and she needed to stay home and take care of him. 

  She told The Times: “It’s more money than I have ever made in any job. I have more money than I know what to do with.”

  

  “It’s a full-time job on top of your full-time job looking for work. Fans want to see you posting daily. You’re always churning. You’re always taking pictures to post,” said 36 year old Elle Morocco of West Palm Beach. She joined the platform after being laid off as an office manager this past July. 

  She has only made $250 on the platform so far, despite sometimes spending up to 8 hours a day managing her account. 

  She also worries about what OnlyFans could do to her future job prospects. She said: “If you’re looking for a 9 to 5, they might not hire you if they find out you have an OnlyFans. They may not want you if they know you’re a sex worker.”

  The Times cited two examples – one of a mechanic in Indiana and the other of a NYC medic – who both believed their OnlyFans account had negative consequences for their full-time jobs. 

  

  Melany Hall, another creator, said she was happy to have made $700 on the platform since December. She said: “This is the first year I didn’t have to choose between the electric bill and Christmas presents for my kids. This is the first year I’ve been able to do it all by myself.”

  But Barb Brents, a professor of sociology at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said there are risks that go along with sex work – despite it happening on a virtual platform. “Online sex work is a much more appealing alternative to many people than going on the streets or selling direct sexual services. That said, anybody getting into this kind of work needs to be aware that there are dangers,” she said.

  Creators also have to deal with members posting their exclusive content elsewhere on the web – and some have even faced death and rape threats, the article notes.

  OnlyFans currently has 90 million users and more than 1 million content creators. The platform takes a 20% cut of any pay that creators get, excluding tips that creators can get on other payment platforms. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 22:00

• Trump's China Trade War Cost Up To 245,000 American Jobs: Study
  Trump’s China Trade War Cost Up To 245,000 American Jobs: Study

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  A new study estimates that President Trump’s trade war with China caused the loss of up to 245,000 American jobs.

  The study from the US-China Business Council (USCBC) and Oxford Economics said a moderate reduction of tariffs on both sides could lead to an additional 145,000 US jobs and an increase in $160 billion GDP by 2025.

  

  The USCBC is an organization that promotes US-China trade relations and is made up of about 200 US companies that do business in China. The USCBC announced the study in a press release titled, “Decoupling with China Not Economically Viable For Americans.”

  “What we’ve seen over the past few years is that raising tariffs does little more than raise costs for American families and shrink their opportunities,” said USCBC President Craig Allen.

  Reuters describes further of the study:

  The group, which represents major American companies doing business in China, said the study by Oxford Economics also includes an “escalation scenario” which estimates a significant decoupling of the world’s two largest economies could shrink U.S. GDP by $1.6 trillion over the next five years. This could result in 732,000 fewer U.S. jobs in 2022 and 320,000 fewer jobs by 2025, it said.

  The study comes as the Biden administration is deciding how to pursue trade policy with China. In December, Joe Biden said that he does not plan to “immediately” lift tariffs on Chinese goods or scrap President Trump’s Phase One trade deal.

  Allen and the USCB are hoping Biden acts to lift tariffs. “If we don’t find ways outside of self-defeating tariff measures to address differences with China, American workers will continue to suffer,” Allen said.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 21:40

• How A US Nuclear Strike Works
  How A US Nuclear Strike Works

  In the wake of last week’s events in Washington, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, among others, began discussing the use of the 25th Amendment, amping up the hyperbole by voicing concerns about President Trump launching some kind of attack on a foreign adversary using nuclear weapons in order to create a state of emergency and halt the transition. Those concerns prompted her to contact the Pentagon’s leadership in order to receive assurances that safeguards are in place, assurances she reportedly received.

  

  So, that got us wondering, if President Trump decided to launch a nuclear strike, how swiftly could he put things in motion? Would he have the sole power alone to launch a nuclear missile? According to an analysis undertaken by Bloomberg, the U.S. president’s power is absolute in this situation – he or she gives the order and the Pentagon is obliged to go along with it. It remains unclear if that has now changed given Pelosi’s reported contact with the Pentagon’s leadership.

  This infographic, via Statista’s Niall McCarthy, provides an overview of the steps necessary to make a nuclear strike happen.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  It can take as little as five minutes from the president’s decision to strike to intercontinental missiles launching from their silos. When it comes to submarine-launched weapons, however, it takes a little bit longer – approximately 15 minutes.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 21:20

• Politics Won't Fix The American Decline
  Politics Won’t Fix The American Decline

  Authored by Zachary Yost via The Mises Institute,

  By any measure, 2020 was not a very good year for human freedom. By now everyone is very familiar with the assaults on liberty stemming from measures ostensibly in the name of stopping the spread of covid and the way in which such measures have threatened the very existence of the social order. Beyond such obscene and unprecedented measures, 2020 also demonstrated that the leaders of our society are truly incompetent and bungling. The ineptitude is truly staggering, even for skeptics of the state. When surveying the wreckage of last year one can’t help but feel a sense of dread and apprehension for the long-term health of our civilization.

  

  It is not only the state and its myriad of pathetic politicians and power-mad bureaucrats who are cause for concern. Culturally, the woke madness has been spreading like a malignant cancer throughout the body politic. Churches, universities, large companies, and cultural institutions have increasingly come under the sway of the reality-denying woke ideology. No doubt that a few hundred years in the future some enterprising author will make a fortune humorously documenting all the culturally accepted absurdities of our era, but unfortunately they are not so amusing to those of us forced to endure them.

  Now, 2021 has opened with even more chaos and uncertainty as a riotous mob supporting Trump stormed the capital building. This crazed lunacy has only furthered the idea that we are on the decline, not to mention that it will serve as a convenient excuse for any number of further government crackdowns.

  In short, disorder reigns.

  Looking around at the wreckage and continued decay of our society, it is easy to become discouraged and even to begin to feel desperate. In such desperation, it may seem necessary to redouble our efforts to affect political change and “save the country” from its present disastrous course.

  While such a position is easy to understand, I would posit that perhaps trying to roll back the state via electoral victory, which is what friends of liberty have consistently failed to do for decades, is not a viable strategy, and that it is actively contributing to the problem.

  While it is popular and accurate to blame our societal elites for being pathetic and inept, the truth is that these leaders, both political and cultural, are reflections of us. Leaders who do not reflect the character of the people they lead will not be leaders for long. In the final accounting, it is not the words written down on the parchment of the Constitution that govern the United States. Rather, the true constitution of a people is the one that is written in their hearts. A badly written constitution will not be an obstacle to a virtuous and ordered people, just as the most brilliantly organized constitution will not save an unvirtuous and disordered people.

  Perhaps, in the same way that the central government has sapped more and more of the strength and social power from all other institutions of social life, it has also sapped our attention and energies from where they truly belong. To what extent have efforts to stop the government merely made its job easier by leading us to neglect our families, churches, and communities? To what extent has it made us neglect our very own cultivation of virtue?

  In the first chapter of The Art of War, Sun Tzu counsels that if the enemy “is in superior strength, evade him….Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.” Constantly attempting to seize the power of the state in order to reduce it has been attacking the enemy where he is strong and engaging on his terms. In a sense, we have let the central government determine the battlefield. Political power is not the only repository of power in society, yet we have chosen to constantly engage the state in that sphere and have consistently lost. Even supposed victories tend to merely be rearguard-holding actions to delay rather than defeat.

  I would suggest that the time has come to consciously turn to an alternative strategy of cultivating social power outside of the state apparatus. Such an effort is likely to lead to much more success, although that is a low bar since the current strategy has led to no success at all. Unlike federal electoral politics, it begins with something entirely and completely under one’s control: oneself.

  The key to the cultivation of alternative poles of social power begins with order, specifically the ordering of one’s own life. This is not an idea original to me. Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson has recently popularized this idea in a secular manner with his refrain of “clean your room.” Less recently, though in a far more sophisticated manner that recognizes man’s spiritual nature, the political theorist Eric Voegelin has written voluminously about modern chaos as stemming from internal disorder that is the result of man’s loss of connection to the engendering experiences that serve to capture the truth of reality, the end result of which is the rise of totalitarian ideologies.

  Instead of a more traditional concern with cultivating oneself, with looking after the beam in one’s own eye, modern man has become obsessed with everyone else on the planet. Even friends of human liberty have fallen prey to this tendency, from time to time, in our excessive investment of time and attention to political issues that are far removed from our actual lived existence. In doing so, we have neglected to build up alternative bases of social power in our families and communities.

  One may respond that it is all well and good to order oneself, but that it is not enough or is even pointless in the face of the wider chaos that is engulfing the rest of society. However, it may be that such self-ordering is in fact the only thing that restores order to the rest of society. Philosopher Irving Babbitt argued that “there may be something after all in the Confucian idea that if a man only sets himself right, the rightness will extend to his family first of all, and finally in widening circles to the whole community.”

  If dark and illiberal days truly are ahead, as it seems reasonable to consider at least as a possibility, then these localized bastions of ordered liberty will become more important than ever. Perhaps instead of letting strangers in state schools and who knows what kind of wackos on the internet raise one’s children, now is the time to take the plunge into homeschooling, or at the very least to invest time in their education and moral upbringing. Perhaps now is the time to develop friendly relations with one’s neighbors and to begin attending local township meetings. Perhaps now is the time to begin to invest one’s time and energy in what the sociologist Robert Nisbet called the intermediary groups and associations that serve as a buffer between the state and the solitary and weak individual.

  This is not to say that federal politics should be ignored completely; the federal government is impossible to ignore thanks to the immense power it wields. But such engagement must not come at the cost of those areas of life that are truly under one’s control.

  Disorder increasingly reigns across the land and with disorder inevitably comes oppression and the curtailment of our traditional rights and liberties. The restoration of order begins with oneself and one’s home. Societal order will not be restored until order is restored in the hearts of those who make up the society. Even if the pessimists are correct and our country is too far advanced down the path of decay and collapse that every other empire has trodden in history, the cultivation of personal order is still imperative for survival in the dark and chaotic days to come.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 21:00

• Surprise! Chicago Mayor Pushes To Loosen Lockdowns Days Before Biden Inauguration
  Surprise! Chicago Mayor Pushes To Loosen Lockdowns Days Before Biden Inauguration

  A second Democratic leader is pushing for loosening COVID-19 restrictions, just days before President-elect Biden is set to be sworn in.

  Following on the heels of NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s call to “reopen the economy,” Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is now of the opinion that bars and restaurants need to reopen for indoor dining “as quickly as possible.”

  

  “I am very, very focused on getting our restaurants reopened. If we look at the various criteria that the state has set, we are meeting most if not all of those. So that’s a conversation that I will have with the governor,” she said at a Thursday press conference. “But I want to get our restaurants and our bars reopened as quickly as possible.“

  “Let’s bring it out of the shadows, let’s allow them to have some recreation in restaurants, in bars, where we can actually work with responsible owners and managers to regulate and protect people from COVID-19, so I feel very strongly that we are very close to a point where we should be talking about opening our bars and restaurants,” she continued.

  This would, as it turns out, help Chicago City Councilmember Tom Tunney (D), who was caught running an illegal ‘COVID Speakeasy‘ out of his Chicago restaurant last month.

  Lightfoot’s call for reopening comes after she told people to cancel Thanksgiving with family, while the number of case counts across the state reversing higher over the last two weeks from a January 1 bottom. Meanwhile, while the Mayor is calling to reopen indoor dining (and gradually reopen schools), she oddly extended a stay-home advisory until January 22. We’re unclear on exactly which science she’s following.

  The Chicago Tribune elaborates, saying it will ultimately come down to Governor. J.B. Pritzker (D) to make the call:

  On Thursday, Chicago’s test positivity stood at 10%, according to city statistics. Under the current pandemic rules, the city would have to have a positivity rate of 6.5% or less for three straight days in order for restaurants and bars to reopen.

  Ultimately, it’s Pritzker who will make the decision about when bars and restaurants can reopen for indoor service. The city can set rules that are stricter than the state’s but not rules that are looser.

  A Pritzker spokeswoman said in a statement Thursday that Chicago’s coronavirus numbers aren’t there yet, but the governor would “look forward to her call” on the matter.

  Pritzker, as you may recall, ignored Lightfoot’s “do not travel” order to  leave Chicago for Thanksgiving.

  “As the governor announced last week, beginning tomorrow, regions who meet the metrics to go back to lower tiers in the resurgence mitigation plan will be allowed to do so,” said Pritzker spokeswoman Jordan Abudayyeh. “Currently, the city of Chicago and Cook County do not meet the metrics to return to previous tiers.”

  Pritzker shuttered Chicago restaurants and bars for indoor dining in late October after the city surpassed the 8% benchmark for three straight days on average daily positivity.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 20:40

• Consent-Manufacturing For Patriot Act II Continues
  Consent-Manufacturing For Patriot Act II Continues

  Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

  It’s been obvious for a long time that the best way to stop the rise of right-wing extremism in America that everyone’s so worried about today is not to pass a bunch of authoritarian laws, but to reverse the policies of soul-crushing neoliberalism and domestic austerity which led to Donald Trump. Instead of doing this, the next president is already pushing a Patriot Act sequel and reducing the stimulus checks he’d promised the public before he’s even been sworn in.

  

  President-elect Biden promised unambiguously that if voters gave the Democratic Party control of the Senate by electing Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in Georgia earlier this month, checks of $2,000 would “go out the door immediately”. Warnock blatantly campaigned on the promise of $2000 checks if elected, literally using pictures of checks with “$2000” written on them to do so. This was not an unclear promise by any stretch of the imagination, yet when Biden unveiled the “American Rescue Plan” on Thursday, the number 1400 was written where the number 2000 should have been.

  Boss: Here’s your check.
  Employee: This is $1400. You said $2000 for the job.
  Boss: Yeah but that’s minus the $600 I paid you for the last job. You’re welcome.

  — Caitlin Johnstone ⏳ (@caitoz) January 15, 2021

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

  The argument being pushed out at the moment is that when Democrats were blatantly promising stimulus checks of $2000 what they really meant was that Americans would receive $1400 on top of the $600 checks they’d received earlier, and everyone should have just known this somehow (perhaps via some sort of psychic precognition or sorcery). Which of course makes as much sense as someone hiring you to do a job for a given amount of money and then paying you the amount promised minus the amount you’d made at your last job.

  It’s just so emblematic of US austerity policies, which are so normalized they don’t even use that word. Keep people stretched so thin that even a paltry $2000 after months and months of nothing can be spun as an excessively exorbitant indulgence which must be scaled back to keep it reasonable. In reality a grand total of $2600 in the richest nation on earth after all this time would still be a huge slap in the face, but generations of media spin have gone into keeping Americans from attaining that level of rightful entitlement.

  So as of this writing the internet is full of angry Americans actually typing the words “$1400 is not $2000”, which is totally bananas. People should not have to say that the number 1400 is not the same as the number 2000. It feels like if my Twitter feed was full of people saying “Cars are not birds”, or “Pogs are not iPhones”, or “Mimes are not salad”. People should not have to make such self-evident clarifications.

  But they apparently do need to make such clarifications, because scumbags like Adam Schiff are looking them right in the eye, sharing information that says “$1,400 checks” on it, and telling them that it says “$2000 relief checks”.

  2 + 2 = 5.

  

  So again, it’s pretty clear that America isn’t going to attempt to reverse the conditions which created Trump and all the extremist factions that everyone’s been freaking out about since the Capitol riot. Obama led to Trump, and the strategy going forward is to just keep tightening the neoliberal screws like both Obama and Trump did throughout their entire administrations. And, of course, to advance new “domestic terrorism” laws.

  As we discussed previously, Biden has often boasted of being the original author of the Patriot Act years before it was rapidly rolled out amid the fear and blind obsequiousness of the aftermath of 9/11. Now in the aftermath of the Capitol riot we are seeing a push to roll out new authoritarian laws around terrorism, this time taking aim at “domestic terror”, which were also in preparation prior to the event used to manufacture support for them.

  In a new article for Washington Monthly titled “It’s Time for a Domestic Terrorism Law”, Bill Scher argues against left-wing critics of the coming laws like Glenn Greenwald and Jacobin’s Luke Savage saying such “knee-jerk reactions” against potential authoritarian abuses fail to address the growing problem. He opens with the acknowledgement that “Joe Biden’s transition team was already working on a domestic terrorism law before the insurrection,” and then he just keeps on writing as though that’s not weird or suspicious in any way.

  Scher lists among the growing threat of domestic terror not just white supremacists and right-wing extremists but “extremist left-wing domestic terrorism” as well. He approvingly cites Adam Schiff’s Confronting The Threat of Terrorism Act, which “creates a definition of domestic terrorism broadly encompassing plots that carry a ‘substantial risk of serious bodily injury’ along with an ‘intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population’ or ‘influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.’” The ACLU has unequivocally denounced Schiff’s bill, saying it “would unnecessarily expand law enforcement authorities to target and discriminate against the very communities Congress is seeking to protect.”

  This is sketchy. Anonymous FBI officials basically tell NBC the violence at the Capitol could have been stopped if it wasn’t for free speech and the first amendment. They’re priming us for domestic terrorist laws.https://t.co/wJP7UhEIFB

  — Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) January 13, 2021

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

  Known CIA asset Ken Dilanian has also been trotted out to make the case that Americans have too many rights for their own good, co-authoring an NBC article titled “Worried about free speech, FBI never issued intelligence bulletin about possible Capitol violence”.

  “FBI intelligence analysts gathered information about possible violence involving the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6., but the FBI never distributed a formal intelligence bulletin, in part because of concerns that doing so might have run afoul of free speech protections, a current and two former senior FBI officials familiar with the matter told NBC News,” the article warns, making sure to inform readers that “experts say the lack of a domestic terrorism statute constrains the FBI from treating far-right and far-left groups the same as Americans who are radicalized to violence by Al Qaeda or ISIS ideology.”

  We can expect to see more such articles going forward.

  The only way to sincerely believe more Patriot Act-like laws will benefit Americans is to believe that the US will only have wise and beneficent leaders going forward, and the only way to sincerely believe the US will only have wise and beneficent leaders going forward is to be completely shit-eating stupid. The trajectory has already been chosen, and that trajectory is the one that has already given rise to Trump. Continuing along that same trajectory can only give rise to something far uglier, and that something far uglier will have whatever new authoritarian powers are added by Joe Biden.

  They’re not actually worried about “domestic terror”, they’re worried about any movement which threatens to topple the status quo. They want to make sure they can adequately spy, infiltrate, agitate and incarcerate into impotence any movement which provides a threat to America’s rulers and the system which funnels them wealth and power at the expense of everyone else. The movements which most threaten this are not rightists, who are generally more or less aligned with the interests of the oligarchic empire, but the left.

  This is who they’ll end up targeting going forward, and whatever Biden and Company wind up rolling out to fight “domestic terrorism” will help them do so.

  *  *  *

  Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Poems For Rebels (you can also download a PDF for five bucks) or my old book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

  Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 20:20

• Restaurant Chain Transactions Tumble In December As Recovery Stalls 
  Restaurant Chain Transactions Tumble In December As Recovery Stalls 

  Dining restrictions and cold weather have derailed the restaurant recovery in December. 

  Market research firm NDP Group, which tracks 75 restaurant chains, said transactions at major chains slumped 10% in December versus the same month one year ago. 

  “Up until December, monthly restaurant transaction declines had been improving consecutively since April. November transactions were down just 8%,” CNBC said, citing the report. 

  

  A reemergence of the virus pandemic, new indoor dining restrictions, and colder weather dissuaded patrons last month from returning. 

  The full-service restaurant segment has been some of the hardest hit, unable to adapt, or has had a more challenging time overhauling their business models to accommodate delivery and takeout.

  In April, the full-service segment saw transactions plunge by more than 70%. In December, transactions fell 30% due to indoor dining limitations or bans. 

  UBS Evidence Lab found that even if these restaurants could pivot to takeout, many of these stores will still fall short of revenue to sustain operations. 

  Some of the latest Bank of America consumer spending data shows chain restaurants are fairing much better than mom and pop ones. 

  While the industry struggles and requests for more relief, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported last Friday that food services and drinking places lost 372,000 jobs in December. 

  Goldman Sachs pointed out that colder weather would accelerate infections. This means local and state governments would be forced to limit or continue the ban through early 2021, crushing the industry even further. 

  With more than 110,00 restaurants already collapsed, the stage is being set for an epic bust in commercial real estate. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 20:00

• Rush To Judgment On Trump? Multiple Leftists Arrested For Capitol Riot
  Rush To Judgment On Trump? Multiple Leftists Arrested For Capitol Riot

  Authored by Monica Showalter via AmericanThinker.com,

  When the Capitol riots happened on Jan. 6, the blame of President Trump was all over. 

  Supposedly, he was the instigator. Supposedly, he’d egged the rioters on. The tape of his urging his supporters to stay strong and fight was Exhibit A in the press, and with no skepticism whatsoever, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared Trump guilty and rushed a crazily hasty second impeachment just days before Trump’s exit. She declared it was all about holding Trump “accountable” and she added, that her explicit aim at the uselessly late date was to prevent him from ever running from public office again.

  Never mind what the voters might want. In more ways than one, in Pelosi’s addled mind, their votes don’t count.

  The press also rushed to judgment, even the Wall Street Journal’s editorial writers, claiming that Trump’s political capital and credibility was now gone and he’d never run for president again.

  But as news of the arrests comes out, showing who these branded Trump so-called supporters are, the conventional argument is starting to splinter apart.

  The arrests made in the riots case are starting to show the kind of people who like to riot, which is to say extreme leftists.

  Start with this freak, as reported by Fox News:

  A left-wing activist who told Fox News last week that he’d followed a pro-Trump mob into the Capitol in order to “document” the siege is now the subject of a criminal complaint in connection with his alleged participation, according to the U.S. Justice Department.

  John Sullivan can allegedly be heard egging on protesters in video he provided to the FBI, according to a federal criminal complaint. He has also shared the video to his YouTube and Twitter accounts under the pseudonym Jayden X.

  He was charged Thursday in federal court in Washington after being arrested by the FBI. He remains in custody in Toeele County, in his home state of Utah, on a U.S. Marshals Service hold request.

  The Epoch Times reports that he was a Black Lives Matter activist. Andy Ngo notes that he’s been busted for BLM riot activity, too. GatewayPundit reported that he was caught on video bragging about posing as a Trump supporter.

  

  He had a pal, too, from CNN. According to this report from TrendingPolitics:

  On Thursday night, damning new footage showed CNN’s Jade Sacker inside of the Capitol with John Sullivan, the BLM member who was charged by federal prosecutors for inciting chaos on January 6th.

  Sacker co-conspired with the liberal activist in order to cause chaos and make Trump supporters look bad.

  The shocking video shows her and Sullivan celebrating and shouting “We did it!” when they got the footage they were looking for. When she asked Sullivan if he was filming, he said was going to delete it. He never did.

  Trending Politics ran a tweet of the actual video, and described this:

  As you can see, Sacker and Sullivan are overjoyed with the fact that they got footage of Trump supporters “rioting”.

  “Is this not gonna be the best film you’ve ever made in your life?!” Sullivan asks her.

  Verified twitter user Amuse breaks everything down in further detail in a series of tweets.

  “To make this clear. CNN was embedded with BLM/Antifa pretending to be Trump supporters taping them incite a riot. This is freaking huge. If CNN is allowed to maintain its press access anywhere in DC there needs to be a serious overhaul of our entire system,” he tweeted.

  BREAKING: CNN’s Jade Sacker penetrating the Capitol with a member of BLM/Antifa cheering, “We did it!” And then asking her conspirator if he was filming, he said he’d delete it, he lied. CNN was in on it. pic.twitter.com/FVhotiAwcP

  — @amuse (@amuse) January 15, 2021

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

  Here’s another one, who showed up with furs, and also got himself arrested. According to the New York Post:

  Aaron Mostofsky was busted Tuesday at his brother’s house in Brooklyn by federal agents on multiple charges, including theft of government property for allegedly stealing a police riot shield and bulletproof vest, the source said.

  Mostofsky, who is the son of Shlomo Mostofsky, a Supreme Court judge and a prominent figure in the Orthodox Jewish community, was photographed with both items.

  Video circulating on Twitter following Mostofsky’s arrest shows FBI agents swarming the home and carting out what appeared to be the fur pelts and walking stick he had on him during the insurrection.

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

  His politics? According to this report, registered Democrat.

  

  Even the press is starting to notice that the pieces aren’t fitting together. Rather than a picture of all wicked and crazed Trump supporters, charging the Capitol, leftist news outfit Bloomberg reported that its survey of various parties involved, including those who died or were arrested, didn’t paint the desired picture. Conclusion?

  Many of those shown in news footage had no party affiliation and voted sporadically, if at all. 

  Bloomberg’s survey of the players showed that only the people who died of medical emergencies seemed to be fully normal Republican voters — the rest didn’t vote at all, voted sporadically, voted Libertarian, Independent or Democrat, and in general were fringe players. Bloomberg, missing that obvious conclusion, seemed to consider these mostly arrested characters “Trump’s people” and Trump’s “base,” in a bid to still pin the riots on Trump. But how anyone who votes Democrat or doesn’t vote at all could be a part of Trump’s rise and the huge crowds he draws was never actually explained. Trump supporters … vote for Trump. This isn’t rocket science.

  More and more, it looks like Trump was framed. This, in addition to transcripts not bearing out the claims that Trump called for an attack on the Capitol, as well as the inconvenient timeline — the FBI put out warnings of plans for disturbances days earlier, and the attack on the Capitol began before President Trump finished speaking and probably uttered the words the Democrats literally impeached him on.  

  It was a rush to judgment, a failure to look at facts. It happened in the aftermath of the event, and it turns out Trump had little or nothing to do with it. Even House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy blamed Trump for the riots. But he, too,disgracefully rushed to judgment, so we await his apology, please.

  The rush to judgment, incidentally, didn’t affect just President Trump, who got a second impeachment from it. There were many rushes to judgment in this leftist hysteria.

  Here’s a blameless man named David Quintavalle, a retired Chicago firefighter, who was falsely accused of being the person who hurled the fire extinguisher that killed police officer Brian Sicknick, who by the way, really was a Trump supporter.

  According to The Patch of Chicago:

  The retired Chicago firefighter from Mount Greenwood — whom social media trolls called a “terrorist” and accused of fatally wielding a fire extinguisher that killed a cop as a mob of Trump-supporting insurrectionists stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 — was grocery shopping and celebrating his wife’s birthday in Chicago, Patch has learned.

  Twitter exploded with unsubstantiated claims Tuesday that Quintavalle — who retired from the fire department in 2016 after 32 years — was the bearded “#extinguisherman” in a surveillance video wearing a “CFD” stocking cap wanted for questioning and “soon to be arrested” by the FBI regarding the fatal beating of U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick.

  Quintavalle had all his receipts and proofs. But this is how the left’s rush to judgment went for him:

  By Tuesday night, Quintavalle began getting angry calls from people saying he’s a “f—— murderer” who belongs in jail. TV news reporters had staked out his house. Chicago police dispatched a patrol car to keep watch overnight, as well, his lawyer said.

  Some folks got ridiculed for tweeting that Quintavalle wasn’t “the guy” and his facial features don’t match those of the man wanted for questioning by the FBI. One post claimed that tweets disputing Quintavalle’s involvement in the U.S. Capitol insurrection were pushed by trolling Twitter “bots with practically no followers coming out of the woodwork.”

  This is a hell of a sorry picture.

  The facts will continue to roll out and the picture that emerges will likely start to show that these rioters were hardly “Trump’s people” as a rule, or people who were egged on by Trump. They were, in general, leftists, political fringers and people who like to go to riots. There remains to be news of whether and how this fiasco was plotted out but expect news of that to roll out. 

  That leaves Congress and all the jerks who voted for impeachment of President Trump looking like boobs and losers. They’ve hitched their star to this leftist impeachment obsession, and now have seen it falling flat. Now they are about to sully and overshadow Joe Biden’s first days in office with increasingly discredited charges against President Trump and rest assured, the voters will notice just how bad it is. This rush to judgment will trash their own legacies for history.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 19:40

• New York Lawmaker Wants To Ban Bulletproof Vests 
  New York Lawmaker Wants To Ban Bulletproof Vests 

  In a world of surging violent crime, economic downturn, and a raging virus pandemic, one New York lawmaker has introduced a bill to outlaw body armor in the state, according to The Washington Free Beacon. 

  If the bill is passed, anyone who owns body armor would have to surrender their vests within 15 days of the law being passed or face severe consequences. 

  

  The bill introduced by assemblymember Jonathan G. Jacobson (D.) is attempting to outlaw the sale and possession of body armor across the state.

  New York already prohibits the use of bulletproof vests while carrying out “any violent felony offense.” Still, Jacobson’s proposal would make it criminal for anyone in possession of a vest. 

  So what’s the penalty if the new law is passed? 

  According to the law, “the purchase or possession of a body vest shall be a class A misdemeanor for a first offense and a Class E felony for each subsequent offense.” This could result in fines, probation, and even jail time. 

  This week, we noted that background checks for firearms hit record levels this year amid the virus pandemic, social unrest, and surging violent crime. 

  If Jacobson’s bill passes, body armor bans could sweep across blue states. Even before the bans may be seen, there could certainly be a run on vests. 

  * * * 

  Here’s Jacobson’s new bill in full:

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 19:20

• The Hottest Product At CES Is A Doggy Door
  The Hottest Product At CES Is A Doggy Door

  Submitted by Market Crumbs,

  While garage doors aren’t exactly the most exciting business to be in, it’s a strong business nonetheless for Chamberlain Group, the world’s largest manufacturer of automatic garage door openers.

  Chamberlain Group’s brands have embraced the trend of smart homes, for example its myQ brand has teamed up with Amazon to offer In-Garage Delivery, enabling Amazon Fresh and Whole Foods Market groceries to be delivered securely inside your garage.

  myQ stole the show at this year’s CES with the debut of its new Pet Portal as it hopes to capitalize on the booming pet industry. The myQ Pet Portal, which won the CES 2021 Smart Home Innovation Award, is designed to replace an existing exterior door so your pets can come and go as they please.

  

  The futuristic take on a simple pet door includes live video streaming and 2-way communication using the myQ Pet Portal app. The patent-pending, elevator style opening mechanism is unnoticeable from the exterior of a home and uses a smart collar to detect when your pet wants to come or go.

  myQ is taking deposits for the Pet Portal, which retails for $2,999 and will ship to the first customers this spring. The package includes a custom configured myQ | Kolbe Door integrated with Pet Portal as well as a 1 year subscription for video history.

  Chamberlain Group hopes to position itself for when people return to work and their pets are left at home alone. They argue that the lofty price is less than half of what pet owners would spend annually on a dogwalker.

  “A bright spot for many people in a challenging 2020 has been adding a furry friend to the family. But as COVID-19 restrictions begin to lift in 2021 many dogs will experience a dramatic change in their routine,” Chamberlain Group Director of Product Marketing Beril Altiner said. “The myQ Pet Portal can help alleviate some of the stress and expenses that might come along as schedules change. It’s a secure and convenient way to make sure your dog can go outside when they need to, while also giving you access to your best friend anytime through your smartphone.”

  While the idea may sound absurd, a team of a dozen employees at Chamberlain Group have been working on the idea for 16 months while conducting surveys and focus groups to perfect the technology. According to a national survey conducted by the company, just 8% to 11% of pet owners have a pet door in their homes. The survey also found that 68% of households who routinely let their pet outside don’t have a pet door.

  Despite the lofty price tag, it may not be long before this becomes a common door in new homes across America as they become increasingly connected and filled with pets.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 19:00

• In Historic First, FAA Approves Fully Automated Commercial Drones In US Skies
  In Historic First, FAA Approves Fully Automated Commercial Drones In US Skies

  In nothing less than a revolutionary step for aviation and which will forever alter the skies over America, on Thursday the Federal Aviation Administration for the first time issued approval for the first fully automated commercial drone flights.

  It’s been revealed Friday that the FAA granted a small Massachusetts-based company called American Robotics Inc. the authorization to operate automated drones, meaning they won’t need either hands-on piloting on the ground or direct observation while in flight.

  

  Commercial drone operation was already given approval under extremely limited conditions – for example as a remote inspection tool for agricultural areas or railroads, but so long as human operators were in the vicinity, along with spotters.

  The Wall Street Journal reports of the new approval:

  “…in its action Thursday, the FAA granted American Robotics Inc., based in Marlborough, Mass., permission to fly in U.S. airspace without anyone controlling or monitoring it on site, according to Lisa Ellman, a lawyer in the Washington, D.C., office of Hogan Lovells, who represents the company and also is executive director of the Commercial Drone Alliance, an industry trade group.”

  In particular its Scout drones will “operate under predetermined flight programs and use acoustic technology to detect and avoid drones, birds and other obstacles,” according to the WSJ report.

  The news also comes as the FAA this week is implementing new aviation rules which are expected to allow for eventual broad expansion of drone deliveries by companies like Amazon. However, authorities have remained cautiously slow given the immense safety concerns both to traditional aviation and air travel, as well as to bystanders on the ground, and the fact that commercial drone delivery traffic is likely to be most active over dense residential areas.

  FAA Approves First Fully Automated Commercial Drone Flights—The decision “limits operation of automated drones to rural areas and altitudes below 40 feet, but is a potentially significant step in expanding commercial application”https://t.co/wdRoQKHp4l

  — Jonathan Feldman (@_jfeldman) January 15, 2021

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

  “The new rules make way for the further integration of drones into our airspace by addressing safety and security concerns,” FAA Administrator Steve Dickson earlier this week. “They get us closer to the day when we will more routinely see drone operations such as the delivery of packages.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 18:40

• Biden Reveals Plans To Speed Up Vaccine Rollout, Asks Americans To "Mask Up" For 100 Days
  Biden Reveals Plans To Speed Up Vaccine Rollout, Asks Americans To “Mask Up” For 100 Days

  For weeks ahead of the election, Joe Biden kept hammering Trump’s response to the covid pandemic without explicitly stating what or how he would do differently, besides “urging” Americans to wear masks (which is what California has been diligently doing even as the state now boasts the highest number of cases in the nation) and to “listen to scientists.” Today, for the first time, the president elect laid out in specific terms what will would do to eradicate the covid plague and how he plans to speed up the vaccine rollout.

  Addressing the nation near his home in Wilmington, Delaware, Biden said he would order increased production of syringes and other supplies to ramp up vaccinations against COVID-19 and improve upon the Trump administration rollout that he has called a “dismal failure.”

  Trump had aimed to give vaccine doses to 20 million Americans by the end of 2020. But only 11.1 million coronavirus shots had been administered as of Thursday out of more than 30 million doses distributed to states, amid widespread distrust and roughly 40% of the population refusing to get vaccinates.

  

  Biden promised to do better and to get 100 million vaccine shots into the arms of Americans during his first 100 days in office.  Federal officials have largely left states to manage distribution, resulting in big differences in vaccination rates. The Trump administration has said it expects 1 million shots to be delivered per day by the end of next week.

  “This is a time to set big goals and pursue them with courage and conviction because the health of the nation is literally at stake,” Biden said.

  Biden said he will instruct FEMA would to begin setting up community vaccination sites on his first day in office, in locations like gymnasiums, sports stadiums and community centers, where retired doctors would administer shots to teachers, grocery store workers, people over 65 years old and other groups who do not currently qualify.

  “Mobile clinics moving from community to community” will partner will local health-care professionals to get vaccinations to “hard-to-reach” communities, he said.

  According to a document released by his transition team, Biden would invoke the Defense Production Act to increase production of equipment needed to distribute the vaccines, such as glass vials, needles and syringes. He would also use the law to support vaccine refrigeration and storage. States that use their National Guard in the effort would be reimbursed by the federal government.

  As part of Biden’s “aggressive” plan to defeat covid, he called on all Americans to wear masks in public for 100 days to combat the spread of the coronavirus, saying it was “stupid” that face coverings had become a political issue.

  “This is a patriotic act,” Biden said in a speech in Wilmington, Delaware, on Friday outlining his plan to accelerate vaccinations against the virus. “We’re asking you, we’re in a war with this virus.” Biden also criticized Republican lawmakers who have refused to wear masks. “What the hell is the matter with them? It’s time to grow up.”

  “For God’s sake, wear a mask – if not for yourself, for your loved ones, for your country,” Biden said, despite a recent Danish study which found that masks provide the wearer with only limited protection against COVID-19 infection. That study, conducted in April and May in which 6,024 adults were divided into two groups, found that after one month, 1.8% of the people wearing masks had been infected, while 2.1% of the people in the control group had tested positive.

  Biden also called for increasing vaccine distribution in lower-income neighborhoods not currently well served by public health hospitals and pharmacies. Biden also plans a marketing campaign to encourage those skeptical of the vaccine to get inoculated.

  “The vaccine rollout in the United States has been a dismal failure so far,” he said. Five changes, he said, will help the U.S. meet his goal of 100 million doses in his first 100 days.

  “You have my word: we will manage the hell out of this operation,” he said. It was unclear who the “we” is though we suspect he means the Federal government, which explains just how “hellishly” this operation will be managed.

  That said, and similar to his pre-election promises, Biden’s pledges remain vague about timelines, reinforcing Biden’s previous warnings that there’ll be no quick fix.

  “We didn’t get into all of this overnight. And we won’t get out of it overnight, either,” Biden said. “We remain in a very dark winter.”

  According to an announcement Friday by his transition office, Biden would encourage states to abandon a complex series of priority groups that’s been used to triage vaccination and instead focus on giving shots to front-line essential workers and anyone over 65.  He plans to set up community vaccination centers and mobile clinics and “jump-start” an effort to make shots available at pharmacies.

  And so once again, the scientists – who originally urged a priority group rollout – were proven wrong.

  Implementation of priority groups was driven by science but “has been too rigid and confusing,” Biden said. “There are tens of millions of doses of vaccine sitting around unused in freezers across the country” while people who want vaccinations can’t get them, he said.

  “I’ve already asked the team and we’ve identified the suppliers who are prepared to work with our teams,” he said. Needless to say, companies like Pfizer which stand to make billions, were delighted: Pfizer CEO said he is “ready and able to support this plan” adding that “we are particularly aligned with the ideas of federally assisted vaccination centers, financial support to the States, mobile clinics to reach underserved urban areas and rural communities, vaccine availability in pharmacies and qualified health centers and an expanded public health workforce.”

  Biden’s fourth change is a previously announced plan to release more first doses of vaccines and hold less in reserve for second doses. The Trump administration announced it would make that change itself this week. Biden said his administration would not change recommended dosing schedules that call for people to receive a booster shot three or four weeks after their first dose.

  His fifth change, he said, will be more transparency for the vaccine program, including regular updates on progress toward vaccinating the population.

  Biden’s team on Friday appointed former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner David Kessler as chief science officer of what it calls “Covid Response.” They’re retiring the “Operation Warp Speed” name President Donald Trump used for the vaccination effort. Kessler will replace Moncef Slaoui, who served as the initiative’s chief scientist, and Kessler will focus on administering the vaccine.

  Earlier in the day, his transition team said he will reorganize the vaccine distribution team currently called “Operation Warp Speed” and has asked former Food and Drug Administration chief David Kessler to work with manufacturers to boost vaccine availability. On Thursday evening, Biden unveiled a $1.9 trillion stimulus plan on Thursday that includes $20 billion for vaccine distribution as well as $50 billion for coronavirus testing, which experts and officials said should help speed the process up.

  Biden’s aggressive measures come just as the number of hospitalizations in the US declined for the first time in 4 months…

  

  … and as Bank of America predicted that, absent a major spread of a mutant variant, the vaccinations should bring the virus under control in just a few weeks. 

  A video of Biden laying out his plan is below.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 18:20

• Looking Forward at Interest Rates, the U.S. Dollar, Volatility, and the B117 Variant
  Looking Forward at Interest Rates, the U.S. Dollar, Volatility, and the B117 Variant

  Real Vision CEO and co-founder Raoul Pal joins Real Vision managing editor Ed Harrison for a nuanced discussion of how the economic recovery will evolve over the next few months. Raoul and Ed interpret today’s dismal retail sales figure, which indicate a contraction of total retail activity for the third straight month. With the new B117 COVID-19 variant on the move, Raoul expects economic activity to continue to decline, ebbing away at the dominant reflationary trades that are short U.S. Treasurys as well as the U.S. dollar. Ed asks Raoul his thoughts on the recent storming of the U.S. Capitol, the approaching inauguration of President Elect Joe Biden, and Biden’s new $1.9 Trillion stimulus plan. Lastly, Raoul and Ed wax philosophical about “the death of macro”: what would happen if the volatility of interest rates and currencies – the bread and butter of macro investing – were extremely low over the next decade? In the intro, editor Jack Farley provides context on bank earnings and the recent short squeeze of GameStop Corp ($GME).

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/15/2021 – 18:19