• Not A Coup, But A Cover-Up
  Not A Coup, But A Cover-Up

  Authored by Lee Smith via The Epoch Times,

  Speculation is growing in Republican media circles that the recent scandal over President Joe Biden’s improper possession of classified information from his time as vice president represents an internal coup. The theory holds that Democratic Party insiders, particularly Obama-era officials situated within the Biden administration, are using the revelations of Biden’s carelessness to push him aside or at least prevent him from running for reelection in 2024.

  

  Capitol Hill sources say it’s true that the Biden administration is a hornet’s nest with several factions vying for control, including one led by domestic policy adviser Susan Rice and Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, both Obama loyalists. However, a careful look at the evidence shows that senior Biden aides, Democratic officials, and the party’s media apparatus are circling the wagons to protect Biden. What we’re watching isn’t a coup but a coverup.

  Press reports show that at the beginning of November 2022, Biden’s lawyers found classified documents in his office at a Washington think tank affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania that bears his name: the Penn Biden Center. This account is improbable. If Biden’s legal team, rather than his administrative staff, typically sorted through his papers, it’s likely they would have previously identified the classified records in question.

  There were at least two other opportunities for Biden’s aides to find the papers among his belongings. The first came when his staff packed his boxes as he left the Office of the Vice President in January 2017. It isn’t yet known where the documents were kept between then and when they were moved to the Penn Biden Center when it opened in 2018. The move would have given his staff another chance to find the classified documents. Hence, it seems likely that it was an outside source that alerted either the Biden team, the National Archives, or the Department of Justice to the fact that the president was improperly holding classified documents.

  In a press conference on Jan. 12, Attorney General Merrick Garland said that on Nov. 9, 2022, he asked the FBI to assess whether those records had been mishandled. On Nov. 14, 2022, he asked the U.S. attorney in Chicago, John Lausch, to conduct an initial investigation.

  Administration officials and Biden loyalists in federal law enforcement knew they had a problem. Mishandling classified documents was the basis of a broad Democratic Party campaign against Biden’s possible 2024 rival, former President Donald Trump.

  The FBI raided Trump’s Florida home in August 2022 to seize classified documents, and rumors circulated that indictments were in the offing. Eventually, the Department of Justice appointed a special counsel to investigate Trump. Biden even chastised his predecessor for mishandling classified documents in a September 2022 media interview. And now, here was Biden as culpable as the man they hoped to destroy with the same instrument—classified documents.

  The Biden team moved to attenuate the potential fallout with a leak to the press. A Nov. 14, 2022, Washington Post article citing “people familiar with the matter” explained that “FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property.”

  That is, contrary to the public outcry that Trump had taken the documents for illicit purposes—he was selling U.S. nuclear secrets to Saudi Arabia, one journalist claimed without evidence or reason—there was nothing sinister at play. Rather, he was simply motivated by ego.

  The Nov. 14, 2022, article was evidence that the Biden circle was walking back its scorched-earth campaign against Trump on classified papers. Nearly three months later, it’s clear why—to reframe the context for when news of Biden’s own problems with classified documents went public.

  When the story broke last week in administration-friendly media outlets, Democratic lawmakers not only rallied around the president but also compared his response favorably to Trump’s. Unlike Trump’s team that argued with the institution tasked to keep U.S. records, Biden’s lawyers, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) intimated, “appear to have taken immediate and proper action to notify the National Archives.”

  Dozens of media publications, from The New York Times to Vox, have published explainers showing why what Trump did is much worse than what Biden did.

  Trump had more documents, the argument runs; Biden’s lawyers were more forthright; and so forth. The fact is that no one on the Democratic side has broken with the president or even so much as hinted that he did something wrong. This isn’t what an internal coup looks like.

  The special counsel appointed to investigate Biden’s handling of classified documents identifies as a Republican but he appears to be a Never Trump Republican. Robert Hur is a protégé of Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general under Trump who reportedly offered to wear a wire to spy on the previous president.

  Rosenstein furthered the anti-Trump cause by withholding documents from the investigation led by former Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) into alleged FBI crimes and abuses committed during the bureau’s Trump–Russia probe. He also allegedly threatened to subpoena Nunes’s staffers, including Kash Patel. A winter 2018 chain of emails (pdf) between Department of Justice officials shows that Hur was part of the law enforcement team tasked to stonewall Nunes’s investigation.

  Former congressional investigators say that Hur’s appointment as special counsel is intended not to uncover potential crimes committed by the president but rather to give the appearance of a genuine investigation and thereby bury the issue once and for all. And thus, actions taken by the Biden administration and the responses of Democratic officials and the media show that what’s unfolding at present isn’t a coup, but a coverup.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 23:40

• How Ozone-Depleting Gases (Almost) Disappeared
  How Ozone-Depleting Gases (Almost) Disappeared

  According to an expert assessment released last week, the hole in the ozone layer is expected to close completely over the upcoming decades.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, the layer in the world’s stratosphere containing a high concentration of ozone had ruptured every year since the 1980s due to harmful chemicals being released into the air and depleting the atmosphere’s naturally occurring ozone. Striking a hopeful note for the successes possible in environmental and climate conservation, the phase-out of substances like CFCs are expected to reverse the damage done.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The UN Ozone Secretariat supplies data on the annual global consumption of ozone-depleting substances and how their use decreased since the end of the 1980s.

  CFCs (Chlorofluorocarbons) and halons had been the single most consumed ozone-depleting gases some decades ago and were used in aerosols and fire extinguishers or as refrigerants and solvents. Their use has all but been phased out. The use of other ozone-harming gases has also been cut down to a minimum. The exception are Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), which have been employed as a bridge technology to phase out more harmful sustances faster. They are still used today but due to their shorter lifespan in the atmosphere do much less harm. The substances are scheduled for a complete phase-out by 2030. Another substitute for ozone-harming gases – Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) – do not have an effect on the ozone layer. However, their emissions from the use in air conditioning, insulation and refrigeration are many times as potent as CO₂ emissions in warming the global climate.

  Holes in the ozone layer have been forming over the Earth’s poles due to the globe’s wind pattern and the regions’ cold winter climate, which fosters conditions for ozone depletion that manifest themselves in the spring. Due to Antarctica featuring a cold-attracting landmass, the hole in the ozone layer in the Southern hemisphere has usually been larger. Once a hole in the ozone layer has formed, ultraviolet radiation from the sun hits the Earth more strongly, for example heightening the risk of skin cancer.

  The ozone hole over the Antarctic varies in size each year but has been growing smaller lately. Under current scenarios, the ozone layer is expected to be restored to its 1980 condition by 2066 at the latest.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 23:20

• Mapping Out All The Key Revelations From The 'Twitter Files' So Far…
  Mapping Out All The Key Revelations From The ‘Twitter Files’ So Far…

  Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Documents revealed by Twitter’s new owner, tech billionaire Elon Musk, show the social media company intertwined with a government-private censorship apparatus.

  Twitter suppressed or removed content on various subjects, including irregularities in the 2020 elections, mail-in voting issues, and various aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The company was under government pressure to purge such content and its purveyors from the platform, though most of the time it was cooperating with the censorship requests willingly, the documents indicate.

  INFOGRAPHIC (Click on image to enlarge or Click Here to download)

  

  Musk took over Twitter in October, taking the company private. He then fired around half of the staff and much of the upper management, vowing to take Twitter in a new direction. The “#TwitterFiles” releases have been part of his promised focus on transparency for the company.

  He allowed several independent journalists to submit search queries that were then used by Twitter staff to search through the company’s internal documents, sometimes under the condition that the resulting stories would be first published on the platform itself.

  The two journalists primarily responsible for the releases have been journalists Matt Taibbi, a former contributing editor for Rolling Stone magazine, and Bari Weiss, a former editor at both The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. Both are liberals who have expressed disillusionment with the more extreme currents of progressivism and neoliberalism.

  Others involved in the releases have been independent journalists Lee Fang and David Zweig, former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, as well as author and environmentalist Michael Shellenberger.

  The journalists have only released a fraction of the documents they reviewed. They’ve also redacted the names of employees involved, other than some high-level executives.

  The documents show that the FBI and other state, local, and federal agencies have been scrutinizing the political speech of Americans on a significant scale, and trying to get lawful speech suppressed or removed online. Many conservative and traditionally liberal commentators have deemed that a violation of the First Amendment.

  Twitter, a major hub of political speech, has been among the main targets of censorship. Many news stories have broken on Twitter in recent years and a significant portion of the nation’s political debate takes place on the platform, as it allows an efficient way for direct and public interaction between all on the platform, from the most prominent to the least.

  Twitter resisted some censorship requests, but there was little sign the company did so as a matter of principle. Rather, executives sometimes couldn’t find a policy they could use as a justification. Prior Twitter chief executive Jack Dorsey was under pressure from his lieutenants to expand the policies to allow more thorough censorship, the documents show.

  “The hypothesis underlying much of what we’ve implemented is that if exposure, e.g., misinformation directly causes harm, we should use remediations that reduce exposure, and limiting the spread/virality of content is a good way to do that (by just reducing prevalence overall),” said Yoel Roth, then Twitter’s head of Trust and Safety, which governs content policy, in a 2021 internal message published by Weiss.

  “We got Jack on board with implementing this for civic integrity in the near term, but we’re going to need to make a more robust case to get this into our repertoire of policy remediations—especially for other policy domains.”

  

  In many cases, Twitter leaders de facto allowed the government to silence its critics on the platform.

  Many censorship requests came in with an imperious attitude, particularly those from the Biden White House, but also some from the office of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who at the time headed the powerful House Intelligence Committee.

  Around November 2020, Schiff’s office sent a list of dema to Twitter, including for the removal of “any and all content” about the committee’s staff and suspend “many” accounts including that of Paul Sperry, a journalist with RealClearInvestigations.

  Schiff’s office accused Sperry of harassment and promoting “false QAnon conspiracies.”

  Sperry rejected the allegation, asking Schiff to show evidence for his claims and announced he was considering legal action.

  Schiff’s demands were apparently a response to Sperry’s articles that speculated on the identity of the White House whistleblower that alleged a “quid pro quo” between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

  Sperry reported, using anonymous sources, that the whistleblower was likely then-CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella, who was overheard talking in the White House with Sean Misko, a holdover staffer from the Obama administration. Misko later joined Schiff’s committee.

  Twitter rejected Schiff’s demands, save for reviewing “again” Sperry’s account activity. Sperry’s account was suspended months later. Taibbi said he wasn’t able to find out why.

  Under Pressure

  The many censorship requests Twitter received via the FBI were phrased as merely bringing information to its attention, leaving it up to the company to decide what to do with them. But Twitter executives clearly felt compelled to accommodate these requests, even in cases where they internally struggled to justify doing so, the documents show.

  The government pressure took several forms. The FBI would follow up on its requests and if they weren’t fulfilled, Twitter had to explain itself to the bureau. If Twitter’s position on an issue differed from the one expected by the government, company executives would be questioned and made aware that the bureau, and even the broader intelligence community, wasn’t happy. That would send the executives into triage mode, rushing to salvage the relationship, which it apparently considered essential.

  

  Corporate media served as another pressure point. If Twitter wouldn’t do what it was told fast enough, the media would be provided with information portraying Twitter as ignoring some problem of paramount importance, such as possible foreign influence operations on its platform.

  One censorship request, for instance, targeted an account allegedly run by Russian intelligence, though Twitter wasn’t given any evidence of it.

  “Due to a lack of technical evidence on our end, I’ve generally left it be, waiting for more evidence,” said one Twitter executive that previously worked for the CIA, according to Taibbi.

  “Our window on that is closing, given that government partners are becoming more aggressive on attribution and reporting on it.”

  The internal email suggests that Twitter, despite having no concrete evidence to back it, wouldn’t dare to disobey the request because of the media fallout of the government publicly labeling the account as run by Russian intelligence.

  Congress was perhaps the heaviest sword of Damocles hanging over Twitter’s head. Lawmakers could not only spur negative media coverage, but also tie up the company in hearings and investigations, or even introduce legislation that could hurt Twitter’s bottom line.

  

  For instance, just as Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) was pushing Twitter to produce more evidence of Russian influence operations on its platform in 2017, he also teamed up with Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) to propose a bill that would have required extensive disclosures of online political advertising.

  In the meantime, Twitter managers were convinced that lawmakers were leaking information Twitter provided them and seeding negative news stories, even as the company was trying to placate them with increasingly stringent actions toward actual and alleged Russia-linked accounts.

  Even though the FBI was officially only alerting Twitter to activities of malign foreign actors, many of the censorship requests were simply lists of accounts with little to no evidence of malign foreign links. At times, Twitter tried to ask for more information, noting that it couldn’t find any evidence on its end, but often it simply complied. It was impossible for Twitter to do its due diligence on each request—there were simply too many, according to Taibbi.

  One request revealed by Taibbi claimed that “the attached email accounts” were created “possibly for use in influence operations, social media collection, or social engineering.”

  “Without further explanation, Twitter would be forwarded an excel doc,” Taibbi said.

  Censorship requests were lopsided against the political right. Some researchers said that the right was much more involved in spreading misinformation, but the documents indicate that the censorship wasn’t so much a matter of a right-left dichotomy, but rather a pro- and anti-establishment one. Even some left-leaning accounts were targeted if they strayed too far from the official government narrative.

  Moreover, the right didn’t appear too keen on demanding censorship to begin with. Taibbi couldn’t find a single censorship request from the Trump campaign, Trump White House, or even any Republican, though he was told there were some.

  On the other hand, there seemed to be no appetite across the board for targeting misinformation coming from the establishment itself

  

  Hunter Biden’s Laptop

  Twitter’s suppression of the 2020 New York Post exposé on Hunter Biden, son of then-candidate Joe Biden, was dissected in the Twitter release in particular detail. Apparently, some Twitter executives, particularly Roth, head of Trust and Safety, were regularly invited to meetings with the FBI and other intelligence agencies to receive briefings on the online activities of foreign regimes. In the several months prior to the 2020 election, Roth had been conditioned to expect a “hack-and-leak” Russian operation, possibly in October and involving Hunter Biden.

  The FBI alleged there was some evidence of Russian influence operation related to Hunter Biden’s dealings in Ukraine. But the bureau was also aware that Hunter Biden left his laptop with a trove of explosive information in a New York repair shop and that a copy of it was handed to Trump’s then-lawyer, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The FBI picked up the laptop from the repair shop in December 2019 and had Giuliani under surveillance in August 2020, when the repairman gave him the copy. As the FBI knew, the laptop information was neither hacked, nor a figment of a Russian plot.

  When the Post broke the story, Twitter executives were left with no doubt it was exactly what the FBI had been warning about.

  “This feels a lot like a somewhat subtle leak operation,” Roth commented in an internal email, despite acknowledging he had no evidence for such a claim, save for “questionable origins” of the laptop, which was apparently abandoned by Hunter Biden at a computer repair shop.

  Roth noted that the story didn’t actually violate any Twitter rules. Nevertheless, it was marked “unsafe” and blocked on Twitter under its policy against hacked materials, despite there being no evidence the materials were hacked.

  Twitter’s then-Deputy General Counsel James Baker backed the censorship move, saying it was “reasonable” to “assume” the Hunter Biden information was hacked.

  Baker was FBI General Counsel until May 2018. He joined Twitter in June 2020. At the FBI, Baker was closely involved in the Russia investigation scandal where the FBI embroiled the Trump campaign and later the Trump administration in exhaustive investigations based on paper-thin and fabricated allegations that Trump colluded with Russia to sway the 2016 election. The allegations were produced by operatives funded by the campaign of Trump’s opponent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

  The FBI was in fact aware of no intelligence suggesting a “hack-and-leak” operation ahead of the 2020 election, as testified in November 2022 by Elvis Chan, head of the cyber branch at the FBI’s San Francisco Field Office, which was responsible for communications with Twitter and other tech companies with headquarters in its jurisdiction.

  Twitter itself found very little Russian activity ahead of the 2020 election, Shellenberger reported, citing internal communications.

  Shadowbanning

  Twitter has long denied the practice of shadowbanning—suppressing the reach of an account without informing the user. The denial, however, specifically defined shadowbanning as making the person’s content invisible to others. What people have been complaining about is that Twitter would suppress how many people see their content without making it invisible altogether—Twitter has been doing that a lot, the internal materials show.

  One Twitter engineer told Weiss: “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do.”

  Among those whose accounts were surreptitiously throttled was Jay Bhattacharya, Stanford University professor of medicine and one of the early critics of the COVID-19 lockdowns.

  Others included Dan Bongino, conservative podcaster and former Secret Service agent, and Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, the country’s largest conservative youth group.

  COVID-19

  Twitter has extensively suppressed information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. Anything about the origin of the virus, its treatment, the vaccines developed for it, and public policies to mitigate its spread had to align with the official position of the federal government, as promulgated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  Zweig said he “found countless instances of tweets labeled as ‘misleading’ or taken down entirely, sometimes triggering account suspensions, simply because they veered from CDC guidance or differed from establishment views.”

  Twitter user @KelleyKga, a self-described fact-checker, criticized a tweet that falsely claimed that COVID-19 was the leading cause of death by disease in children. @KelleyKga pointed out that such a claim would require cherry-picking data, backing his argument with data from the CDC. His criticism, however, was labeled as “misleading” and suppressed. On the other hand, the tweet that contained the false claim was not suppressed.

  All physician Euzebiusz Jamrozik did was write on Twitter an accurate summarization of study results on COVID-19 vaccine side effects. The tweet was labeled “misleading” and suppressed.

  Sometimes, it appears, Twitter suppressed the information on its own, but many of the COVID-19-related requests came from the government and even directly from the Biden White House, internal files show.

  In one email, White House Digital Director Rob Flaherty accused Twitter of “bending over backwards” to resist one of his censorship requests, calling it “total Calvinball”—a game where rules are made up along the way. The email wasn’t part of the Twitter files. It came out during an ongoing lawsuit against the Biden administration filed by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana.

  Another White House staffer wanted Twitter to censor a tweet by Robert Kennedy, Jr., a long-time critic of vaccination. The staffer mused whether Twitter could “get moving on the process for having it removed ASAP.”

  “And then if we can keep an eye out for tweets that fall in this same genre that would be great,” he said in the Jan. 23, 2021, email.

  The administration wasn’t always trying to get such content removed. People who merely expressed “hesitancy” about the vaccines were supposed to only have their content suppressed from reaching any significant audience, the documents indicate.

  The Biden administration had a lot at stake as the vaccine rollout was one of its first and most high-profile tasks. There were other stakeholders as well.

  

  Several censorship requests came from Scott Gottlieb, board member and head of the regulatory and compliance committee at Pfizer, the pharmaceutical giant that made the most popular COVID-19 vaccine and raked in tens of billions of dollars on sales of it over the past two years.

  Gottlieb sent Twitter at least three requests. One targeted a doctor who argued on the platform that naturally acquired immunity to COVID-19 is superior to vaccination. Twitter suppressed the tweet, even though the doctor was correct.

  Another request targeted author Justin Hart, who argued on Twitter against school closures, pointing out that COVID-19 fatalities among children are extremely rare. Gottlieb sent the request shortly before Pfizer received approval for the use of its vaccine on children. Twitter didn’t comply with the request.

  Yet another request targeted former NY Times reporter Berenson. Gottlieb claimed that Berenson’s criticism of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of COVID-19 response in the Biden administration, was causing threats of physical violence toward Fauci. Twitter suspended Berenson’s account shortly after.

  Gottlieb sent his requests to the same Twitter official who served as a contact person for censorship requests coming from the White House.

  Trump Deplatforming

  Trump was particularly effective on Twitter. His soundbites, honed over decades of dealing with the New York press, played well on the brevity-oriented Twitter, earning the president some 90 million followers and lending him the power to bypass media filters and instantly grab national attention. Trump’s Twitter presidency, however, brewed scorn in the beltway, especially among the foreign policy crowd that was used to diplomatic subtlety.

  Twitter’s removal of Trump a few days after the Jan. 6, 2021, protest and riot at the U.S. Capitol appears to be one of those instances where Twitter executives acted on their own, breaking the platform’s content policies in suppressing the voice of a sitting American president, internal documents indicate.

  Twitter suspended Trump’s account on Jan. 8, 2021, after the president made two posts.

  “The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!” said one of Trump’s tweets.

  “To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th,” read the other.

  Twitter moderators and supervisors agreed that the Tweets didn’t violate any rules.

  “I think we’d have a hard time saying this is incitement,” wrote one staffer. “It’s pretty clear he’s saying the ‘American Patriots’ are the ones who voted for him and not the terrorists (we can call them that, right?) from Wednesday.”

  Higher executives, under pressure from their many anti-Trump employees, wouldn’t accept that conclusion and continued to push for construing Trump’s comments as malicious.

  “The biggest question is whether a tweet line the one this morning from Trump, which isn’t a rule violation on its face, is being used as coded incitement to further violence,” Vijaya Gadde, Twitter’s Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust, argued in an internal message.

  Another Twitter moderation team quickly furnished Gadde’s argument with a narrative. Trump was a “leader of a violent extremist group who is glorifying the group and its recent actions,” the team concluded, according to internal messages.

  Undermining the Nunes Memo

  In January 2018, then-Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) submitted his memo detailing FBI surveillance abuses in pursuit of the Trump-Russia investigation. The memo was correct on virtually all points of substance, as later confirmed by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

  The memo was dismissed by the corporate media as a “joke,” but gained significant traction on social media nonetheless. Legacy media and several lawmakers then came out claiming the memo was boosted online by accounts linked to Russian influence operations.

  However, Twitter found no evidence of Russian influence behind the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag.

  The claims were all sourced to the Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), a group set up in 2017 under the German Marshall Fund, a think tank funded by the American, German, and Swedish governments.

  The ASD is closely linked to the U.S. foreign policy and national security establishment. It was headed at the time by Laura Rosenberger, a former Clinton campaign adviser who held various roles at the State Department and the National Security Council. Its Advisory Council includes former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, former CIA head Michael Morell, and former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) head Mike Chertoff.

  Twitter officials were at a loss as to how the ASD came to its conclusions.

  “We investigated, found that engagement was overwhelmingly organic and driven by strong VIT [Very Important Tweeters] engagement (including Wikileaks, [Donald Trump, Jr., Rep. Steve King, and others),” Trust and Safety head Roth wrote in an internal message.

  In fact, the “dashboard” ASD used to make its claims had already been reverse-engineered by Twitter—a fact Roth didn’t want to disclose to the media.

  Twitter tried debunking the story behind the scenes without giving out such details, but to no avail. Initially, reporters ran with the story without even reaching out to Twitter, Roth wrote.

  The initial letter on the matter from Schiff and Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee at the time, also came out before giving Twitter a chance to respond, internal messages say.

  Twitter tried to stop Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) from piling on with his own letter, but again failed.

  “Blumenthal isn’t always looking for real and nuanced solutions. He wants to get credit for pushing us further. And he may move on only when the press moves on,” commented Carlos Monje, Twitter’s then-Public Policy director, in an internal message. Formerly a Department of Transportation official, Monje returned to the department under the Biden administration.

  In the end, Twitter never publicly challenged the Russia narrative.

  Aiding Pentagon Psyops

  In 2017, a Pentagon official asked Twitter to “whitelist” several accounts the Defense Department was using to spread its message in the Middle East. Twitter obliged, giving the accounts similar privileges it was reserving for verified accounts.

  Later, however, the Pentagon removed any apparent connections between the accounts and the U.S. government, making them de facto surreptitious. Even though the accounts should have been removed under Twitter’s inauthentic activity policy, the company left them up for several years, independent journalist Fang reported.

  Federal ‘Belly button’ of Investigation

  The FBI served as a conduit for other government agencies to pass information to Twitter and ask for favors, according to Taibbi.

  In one exchange, FBI cyber head Chan explained that the bureau would funnel to Twitter communications from the U.S. intelligence community (USIC), but other election-related communications would come from the DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

  “We can give you everything we’re seeing from the FBI and USIC agencies,” Chan said. “CISA will know what’s going on in each state.”

  He then asked if Twitter would like to communicate with CISA separately or if it would prefer to “rely on the FBI to be the belly button of the [U.S. government].”

  Twitter executives were surprised to learn that the FBI had agents specifically dedicated to searching Twitter and flagging content policy violations.

  Since 2017, Twitter has employed at least 15 former FBI agents, further entangling the agency with the platform. The practice is so common, there was an internal discussion group at Twitter for former agents.

  The FBI responded to the Twitter files disclosures in a statement that labeled the reporting “misinformation” spread by “conspiracy theorists and others … with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.”

  Department of Homeland Censorship

  The DHS has managed to shoehorn speech policing into its mandate to protect critical infrastructure. In January 2017, shortly before leaving the White House, President Barack Obama designated elections as critical infrastructure. The DHS’s CISA then made it its job not only to protect elections from hackers, but also from misinformation and disinformation.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 23:00

• FBI Decided Not To Monitor Biden Document Search
  FBI Decided Not To Monitor Biden Document Search

  After President Biden’s lawyers found classified documents at an office he used at a DC think tank, His Justice Department considered, and then declined, a plan to have FBI agents monitor a search for classified documents at his residences, in order to ‘avoid complicating later stages of the investigation,’ and because Biden’s attorneys ‘had quickly turned over a first batch and were cooperating,’ the Wall Street Journal reports, citing people familiar with the matter.

  

  Instead, the DOJ decided that it would be just fine for Biden’s lawyers to conduct the additional searches by themselves, and would agree to immediately notify the Justice Department if they found any other potentially classified records – after which law-enforcement authorities would take them.

  The arrangement meant that FBI agents wouldn’t bear witness to things such as the volume, or contents, of whatever might turn up. This is, of course, the same FBI that participated in a plan (and fabricated evidence) in a plot to frame former President Trump as a Russian asset, and then ran cover for the Bidens during the 2020 US election – telling social media companies that Hunter Biden’s laptop, or anything like it, was likely Russian disinformation.

  In the week since news reports first surfaced about the documents, the incident has drawn parallels to the discovery of a much larger number of documents at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, which federal agents obtained a warrant to search in August after more than a year of negotiations between Mr. Trump’s lawyers, the National Archives and the Justice Department and after Mr. Trump’s lawyers said all documents had been returned. -WSJ

  After the initial finding at the Penn-Biden Center in early November (and not disclosed until last week), classified materials were discovered on three separate occasions in Biden’s Wilmington house in December and January, in the garage and a room adjacent to it, White House lawyer Richard Sauber said last week.

  According to Sauber, the documents were “inadvertently placed” at the locations.

  Trump supporters have accused the DOJ of a double standard in the handling of the Biden situation vs. Trump’s. And of course, as President, Trump’s ability to declassify the documents obtained in the raid remains a constitutional grey area. 

  Biden’s supporters have pointed to the president’s cooperation, however the DOJ’s willingness to let Biden’s lawyers conduct unsupervised searches is obviously fraught with concern.

  According to the White House, it’s no big deal.

  NBC News’ Peter Alexander repeatedly presses Karine Jean-Pierre about the White House claiming that Republicans are “faking outrage” over Biden’s classified document scandal.

  “Why shouldn’t Americans be upset about documents found in a garage?” he asks.

  She can’t answer. pic.twitter.com/zTdd3SkkmN

  — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) January 17, 2023

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

  NBC News’ Peter Alexander repeatedly presses Karine Jean-Pierre about the White House claiming that Republicans are “faking outrage” over Biden’s classified document scandal.

  “Why shouldn’t Americans be upset about documents found in a garage?” he asks.

  She can’t answer. pic.twitter.com/zTdd3SkkmN

  — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) January 17, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 22:40

• The Renewable Energy Problem That No One Talks About
  The Renewable Energy Problem That No One Talks About

  Authored by Peter Castle via The Epoch Times,

  An obvious barrier to adopting wind and solar power for electricity supply is their intermittency – when the wind isn’t blowing, and the sun isn’t shining, substitute sources are required. This issue is given much attention by conservative media, as it should.

  

  Yet one of the less well-known roadblocks for these renewable technologies is frequency control, even though it becomes a critical concern much sooner.

  Since the 1890s, electricity networks and devices all around the globe have used alternating current (AC) systems, which means that the flow of electricity in the system is repeatedly changing direction.

  In Australia, it alternates 50 times a second, that is, at a frequency of 50 Hertz (in the USA, it is 60 Hertz).

  Supplying electricity at a consistent frequency is very important because appliances and electronics on the network are designed for a specific frequency/voltage input. Therefore, they can be damaged by the wrong electricity supply.

  As a rule, networks would rather supply no electricity than bad electricity. Automated controls through the electricity system will disconnect the supply if the frequency or voltage is “off-spec.”

  

  A technician monitors electricity levels in front of a giant screen showing the eastern German electricity transmission grid in the control centre at Neuenhagen bei Berlin, Germany, on Dec. 17, 2015. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

  South Australians will not soon forget when this happened to the entire state network in 2016. The state-wide blackout started late in the afternoon during some poor weather conditions, and thousands of people had to drive out of the city without any streetlights or traffic signals.

  There were a range of contributing causes, including gusty winds taking down some transmission lines and a lightning strike on a power station.

  After those physical causes, automated protection systems took over. Wind turbines disconnected themselves from the network. The system naturally started drawing more load from all remaining supplies, which maxed out the capacity of the interconnector to the rest of the East Coast network, which consequently disconnected.

  From that point, the shutdowns cascaded throughout the whole network. This all happened in less than a second.

  The potential for a cascading shutdown can never be entirely eliminated; automated protection systems must make decisions at a speed that prevents any human involvement.

  Nevertheless, the vulnerability of the whole system can vary, and increasing intermittent renewables contribute to decreasing the system’s stability.

  Traditional vs Renewable Generators

  Traditional generators use turbines—steam turbines, open-cycle turbines, and water turbines (hydroelectricity). This equipment is called “synchronous” because the frequency of the electricity they produce is directly linked to the speed that the shafts of the turbines rotate.

  Because these machines are large and heavy, it takes time and energy to speed them up or slow them down, which means that the frequency of the electricity cannot change too quickly. This is called “inertia.”

  As you may imagine, solar panels, having no moving parts, do not provide inertia. They match whatever frequency is already in the system; they do not help stabilise it.

  Wind turbines, though they do have large spinning components, change speed all the time merely due to wind conditions. Hence they are not designed to synchronise with the AC network. So they do not provide inertia either.

  If a system does not have inertia, then instead of gently responding to a change in load, the frequency can flail about like a cyclist getting speed wobbles (any engine can have the same problem if it doesn’t have a sufficiently heavy flywheel).

  

  Sheep graze in front of wind turbines on Lake George on the outskirts of Canberra, Australia, on Sep. 1, 2020. (David Gray/Getty Images)

  After the 2016 blackout, energy security gained its rightful place as the highest priority for a few glorious and brief weeks.

  A package of actions was taken by the South Australian government over the next couple of years, including the installation of a large-scale battery (following a promise by Elon Musk to construct it within 100 days or provide it for free), the building of a new diesel power station, and providing incentives for new natural gas exploration and production.

  Additionally, two synchronous condensers were installed. Synchronous condensers are large, heavy rotating shafts, similar to what is contained in a turbine, but they don’t produce electricity—they just help to stabilise the frequency of the network.

  In the subsequent years, each of these responses was vindicated. The diesel generator has been used at several critical times. It was also found that the primary value of the large-scale battery was to stabilise the network.

  Though it stores comparatively little energy, the battery responds rapidly to faults originating anywhere in the east coast network, even in Queensland. It has since been programmed to provide “virtual inertia.”

  Technology for 100 Percent Renewable Network Is Not Here Yet

  Advances in technology and network management have meant that renewables can provide more significant and larger portions of supply without unacceptably destabilising the network frequency.

  Nevertheless, it remains true that almost no system can ever afford to operate on 100 percent renewables without keeping at least a few traditional rotating generators online.

  Wind and solar generators are often switched off or “curtailed,” even when there are still some gas or coal generators active. The network operator cannot afford to turn off the synchronous generators without losing frequency control.

  In the Northern Territory, which has a stand-alone electricity network, about 60 MW of solar farms have been constructed and yet have never once been switched on because the system cannot accommodate them.

  Though the 2016 blackout triggered a suite of improvements to South Australia’s network, energy security still falls dangerously far down the list of priorities for Australian governments.

  Important actions that support energy security, such as the construction of the Kurri Kurri peaking generator in New South Wales, often face opposition from the media and politicians.

  

  Visitors gather to see light installations at Sydney Harbour at the start of the Vivid Sydney festival in Sydney on May 24, 2019. Vivid Sydney is an outdoor cultural festival featuring light installations and projections. (Saeed Khan/AFP via Getty Images)

  Several times, Australia has come dangerously close to another cascading shutdown. Incidents have occurred in smaller networks but failed to gain national attention—such as the 2019 Alice Springs shutdown, in which the central-Australian network was shut down for several hours merely due to unanticipated cloud cover.

  A recent example of a near-miss occurred in late November 2022. During a significant weather event, the main transmission line connecting South Australia to the rest of the east coast was broken near Tailem Bend.

  South Australia’s electricity network became an island. For system stability, several rotating generators had to remain online. Yet the amount of solar energy the state can generate during the day can exceed demand. The network operator needed to curtail more solar generation than they have direct control over.

  In response, the market operator began phoning behind-the-meter solar power providers and using social media to ask commercial and residential solar panel owners to switch off their panels. Thanks to these phone calls, they managed to turn off about half of South Australia’s solar power and thus prevent another shutdown.

  The system was highly vulnerable, yet the whole event barely made the evening news.

  Despite the lack of traction from that news story, the media loudly celebrated a fairly meaningless milestone a month later when the state’s renewables generation was 100 percent of demand for 10 days, which would have been impossible without exporting most of the generation to neighbouring states.

  It seems that until the lights actually turn out, the decision maker will keep their gaze firmly fixed on the renewable mirage.

  There are multiple reasons why renewables are not a simple panacea for electricity supply around the world:

  • the weather-dependence problem,

  • the energy storage problem,

  • the end-of-life replacement and recycling problem,

  • the land-area problem,

  • the materials-of-construction and scarcity problem.

  Now you can add the frequency control problem to your list.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 22:20

• "Nothing Short Of Unsustainable": Futures Soar, Yen Tumbles After BOJ Maintains Yield Curve Control
  “Nothing Short Of Unsustainable”: Futures Soar, Yen Tumbles After BOJ Maintains Yield Curve Control

  Ahead of today’s BOJ decision the market was on edge that one month after the December YCC “huge shock” when the central bank unexpectedly widened its Yield Curve Control band from +/-0.25% to +/-0.50%, in the process sparking a historic surge in the yen and explosion in bond market volatility, that outgoing BOJ governor Kuroda would double down and tweak the BOJ’s Yield Curve Control for the second time, especially after a report by Japan’s Yomiuri leaked last week that another adjustment was imminent.

  And while most economists expected a hold by the BOJ, an unusually high number said they can’t rule out an adjustment to yield curve controls like the one that roiled markets last month, which is also why traders were betting on dramatic swings of 2% or more in favor of either the dollar or yen.

  In the end, it all ended up being one giant nothinburger, because moments ago the BOJ reported that contrary to its own leaks a week ago, it maintained the YCC as before at 0.50%, while maintaining all other aspects of monetary policy as before (JGB yield target at 0% and policy rate at -0.1%, both targets which are completely incompatible with Japan’s soaring inflation). The BOJ also stated its intention to continue large-scale bond buying and to increase them on a flexible basis as it showed its intention to double down on defense of its yield curve control program for now.

  While the YCC was the main highlight – and here there were no changes to either the YCC band or targets –  here are details on some of the other aspects of today’s BOJ decision:

  • Extends by one year fund operation to support financial institutions’ lending
  • No change to forward guidance on interest rates
  • Expands fund supply operation against pooled collateral
  • Maintains guidance that it will continue large-scale JGB buying, make nimble responses for each maturity

  Forecasts:

  • Core-core cpi median forecast for fiscal 2023 at +1.8%vs +1.6% in October
  • Core-core cpi median forecast for fiscal 2024 at +1.6% vs +1.6% in October
  • Real GDP median forecast for fiscal 2023 at +1.7% vs +1.9 % in October
  • Real GDP median forecast for fiscal 2024 at +1.1% vs +1.5% in October

  BOJ Quarterly report”

  • Prices to deviate upward in fiscal 2024
  • Uncertainty over japanese economy extremely high
  • Need to pay close attention to effects of financial, currency market movements on japan’s economy and prices
  • Price outlook skewed to upside
  • inflation expection is on the rise
  • heightening of price growth is likely to sustainable price increase involving wage hikes
  • there’s a risk global economy could deviate downward due to capital outflow from emerging markets and tightening of global financial conditions
  • prices could deviate downwardly as wage hikes won’t strengthen as expected
  • need to pay close attention to impact of elevated global inflation, rapid currency fluctuations on Japan’s prices
  • it takes time but prices will gradually rise towards inflation target on the back of rises in inflation expectations and wage rises

  The full text of the BOJ decision can be found here.

  So what happened and why did the BOJ just burn through more than $200BN in bond stabilization liquidity over the past month for nothing? Perhaps Kuroda got cold feet after seeing the observing the historic volatility in the JGB market when YCC cracked on several occasions in just the past week, and forced the BOJ to inject record amounts of cash just to keep the JGB market from imploding. Indeed, as shown in the chart below, while Kuroda insisted that December’s YCC tweak was aimed to improve market functioning, it only fueled speculation over more changes.

  

  Whatever the reason, the BOJ chickened out, and in the process has only accelerated the inevitable collapse of its own unsustainable policy, and as Vanda Research’s Viraj Patel writes, “bond buying is nothing short of unsustainable” and its “only a matter of time before they lose control of JGB markets….Will be an opportunity for JGB bears to go again… ’23 forecast for core CPI at 1.8% looks low JPY”

  ⚠️ No change from BoJ. All down the middle. Good luck Kuroda… bond buying is nothing short of unsustainable. Only a matter of time before they lose control of JGB markets. Will be an opportunity for JGB bears to go again… ’23 forecast for core CPI at 1.8% looks low $JPY pic.twitter.com/3blNXPlHmf

  — Viraj Patel (@VPatelFX) January 18, 2023

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

  And while the market welcomed today’s retreat by the BOJ, with equity futures spiking…

  

  .. alongside bonds…

  

  … while the yen tumbled by over 200pips as the dovish move means the BOJ will have to print and inject trillions more to support the artificially low yield on the 10Y.

  

  Finally, today’s lack of action simply ensures much more volatility in the coming days as bears will aggressively hammer the 10Y sending its yield surging ever higher, which in turn will force the BOJ to intervene even more aggressively, guaranteeing much more fireworks before Kuroda steps down in April.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 22:06

• Is New Zealand A Beta Test For Western Governments Micromanaging The Populace?
  Is New Zealand A Beta Test For Western Governments Micromanaging The Populace?

  In the wake of the covid pandemic lockdowns and mandates, many western nations and states in the US witnessed a new eye opening level of government intrusion into the daily lives of citizens.  Some, however, dealt with worse scenarios than others. 

  New Zealand in particular has popped up time and time again over the past couple of years with some of the most draconian restrictions on the public, and sadly the trend has not stopped just because the pandemic lockdowns stopped.  The island nation seems to be intent on setting the standard for authoritarian policies and government micromanagement, and a series of recent laws are driving home the reality that they do not intend to relent.  

  Flashback: In 2018, New Zealand banned all offshore oil drilling exploration in the name of instituting a “carbon neutral future”, meaning tight energy restrictions are forthcoming in NZ as the decade progresses.  

  In 2019, NZ banned all semi-automatic weapons after the Christchurch mosque shootings, punishing millions of law abiding citizens for the crimes of one man.  Video evidence of the Christchurch shootings is suspiciously illegal in NZ, and anyone caught viewing or downloading the event can be prosecuted.  The gun bans were enforced just in time for the pandemic lockdowns.     

  In 2020, the government introduced internet censorship legislation which would give them the power to selectively filter “dangerous content.”  Most of the provisions were ultimately scrapped after a public backlash, but future censorship remains a priority for the government. 

  In 2021, New Zealand Prime Minister and associate of the World Economic Forum, Jacinda Ardern, openly admitted to constructing a two tier society in which the vaccinated enjoy normal access to the economy, travel and social interaction while the unvaccinated would be deliberately choked with restrictions until they “chose” to comply and accept the mRNA jab.

  It should be noted that the Ardern and the New Zealand government were made aware on multiple occasions in 2021 by medical professionals of the risks of Myocarditis for people 30 years old and under associated with the vaccines.  They ignored the warnings and pushed forward with mass vaccination campaigns anyway, including attempts to introduce vaccine passports. 

  This was not necessarily unique, though, as many western countries made similar dismissals of vaccine concerns and tried to promote passports.  That said, New Zealand was one of the few in the west that built actual covid camps designed to incarcerate people with the virus in forced quarantine.  The camps, referred to as “compulsory quarantine facilities”, were administrated by the NZ military, leaving no doubt that these were prisons rather than resorts. 

  The Primer Minister was finally forced to scrap a large number of covid mandates last year as evidence mounted that lockdowns and masks were mostly useless in preventing the spread of the virus, and that the vaccines do not necessarily stop covid contraction and transmission.  The fact that  the vaccinated now make up the majority of covid deaths is proof enough that the vaccines do not function as officials originally promised. The process of centralizing power has not stopped, though – The tactics have simply changed. 

  NZ has introduced a multitude of oppressive laws post-covid that add up to a freedom suffocating atmosphere for the public.

  In November, the government implemented a law which forces large financial institutions to disclose climate related risks associated with their investments.  The implications are far reaching, and ostensibly this puts pressure on banks and lenders to avoid financing businesses that are a “carbon emissions risk.”  Meaning, if you want a loan from a bank and the government determines you are a “carbon polluter,” then you likely will not get the loan.  This could include anything from large manufacturers to dairy farms. 

  Speaking of farms, NZ has banned the use of caged chicken farming across the country, creating a massive egg shortage which has led to high prices (This is taking place coincidentally right after the US government culled over 50 million chickens in 2022 due to “avian flu”, also causing high prices in America).  

  Feeling stressed about this mess and want to smoke a cigarette?  Those are getting banned in NZ, too.  In an unprecedented move, the government has passed a law which blocks any person under the age of 18 as of 2023 from buying cigarettes for their entire lives.  Meaning, cigarettes will be slowly phased out as the younger generation grows older.  Are cigarettes a health risk?  Yes.  But, governments claim that costs to socialized medicine give them a rationale to control people’s personal habits.  Today it’s cigarettes; tomorrow it could be anything bureaucrats deem unhealthy regardless of actual science.  

  And that brings us to NZ’s latest authoritarian measure, the Therapeutic Products Bill, which if passed will give the government far reaching authority to manage and restrict the manufacture or sale of natural health supplements.  Want to avoid big pharma and their untested products by taking care of your own body?  You’re not allowed.  Alternatives will be erased leaving only drugs and jabs.

  This is not only the end result of the western fall into socialism, New Zealand seems to represent a test case for increasing violations of individual liberties and individual choice.  New Zealand could yield a vision of the future for many other nations should western populations respond passively.       

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 22:00

• "Santa Monica Is Not Safe" Billboard Returns, More On The Way
  “Santa Monica Is Not Safe” Billboard Returns, More On The Way

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

  A large “Santa Monica is Not Safe” sign that first appeared in December returned to the Third Street Promenade, a popular shopping and dining area in downtown Santa Monica on Jan. 15.

  

  The group of about 400 property and business owners behind the billboard—the Santa Monica Coalition—financed the display after the group’s initial funding expired and the sign was removed a few weeks ago.

  The coalition is now looking to place similar signs on 24 apartment buildings around the city, which would read, “Santa Monica is not safe—Crime, Depravity, Outdoor Mental Asylum.”

  

  Santa Monica, a beach city in Los Angeles County, is known for its tourism, shopping, restaurants, and world-renowned pier that features a roller coaster, games, and a Ferris wheel. But some residents and business owners are sounding the alarm on an increase in crime and homelessness.

  “Restaurants, which are the main anchor tenants of Santa Monica—they’re having to let their employees go because 90 percent of residents in Santa Monica will not come to the Promenade anymore,” Santa Monica resident John Alle, with the Santa Monica Coalition, told The Epoch Times. “They’re afraid, and they feel the promenade garages are full of feces, urine, people camped out doing drugs, syringes—so they’re going to other cities.”

  Alle said it is expensive for businesses to stay afloat in the city because employees are afraid to park in the parking garages. Some business owners are trying to help by paying for their workers’ Uber drive to work, which adds up to be a pricey bill, he said.

  Last week, Alle said his car was broken into in one of the parking garages.

  “It’s a big problem,” he said.

  The coalition points to homelessness as the primary problem deterring tourists and causing businesses to suffer.

  

  According to the 2022 point-in-time count recorded by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority last February, Santa Monica’s had 807 homeless people, an 11 percent decrease from 907 recorded in January 2020. The count was canceled in 2021 due to the pandemic.

  Santa Monica officials said in a statement last May the reason for the decrease is that local shelter capacity was “significantly reduced” to comply with COVID-19 public health guidance. There was, however, a 1 percent increase in unsheltered homelessness, officials said.

  Though the Santa Monica Police Department has beefed up its presence in the downtown area, the coalition wants to see even more patrols to address the criminal activity they say is becoming out of control.

  Last year, Santa Monica ranked No. 6 on home safety and security research site Safewise’s “California’s 50 Safest Cities of 2022” list, next to Compton, Oakland, and San Bernardino.

  Earlier this month, a smash-and-grab robbery took place as suspects crashed a vehicle inside the city’s Louis Vuitton at 110 Santa Monica Place. The suspects reportedly got away with luxury merchandise the morning of Jan. 9, according to police reports.

  In another instance, Tiffany Hall, 49, was stabbed to death in her Santa Monica apartment in August. The suspect was arrested at a nearby Jack in the Box about an hour later.

  In November, two victims were hospitalized after being stabbed and robbed by a homeless man on Ocean Front Walk.

  “These people are suffering,” Alle said of the homeless. “We’re seeing people die in the alleys and in downtown from drug overdose, stabbings, or hypothermia.”

  But not all agree with the message. Santa Monica Councilwoman Caroline Torosis said in a statement in December that she disavows the “the hateful, classist, and quite frankly, racist rhetoric from a single business owner on the Santa Monica Promenade.”

  “This is counterproductive, dehumanizing, and dangerous,” Torosis wrote on Facebook Dec. 22. “Post-pandemic Santa Monica is working to recover and I am fully committed to supporting our businesses thrive while supporting solutions for our houseless neighbors.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 21:40

• San Fran City Panel Urges Reparations Of $5 Million Per Black Adult
  San Fran City Panel Urges Reparations Of $5 Million Per Black Adult

  In a spectacular display of what happens when woke politics intersects utter financial illiteracy, a San Francisco government advisory committee on reparations has recommended the city pay eligible black residents age 18 years and older $5 million apiece. 

  That’s just the headline recommendation of the San Francisco African American Reparations Advisory Committee (AARAC), which was created by the city’s board of supervisors amid 2020’s nationwide racial tumult. 

  

  Next on the wish list: “a comprehensive debt forgiveness program that clears all educational, personal, credit card, payday loans, etc.” The group said this measure will get blacks out of “an inescapable cycle of debt” so they can “build wealth.” 

  Rivaling the $5 million payment as an eyebrow-raiser, the committee also wants a welfare program that targets a $97,000 annual income for low-income blacks for the next 250 years. 

  That’s right: a quarter-millennium of near-six-figure per capita handouts. “Centuries of harm and destruction of black lives, black bodies and black communities should be met with centuries of repair,” AARAC chair Eric McDonnell told the San Francisco Chronicle. 

  As with every leftist agenda item, this one demonstrates a profound obliviousness to the influence of incentives on individual human action: There’s no surer way of guaranteeing an individual will stay “low-income” than promising to round them up to $97,000. 

  But wait — there’s more: Those who qualify for reparations should also receive payroll tax, business tax and property tax credits, the panel says. 

  The city should also “create structures and pathways to mitigate tax consequences for recipients of reparations funds.” Sounds like the board of supervisors will get to take a fact-finding trip to the Cayman Islands.  

  Never mind that California wasn’t a slave state, says the committee: 

  “While neither San Francisco, nor California, formally adopted the institution of chattel slavery, the values of segregation, white supremacy and systematic repression and exclusion of Black people were legally codified and enforced.”

  The Chronicle approvingly called it a “bold” plan, and said “what happens next will show whether San Francisco politicians are serious about confronting the city’s checkered past.” 

  

  To its credit, the committee seems wary of a new California gold rush comprised of opportunistic reparations prospectors. To guard against a wave of black migrants cashing in, AARAC took a stab at incorporating time-in-residency prerequisites.

  Their fiscal border wall, however, has big gaps. Their list of criteria applies a “must meet at least two” approach, making it easier for new San Franciscans to sidestep the length-of-residency rules. For example, if you’re a descendant of a slave, and you were personally or a direct descendant of someone incarcerated for breaking drug laws, you’re in. 

  In a blow to the woke pillar of creative and flexible identity, AARAC shamefully stipulates that all applicants should have “identified” as “black/African American” for at least 10 years. Let’s just hope there’s no need for photo ID. 

  Financial acumen appears to be in short supply among the AARAC members. San Francisco’s budget is around $14 billion and there were about 47,000 African Americans in the 2020 census. If just 10,000 residents qualify, the $5 million payment alone would cost $50 billion. 

  Diversity isn’t a strength of the reparations committee either: All 14 members are black. However, there’s a vacant seat right now — available only to “an individual who has lived or is currently living in public housing.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 21:30

• SHOT Show Day One: We Came Across Kamikaze Drones, Robots With Shotguns, And The "Briefcase Gun"
  SHOT Show Day One: We Came Across Kamikaze Drones, Robots With Shotguns, And The “Briefcase Gun”

  Hello from the 45th SHOT Show at the Venetian Expo and Caesars Forum in Las Vegas. Today is day one of four, and more than 2,500 exhibitors from the firearm and outdoor industry are showing off new innovative products. 

  SHOT Show is the largest firearms trade show of its kind in the world. It’s closed to the public — but we’re going to show our readers some of the exhibits that stood out. 

  We first came across AeroVironment’s Kamikaze Switchblade drone (infamous since the Biden administration is sending thousands to Ukraine).

  

  

  AeroVironment showed off a grounded-based robot with a shotgun mounted on the top. 

  

  Here are the different attachments for the grounded-based robot. 

  

  Maxim Defense had a UTV for special operation forces on display.

  

  The UTV has side mounts for machine guns. 

  

  

  We then came across the IXI DRONEKILLER weapon for military forces. The device is compact and lightweight. It thwarts small drone attacks by jamming radio control and GPS signals. 

  

  Combined Systems, Inc. showed off their handheld Tech Torch that can cut through steel rods and metal plates used for breaching buildings. 

  

  We came across KommandoStore’s The ‘Heat’ Rig, which holds 8 pounds of magazines tightly and securely under a business suit. The vest is modeled after rigs used by Robert De Niro in the 1995 crime movie “Heat.” 

  

  Executives from Lenco Armored Vehicles told us this armored vehicle is being widely adopted by US law enforcement. 

  

  Lenco BearCat is also designed for military use. 

  

  There’s a turret on top of the armored vehicle. 

  

  US Ordnance featured a bunch of military-grade weapons. 

  

  They also displayed the next generation of 40 mm grenade launchers. 

  

  Looking at the sights of the grenade launcher. 

  

  Here are a few companies with high-tech uniforms for military and security forces. 

  

  

  For all those civil disobedient Soros-funded rioters — here are the companies making flash bangs and all sorts of crowd control munitions. 

  

  

  Magpul’s so-called “briefcase gun” is on display. 

  

  One company figured out how to mount armor plating on an ATV. 

  

  Military buyers from Asia, Europe, across the Americas, and the Middle East are present at the closed-door event.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 21:20

• Russians Become Biggest Buyers Of Booming Dubai Real Estate
  Russians Become Biggest Buyers Of Booming Dubai Real Estate

  Via The Cradle, 

  Russian nationals have become the largest buying group of real estate in Dubai since the war in Ukraine, driving sales to a new record high according to Sputnik.

  In 2022, Dubai recorded more than 86,000 sales, surpassing the previous record in 2009 with 80,000 sales, according to Dubai-based Better Homes brokerage. The estimated worth of real estate bought in 2022 is a staggering $56.6 billion, an increase of nearly 80 percent since 2021.

  

  However, the real estate market in Dubai not only saw a boost in sales due to geopolitical events unfolding in Europe, but it also became a haven for bankers fleeing strict lockdown rules in Asia, Israeli investors that have taken advantage of the Abraham Accords, crypto investors, and hedge fund managers.

  In addition, the city’s new lenient laws have also made it easier for foreigners to invest in real estate, as well as the easing of COVID-19 restrictions much earlier than the rest of the world. Real estate is one of the city’s most critical sectors, accounting for about a third of the economy.

  Dubai’s “real estate sector has demonstrated its ability to sustain its rapid growth and enhance its attractiveness as an investment magnet,” said Sultan Butti bin Mejren, director general of the government’s Dubai Land Department.

  “The sector is set to achieve even greater growth in the future,” he added.

  The UAE is a neutral ground for Russian investors and even participates actively in negotiations between the warring countries.

  Russians were the biggest international buyers of Dubai real estate last year, according to brokerage Betterhomes https://t.co/lwPXY7dcXu pic.twitter.com/22veLG4Iiv

  — Bloomberg Middle East (@middleeast) January 17, 2023

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

  In October, the Spokesman of the Russian Presidency, Dmitry Peskov, confirmed the UAE’s integral role in a prisoner exchange between Moscow and Kiev.

  UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan (MbZ) informed his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin of the Ukrainian consensus on several issues.  Putin, in return, thanked MbZ during a meeting in St. Petersburg for his mediation in the prisoner exchange and his dedication to resolving regional and humanitarian issues.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 21:00

• Ex-Intel Official Who Signed Hunter Laptop 'Disinfo' Letter Makes Shocking Admission
  Ex-Intel Official Who Signed Hunter Laptop ‘Disinfo’ Letter Makes Shocking Admission

  A former deputy director for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) admitted that he knew a “significant portion” of Hunter Biden’s laptop “had to be real,” but signed an October 2020 letter attacking the NY Post‘s bombshell report anyway, the Post reports.

  The official, Douglas Wise, was one of 51 former intelligence officials who said the Post‘s report had the appearance of a Russian disinformation campaign.

  

  “All of us figured that a significant portion of that content had to be real to make any Russian disinformation credible,” in a comment to The Australian. “The letter said it had the earmarks of Russian deceit and we should consider that as a possibility,” he continued.

  “It did not say Hunter Biden was a good guy, it didn’t say what he did was right and it wasn’t exculpatory, it was just a cautionary letter.”

  Except, the letter concluded that “It is high time that Russia stops interfering in our democracy,” and referenced “[o]ur view that the Russians are involved in the Hunter Biden email issue.”

  The Oct. 19 letter — whose signatories included former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, former Director of National intelligence James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan — went out of its way to cast doubt on the legitimacy of The Post’s scoop, devoting five paragraphs to explaining “factors that make us suspicious of Russian involvement” while slipping in the caveat that “we do not know if the emails … are genuine or not and … we do not have evidence of Russian involvement.” -NY Post

  And as Jonathan Turley notes,

  The infamous letter from the former intel officials (including such Democratic figures like John Brennan, James Clapper, Leon Panetta and Jeremy Bash) was used by the media to assure the public that there was nothing to see in the scandal. It was the perfect deflection in giving a cooperative media cover to bury the story of how the Biden family engaged in influence peddling worth millions with foreign figures, including some with foreign intelligence connections.

  It worked beautifully. It was not until two years later that NPR, the New York Times, and other media outlets got around to telling the public the truth.

  Now some of the signatories are trying to rehabilitate themselves. It is not hard. Figures like Bash have been rewarded for their loyalty. Others like Brennan and Clapper have become regulars on CNN to continue to give their takes on intelligence.

  Wise, however, has tried to find some redeemable role in the letter. He told The Australian that “All of us figured that a significant portion of that content had to be real to make any Russian disinformation credible.” So the emails and photos showing criminal acts with prostitutes and thousands of emails on influence peddling was likely true, but that truth only made them more dangerous forms of Russian disinformation.

  It is that easy. True or not, the story was dangerous in detailing the corruption of the Biden family before the election. Done and done.

  It also means that, under this dubious logic, you can spike any true story that is embarrassing to the President or the party as presumptive disinformation.

  Indeed, Wise says that it was “no surprise” to learn that the emails that he helped spike were actually genuine.

  He is not alone. Washington Post columnist Thomas Rid wrote that  “We must treat the Hunter Biden leaks as if they were a foreign intelligence operation — even if they probably aren’t.”

  Let that sink in for a second. It does not matter if these are real emails and not Russian disinformation. They probably are real but should be treated as disinformation even though American intelligence has repeatedly rebutted that claim.  It does not even matter that the computer was seized as evidence in a criminal fraud investigation or that a Biden confidant is now giving his allegations to the FBI under threat of criminal charges if he lies to investigators.

  Yet, they still wanted the media to treat the story before the election as part of “Russian overt and covert activities that undermine US national security” as a story with “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

  Keep in mind that these “experts” literally had nothing beyond a potentially damaging story against the Bidens before an election. That was all that it took for these experts to rush out their letter.

  Wise does not address that American intelligence reached the exact opposite conclusion and found no evidence — none — of Russian involvement or some foreign disinformation conspiracy.

  Wise and the other signatories did not want to wait for any facts to support their claim. They rushed out the letter to an eagerly awaiting media to spike the story before the election. Now, they are seeking plausible deniability that they were political operatives sent on a political hit job. It is as implausible as calling a presumed true story “disinformation.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 20:40

• The Freight Market Has Bottomed
  The Freight Market Has Bottomed

  Late last March, FreightWaves CEO Craig Fuller was the first to correctly call the coming freight industry recession, a byproduct of the vicious “bullwhip effect” snapback. Overnight, and a little over 9 months later, Fuller is out with another notable call, arguing that while the freight market recession may still be a factor, it is now on the backfoot as the freight market has “likely bottomed.”

  The freight market has likely bottomed is the theme of my latest article https://t.co/lcp5UOgyPk

  — Craig Fuller 🛩🚛🚂⚓️ (@FreightAlley) January 16, 2023

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

  Below we republish Fuller’s latest observations explaining how “High-frequency truckload data suggests the freight market is stabilizing.”

  

  Did the first quarter lull come early, in November and December of 2022? 

  For carriers, the first quarter is always the most difficult period in the annual freight calendar, when retailers clear their excess holiday inventory, construction takes a pause for the frigid weather and everything is gloomy and cold. The soft first quarter often follows a robust fourth quarter, in which freight companies enjoy the annual peak season and make an outsized portion of their profits. Carriers look forward to spring for some market stability and potential market accelerations. 

  Is it possible that winter came early this year? Did the freight winter start in November and now we are experiencing an early thaw? 

  Early freight data and channel checks would suggest the freight market could be stabilizing and clearer skies are ahead. 

  Over the past week, we’ve spoken with numerous freight executives who have mentioned that the first two weeks of the first quarter are shaping up better than expected, granted, expectations were incredibly low after such a weak peak. 
  Going into the quarter, executives we spoke with predicted a significant collapse in freight for the first quarter, with a seasoned veteran executive of a large trucking technology firm predicting that the first quarter would be the worst in his four-decade career. It was a fair bet considering how challenging the second half of the 2022 was for most in the freight market.

  Truckload spot rates, according to the FreightWaves National Truckload Index, hit a low of $1.67 on Nov. 17, 2022, and have since bounced back to $1.98 per mile.

  

  Trucking tender volumes also suggest that the direst of predictions have not played out. Tender volumes on the Outbound Tender Volume Index (OTVI), an index that tracks the volumes of load requests from shippers to carriers, show that volumes briefly dipped below 2019 and 2020 levels, but they have since broken away from this baseline. 

  

  If the first few weeks of the new year are an early omen, then the freight market may have bottomed in the fourth quarter and carriers can look forward to a far less volatile market in 2023. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 20:20

• EV Rebates In Canada Are 153% Over Budget So Far
  EV Rebates In Canada Are 153% Over Budget So Far

  Federal electric vehicle rebates in Canada went 153% over their originally intended budgets, a new report out last week unveiled.

  Ottawa had shelled out $759 million on EV rebates by March of last year, according to a report by True North. The “unprecedented” number of people claiming the rebates pushed Canada’s government well over its allocated spending. 

  Analysts in the Audit Of Incentives For Zero Emission Vehicles Program said: “The uptake of the program was higher than expected and funding was an ongoing concern.”

  “The program’s main risk is not having sufficient funding to meet the demand,” they continued.

  

  In Canada, beginning in 2019, anyone who bought an EV below the price of $45,000 is allowed to claim a rebate of up to $5,000. The government then moved that threshold up to $70,000. 

  Liberals first claimed the program would cost $300 million, True North reported.

  But an audit of the spending found far different results: “The program exhausted its original funding of $300 million and received two subsequent funding top-ups of $287 million and $172 million to continue the program until March 31, 2022 as planned.”

  136,940 buyers in total have claimed rebates and Canada has extended the budget for the program to $1.6 billion until March 2025. The country is trying to fulfill environment minister Steven Guilbeault’s plan to make all vehicles sold by 2035 electric or hybrid.

  The cost for such a program amounts to $100 billion a new analysis found. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 20:00

• Rethinking Japan
  Rethinking Japan

  By Russell Clark of the Capital Flows and Asset Markets substack

  I first went to Japan in 1991 as a 17 year old high school exchange student. I went on to do a degree in Asian Studies (and Economics), and a university exchange to Japan in 1994. When I start working in finance in 2000, one of the things that struck me was how different the Japanese experience was to elsewhere. We were taught that equities always outperform bonds, that large fiscal deficits would imply a weak currency, and inflation was inevitable part of life. When I pointed out that this did not hold in Japan, I was usually told to either shut up, or that Japan was special, so could be ignored. This always struck me as a odd way to do treat the second largest economy in the world, and the largest holder of foreign exchange reserves. For long time readers, you should be aware of my “Japan as the Saudi Arabia of savings” theory, which explained Japanese experience from 1994 up to 2016 very well, but not so well since. I have been contemplating a different way of thinking about Japan.

  

  To follow this analysis, you are going to have to accept a few basic assumptions. First of all is that the US has a very high level of influence on Japanese policy making. This leads to unusually close relationship both economically and politically. One of the distinct features of this is that not only is Japan the largest owners of treasuries, almost uniquely, it ONLY holds US Treasuries as foreign reserves.

  

  This is very different to everywhere else in the world, even countries with very similar economic and political arrangements, like South Korea.

  

  The point of this is to show that Japanese policymakers hew very closely to US policy. With this observation, perhaps we can look at the Japanese economic experience of the last 40 year or so through an American political lens and see if it makes sense. One of the first economic problems that the US faced after World War II was that the US economy was increasingly uncompetitive against its European and Japanese peers. The most visible sign of this was the falling gold reserves of the US.

  

  It is very easy to see the Japanese agreeing a deal to allow the Yen to appreciate, and to go along with the idea of holding treasuries instead of gold as foreign reserves. This led to the first mega trade with Japan – long yen from 1970 to 1990. Since 1990, it has been a wash trade.

  

  In 1980, Ronald Reagan came to power, and we saw politics in the US shift to pro-capital away from pro-labour. One of the key tenets of pro-capital policies is the freedom to buy from wherever is cheapest, with no regard of any political cost. That is, if Japan was cheaper at making cars, then why not buy Japanese cars, for example, but broadly speaking the ideals were of freedom and efficiency were pursued.

  

  Allowing Japanese car makers to compete rigorously with US auto makers also had a secondary benefit. US union power was disproportionally strong in auto makers. By opening up this sector to foreign competition, it should help reduce the power and influence of the unions in the private sector. That is Japan was used as the hammer to break US union power. That is to reduce the political power of pro-labour proponents.

  

  The boom in Japanese manufacturing also led Japan to overtake the US semiconductor industry in the 1980s. As late as 2010, Japan was still a similar size to the US.

  

  As Japanese semiconductor market is dominated by Japanese semiconductor makers, this meant in the late 1980s, Japan producers also had the largest market share. And this is where Japanese problems began. If Japan maintained its technological lead over the US, it would likely face increasing political pressure from the US. It would need to either succumb, or return to the disastrous policies of the 1930s and begin to compete with the US.

  

  

  Asian sales ex-China has been larger than the US for many years, although US companies have much larger market share outside of Japan, which is probably why even though Asia ex China sales are larger than the US, US market share from above totals more than Japan, Korea and Taiwan combined. It should be remembered that not only are Korea and Taiwan strong military allies of the US, both are former colonies of Japan, and Japanese engineers were instrumental in the setting up of their semiconductor industries. It should be pointed out that neither Korea or Taiwan have an equivalent to Tokyo Electron (semiconductor equipment maker).

  

  In essence, in late 1980s Japan was beginning to look like a strategic competitor to the US, and choose stagnation, and a peaceful life, rather than rupture with the US. I think this makes sense to me. Turning Japan from a strategic competitor back into a natural ally of the US is good statecraft, and given the disaster that World War II was for Japan, an understandable decision. Using this line of thought, Abenomics did indeed mark a political change in Japan, away from managed decline to something else. Where exactly, will be subject of another post.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 19:40

• Jes Staley 'Personally Observed' Sexual Abuse By Epstein, Victim Claims
  Jes Staley ‘Personally Observed’ Sexual Abuse By Epstein, Victim Claims

  A woman suing JPMorgan for facilitating Jeffery Epstein’s abuse says that former Barclays CEO Jes Staley “personally observed” the abuse while he was serving as JPM’s head of private wealth.

  

  The woman, Jane Doe 1, made the new allegations in an amended complaint filed late Friday in Manhattan federal court. In it, she claims that Staley was a frequent visitor to Epstein’s properties – including his New York townhouse ‘massage room,’ a ‘stash house’ apartment on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, and of course, pedo island in the US Virgin Islands.

  While hanging out at Epstein’s properties, the former JPMorgan exec “personally observed the sexual abuse of young women, including Jane Doe 1.”

  

  “As a result of Staley’s direct and actual knowledge of Epstein’s sex-trafficking venture, JP Morgan had direct and actual knowledge of Epstein’s sex-trafficking venture,” reads the amended complaint.

  As Bloomberg notes;

  The new allegations seek to bolster the argument that JPMorgan was aware of Epstein’s conduct but nonetheless turned a blind eye. The bank has moved to dismiss the suit in part by arguing that it fails to show the bank knew about Epstein’s abuse.

  Staley left JPMorgan in 2013 and joined Barclays Plc as chief executive officer a few years later. He stepped down from that role in 2021 following a UK regulatory probe into his relationship with Epstein.

  Separate lawsuits against JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank allege that the banks knowingly benefited and received things of value for facilitating and supporting Epstein’s sex-trafficking network. Both banks have sought dismissal of the claims, and have argued that in addition to having no knowledge of Epstein’s conduct, the events in question happened between 1998-2013, and are barred by the statute of limitations.

  That said, the plaintiffs in the case – a class action lawsuit, are suing under New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which temporarily lifts that statute of limitations. The banks claim it doesn’t apply to them.

  Staley is also mentioned in a lawsuit brought by the US Virgin Islands against the bank, and notes that Epstein had an ‘extensive relationship’ with Staley. In an amended complaint of its own, the USVI claims that “Epstein introduced Staley to Glenn Dubin,” the owner of Highbridge Capital Management.

  

  Epstein reportedly received a $15 million fee in 2004 after JPMorgan bought control of Highbridge.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 19:20

• CNN Admits Ukraine War Is A 'Weapons Lab' For Western Arms
  CNN Admits Ukraine War Is A ‘Weapons Lab’ For Western Arms

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Ukraine has turned into a “lab” for Western arms as the war has given the US and its allies an opportunity to see how their weapons fare in a conflict with a major military power like Russia, CNN reported on Monday.

  A source familiar with Western intelligence on the war told CNN that Ukraine is “absolutely a weapons lab in every sense because none of this equipment has ever actually been used in a war between two industrially developed nations.” The source described it as “real-world battle testing.”

  

  Back in July, Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov offered his country as a “testing ground” for Western arms makers. “We are interested in testing modern systems in the fight against the enemy and we are inviting arms manufacturers to test the new products here,” he said.

  Reznikov got his wish as the US, and its allies have significantly stepped up military aid since then, and the war has escalated as Russia began large-scale strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure in October. Russia’s success in its use of cheap kamikaze drones in the infrastructure attacks has influenced plans for Western arms makers.

  The British arms maker BAE Systems has announced that it’s developing a new armored vehicle with added protection to defend it from kamikaze drone attacks from above.

  Multiple intelligence and military officials told CNN that making cheap single-use drones has become a priority of many defense contractors.

  The CNN report said that for the US military, the war has become an “incredible source of data on the utility of its own systems.” For example, the US has seen that its HIMARS rocket launch system has been effective against Russian forces, while the M777 howitzer has become less effective and less accurate over time.

  A source connected to Western intelligence tells CNN that Ukraine is “absolutely a weapons lab in every sense… This is real-world battle testing.”

  Evidently, the U.S. intelligence agencies view the people dying on #Ukraine’s battlefield as lab rats.https://t.co/lcFwyvJuQ4

  — Dimitri Lascaris (@dimitrilascaris) January 17, 2023

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

  The war in Ukraine has also created a demand for weapons that were beginning to become obsolete, such as the Stinger shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles. Raytheon stopped producing Stingers for years but now has been asked by the Pentagon to ramp up production as thousands have been shipped to Ukraine.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 19:00

• Swiss MP At Davos: Change Living Environments To Force The Public To Follow Climate Goals
  Swiss MP At Davos: Change Living Environments To Force The Public To Follow Climate Goals

  The World Economic Forum’s annual meetings in Davos have become a prominent window into the minds of globalists, with admissions every year of some of the most bizarre and disturbing political objectives imaginable.  Davos is where we first heard founder Klaus Schwab call for the “Great Reset,” a global event which WEF members say will change the very fabric of civilization and herald a new world order.

  

  Davos is also where we first heard of the globalist concept of “smart cities” and the “shared economy” in which you will “own nothing, have no privacy” and be happy about it by the year 2030. 

  Though the 2023 meeting has just started, it is not disappointing so far in terms of revelations of technocracy.  Case in point:  Swiss MP Bastien Girod painted a vision of the near future in which governments change the nature of how population is organized.  The grand idea?  To focus people into tightly controlled cities designed around carbon controls and where cars are illegal for individuals to own.  And, to establish penalties for businesses that do not conform to bureaucratic climate change policies.

  At the WEF, a Swiss MP proposes cities where there is no individual ownership of cars, and encourages punishing any businesses that do not align with environmental goals. pic.twitter.com/x2jySxdOhK

  — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) January 16, 2023

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

  The exploitation of global warming hysteria despite all scientific evidence to the contrary remains the primary topic and tool of globalism.  Climate organizations claim that carbon emissions substantially increased for the past eight years yet global temperatures have not increased in same period according to the latest NOAA data.  Not only that, but global temps have only risen less than 1 degree C in the past 100 years.  There is still no concrete evidence that carbon emissions have a causation relationship with changes in global temperatures.  Yet, this false threat is the rallying cry of the Davos elite and their continuing demands for freedom crushing centralization.       

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 18:40

• Jim Grant Warns "Japan Is Perhaps The Most Important Risk In The World"
  Jim Grant Warns “Japan Is Perhaps The Most Important Risk In The World”

  Authored by Christoph Gisiger via TheMarket.ch,

  Speculation is mounting that the Bank of Japan is losing control of the bond market. Jim Grant, editor of «Grant’s Interest Rate Observer», believes this could trigger a shock to the global financial system. He also explains why he expects further surges in inflation and why gold should be part of your portfolio.

  The news caught markets off guard: On December 20th, the Bank of Japan surprisingly extended the target range for the yield on ten-year government bonds to plus/minus 0.5%. A move that not a single economist had expected.

  This week, the Bank of Japan could announce a major policy shift amid rising government bond yields and a strengthening yen. Although barely a month has passed since the BoJ’s last meeting, the bond market is already testing the new upper limit of the yield curve control regime.

  «To us, Japanese interest rate policy resembles the Berlin Wall of the late Cold War era, a stale anachronism that must sooner or later fall,» says Jim Grant. For the editor of the iconic investment bulletin «Grants’ Interest Rate Observer,» recent developments in Japan pose an underestimated risk to global financial markets. Not least because virtually no one is talking about it.

  In an in-depth interview with The Market NZZ, which has been slightly edited for clarity, Mr. Grant explains what it means for financial markets if the Bank of Japan is forced to scrap its yield curve control policy. But first, he says why he doesn’t believe inflation will end soon, why bonds may be at the start of a long bear market, and why he believes gold is the best choice as a store of value.

  «If the past is prologue and if the great bond bull market is over, then on form, we are looking at what could be a very prolonged and perhaps gradual move higher in interest rates»: Jim Grant.

  

  What do you observe when you look at the financial world today?

  Well, it’s always the same, and – here’s the catch – it’s always a little different. The trick is to identify the unique or unusual feature of a familiar cycle. In this regard, it helps to know a little bit of financial history, and to just that extent it helps to be a little old. But what is not helpful is to mistake the past for a certain roadmap to the future.

  What are currently the most important developments from a historical perspective?

  The essential driver of so much of today’s news are the consequences of the monetary regime in place worldwide. That regime has given us artificially low, indeed suppressed rates of interest, and it has given us the consequences of those false rates which include rampant misallocation of capital and great gusts of speculation; some of which are a lot of fun, and some of which are quite lucrative to the clever people who can get in on them.

  However, in the wake of the surge in inflation last year, interest rates have risen rapidly. Now inflation seems to be subsiding. Was the rise in prices only temporary after all?

  Plainly, the rate of change has subsided, but what is often ignored is the level of inflation. The rate of change is everyone’s preoccupation, but the loss in purchasing power is never recovered. This is the nature of a fiat currency regime. Way back under the gold standard, prices would rise on average and they would fall on average, but at the end of very long cycles, they would be unchanged. In contrast, a fiat currency regime is characterized by the fact that prices ratchet ever higher and never are allowed to correct to the downside. So what we have is a very elevated level of average prices and a somewhat lower rate of rise in these prices.

  Then again, the tension in the markets has eased somewhat recently. Stocks have made a surprisingly good start to the new year.

  Certainly, the slowing rate of the rise in inflation is to be celebrated. It’s nice, but we are still left with a system that is inherently inflationary. Here in the United States, it’s a system given to very free and loose public spending, given to great entitlements for one and all, and it’s a system that has flourished in recent years with very low, suppressed rates of interest. To me, that’s the essence of an inflation generating system: Politically, inflation is kind of something for nothing, and that seems to be part of the political zeitgeist. That’s why I would be a little bit guarded in pronouncing the end of this inflationary episode.

  Why do you think the issue of inflation could keep us on the edge for some time?

  Inflation in such a system resembles one of these inextinguishable long-burning underground coal mine fires. I’m not sure if you have them in Switzerland, but in Pennsylvania for example there has been such a fire that’s been going on for around fifty years. You don’t always see it, but it flares to the surface from time to time. It’s always there, it’s always latent, leaking smoke, warming the soles of your shoes. To me, that is a good analogy for inflation in a free spending and paper currency issuing social democracy.

  So are we at a fundamental inflection point heading into a new cycle, characterized by higher inflation and rising interest rates?

  Yes, and I say that with well deserved humility because «Grant’s Interest Rate Observer» was calling the end of the secular bull bond market at least a decade before it ended. Looking back, the last great secular bond bear market began in the spring of 1946 in the US and most of the world. It ended in the fall 1981, 35 years later. What followed, of course, was the still greater and more prolonged bond bull market. It began in October 1981 and perhaps ended in 2020 when the ten-year treasury yield got down to 0.5%.

  What kind of scenario could now be in store?

  If the past is prologue and if the great bond bull market is over, then on form, we are looking at what could be a very prolonged and perhaps gradual move higher in interest rates. We ought to remember that the first ten years of the last bond bear market were characterized by a very gradual increase. It was hardly noticeable. Yields on long-term bonds rose by about ten basis points a year. The treasury yield started off at 2.25% in 1946, and then in 1956 it was at around 3.25%. So with all these qualifications: Yes, I think the bond bull market is over and a bond bear market has begun.

  Why do bond market cycles last such a long time?

  I’m a little weary of saying that the bond market does these things as opposed to that it has done them in the past. But it has exhibited that tendency. At the risk of being pathetic, I would say that since at least the middle of the 19th century bonds have exhibited the tendency to move up and down in yield over the course of decades or generations. I’m not sure anyone can fully explain why. And, because we can’t explain it, we can’t be dogmatic about it continuing in just this way. But again, if past is prologue, we are in for a very long phase or cycle of rising interest rates.

  However, supply chain problems seem to be largely resolved; in the semiconductor industry, for example, there is already overcapacity and full inventories. What are the drivers of inflation in the next few years?

  One of the things I’ve learned in the fifty years in this business is to be a little bit less doctrinaire about such things as the cause of inflation. Milton Friedman famously said it’s «always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon». At some trivial level, that is undeniable because inflation involves money. Then again, you could also argue that it cannot be a monetary phenomenon because the purchasing power of money by definition is a casualty of inflation. As to the cause of inflation, there is a whole new school now arguing that it is a fiscal phenomenon. I think there is something to that, as there is something to the Friedmanite view. There is something to the idea that it is a political phenomenon, it’s a characteristic of politically weak societies.

  But the Federal Reserve assures us that it can bring inflation under control.

  I think that we have not seen the last of this inflationary outburst. But one needs to be quite humble in the face of something that very few central bankers anticipated or even could have imagined. It wasn’t just that the Fed didn’t predict it, but when the Fed saw it, when it saw the whites of inflation’s eyes, it still couldn’t believe it and continued with its QE program until the end of March 2022.

  It looks like markets are now gradually shifting their focus to the threat of recession. Does Fed Chair Jerome Powell have the stamina to «get the job done» in curbing inflation, as he says?

  Hardly a day passes without one regional Fed president or another declaring that the FOMC will most definitely push the funds rate to 5% or higher and hold it there for six months or a year or maybe two. What I object to these pronouncements is the unseemly certitude that they convey. The Fed seems so sure of itself. It was so sure of itself when it was predicting just as confident in 2021 that a 10 basis-point funds rate was a lock through 2023. Their cocksureness does not become them. The future is a closed book, not an open book. Especially, it is a closed book to people who mobilize pseudo-scientific mathematical models of the workings of the financial economy because they really don’t understand it.

  Usually, the Fed raises interest rates until there is an «accident» somewhere in the financial system or the economy. Is that going to be the case this time as well?

  The Fed is not a believer in the likelihood of accidents. I’m not sure that it understands the risks its previous QE regime has introduced into the financial system, specifically the heavy leverage in Corporate America, and still more particularly the leverage in private equity for example. Of course, a lot of speculation has been wrung out of the system already, certainly in cryptocurrencies, in SPACs and such things.

  Where could such an accident occur?

  I think Japan is perhaps the most important risk in the world, not least because it is among the least discussed risks, certainly in the Western press. Mostly, it’s very much an afterthought. The risk is this: Every business day, the Bank of Japan is spending tens of billions of dollars worth of yen to enforce governor Kuroda’s yield curve interest rates suppression program. To put this into perspective: In the UK, when the little crisis over liability driven pension investing in late September happened, the Bank of England spent around $5 billion. The BoJ does that before breakfast.

  The Bank of Japan already introduced its policy of yield curve control in the fall of 2016 by keeping the yield on ten-year government bonds within a target range through direct interventions in the bond market. Why should it change its monetary policy now?

  Governor Kuroda, who’s term is up on April 8, insists that yield curve control is here to stay. But to us, Japanese interest rate policy resembles the Berlin Wall of the late Cold War era, a stale anachronism that must sooner or later fall.

  And why specifically now?

  What’s different is that the market is on to something. I say that because the Bank of Japan has already lifted the allowable ceiling on ten-year JGB yields to 0.5% from 0.25% at the end of last year. Kuroda said it was nothing more than a means to the end of ensuring the success and stability of a permanent regime of yield suppression. But the market is like a very ill-behaved dog at the end of a leash. It’s wheezing and frothing, and the Bank of Japan is yanking ever harder and tighter to control this beast.

  Why do you think this beast will finally break free?

  Kuroda stated that the Bank of Japan is not going to stop until there is inflation. Well, Tokyo’s consumer prices which precede the national CPI rose to 4% in December versus expectations of 3.8%. What’s more, Uniqlo and other corporate leaders are out announcing that they are raising wages significantly. You will find other stories to this effect, signs and precursors of a change. Some former governors of the Bank of Japan are now venting their views that this has gone far enough and the consequences will be devastating. So I think this is a huge risk just offstage and the world has to pay closer attention to it.

  What’s the risk if the Bank of Japan gives up control of the yield curve?

  What makes it a risk for everybody, whether you are Swiss, American, German or Japanese, are two things. First of all, suppressed rates prompt leveraged individual and corporate balance sheets which at the shock of a rise in interest rates will get into trouble. There are troubles buried in the financial statements of Japanese companies that have borrowed too much. Sure, Japanese businesses are not as inclined as, say, American ones to borrow excessively, but there are also risks regarding a lot of bank saving schemes or structured products in Japan. For instance, you get a yield of 0.75% for five years, but in the fine print there is some caveat that if rates go above a certain level then the duration of this product extends to ten years. I’m making these numbers up, but it’s essentially what the risk is.

  And what is the second risk?

  The Japanese are a frisky nation. They have an immense amount of net savings, and some $3 trillion of Japanese assets are invested in non-Japanese markets, of which half are domiciled in the United States. In other words, the Japanese, the proverbial Mrs. Watanabe, search the world for yield opportunities. According to Bloomberg, expressed as a percentage of the GDP of the country in which they are invested, Japanese stock and bond holdings break down to 7.3% of America, 7.5% of France, 8.3% of Australia and 9.5% of the Netherlands. What is going to happen if suddenly Japanese yen denominated rates become rather attractive? Well, a lot of this money may be repatriated and the result of that repatriation will be a rise in volatility in markets we can’t really identify now. So the risk of a volatility upsurge is considerable. I think the time is getting ripe for a big change in Japanese rates structure and therefore in interest rates and in the risk presented to bond holders worldwide.

  What is your advice to investors in this environment?

  Having just mocked the central banks for their pretending to know what they can’t know, I’m in a very compromised position if I were to say what is going to happen. But allow me to suggest that I’m somewhat of a broken record on gold. I’m going to continue with this broken record and observe that people have not yet come to terms with the essential inherent weaknesses of the monetary system that has been in place since 1971. We have all gotten used to it. I mean, you have to be a person of a certain age, indeed you have to be as old as I am, to really recall the debates surrounding the abandonment of Bretton Woods. People have grown up with the idea that money is what they print, and if the Japanese can print $50 billion a day with which to suppress interest rates, that doesn’t shock many people. But I think such shocks do lay ahead.

  And gold can help protect a portfolio against such shocks?

  I think that the strains that are already obvious will become more so. People will be looking around not for a better brand of paper or digital money, but rather for the real McCoy. In every issue of «Grant’s» we have something to say about a stock, so I don’t want to sound too much of a nutcase. We do live in the real world. But when I look at the very big picture, the money the central banks produce in such profusion is unsound. It may not be now, but in time, people will look around for an alternative and that alternative may just be gold – the thing that has been more or less a shadow cast by Bitcoin, Ethereum, and all the other crypto currencies.

  Against this background, how do you assess the general outlook for the stock market?

  The market has come down from extremely overvalued to nearly expensive, and my observation is that an extremely overvalued market does not normally bottom out at nearly expensive. So I’m not sure that’s the end of things. I don’t find a whole lot of compelling values in the stock market. Sometimes, one has great conviction, but not now with regard to stocks for me.

  Are there any exceptions that appear attractive from a value perspective?

  In one of our recent issues, we had a story on Transocean. The stock had a little move, it’s gone up from $2.50 to $5 or something in that order, but we’re still bullish. It’s a high-tech story. The technology happens to pertain to fossil fuels, therefore it’s beyond the pale for «properly sensitive fiduciaries» to put it this way. But it is a very impressive business which happens to have the flaw of a highly leveraged balance sheet. So there is considerable risk, but I think the risk is less compelling now than the reward. So if you ask about something to be bullish on, I would suggest Transocean.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/17/2023 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: All Quiet (Panic) On The Western Front
  Escobar: All Quiet (Panic) On The Western Front

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  Shadows are falling / And I’ve been here all day / It’s too hot to sleep / And time is running away / Feel like my soul / has turned into steel /I’ve still got the scars / That the sun didn’t heal / There’s not even room enough / To be anywhere / Lord it’s not dark yet, / but it’s getting there

  Bob Dylan, Not Dark Yet

  Lights! Action! Reset!

  The World Economic Forum (WEF)’s Davos Freak Show is back in business on Monday.

  

  The mainstream media of the collective West, in unison, will be spinning non-stop, for a week, all the “news” that are fit to print to extol new declinations of The Great Reset, re-baptized The Great Narrative, but actually framed as a benign offer by “stakeholder capitalism”. These are the main planks of the shady platform of a shady NGO registered in Cologny, a tony Geneva suburb.

  The list of Davos attendees was duly leaked. Proverbially, it’s an Anglo-American Exceptionalist fun fest, complete with intel honchos such as the US Director of National Intelligence, Avril “Madam Torture” Haines; the head of MI6 Richard Moore; and FBI director Christopher Wray.

  Remixed Diderot and D’Alembert Encyclopedias could be written about the Davos pathology – where a hefty list of multibillionaires, heads of state and corporate darlings (owned by BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street and co.) “engage” in selling Demented Dystopia packages to the unsuspecting masses.

  But let’s cut to the chase and focus on a few panels next week – which could easily be mistaken for Straight to Hell sessions.

  The Tuesday, January 17 list is particularly engaging. It features a “De-Globalization or Re-Globalization?” panel with speakers Ian Bremmer, Adam Tooze, Niall Ferguson, Péter Szijjártó and Ngaire Woods. Three Atlanticists/Exceptionalists stand out, especially the ultra-toxic Ferguson.

  After “In Defense of Europe”, featuring a bunch of nullities including Poland’s Andrjez Duda, attendees will be greeted with a Special Season in Hell (sorry, Rimbaud) featuring none other than EC dominatrix Ursula von der Leyen, known by a vast majority of Germans as Ursula von der Leichen (“Ursula of Cadavers”) in a tag team with WEF mastermind, Third Reich emulator Klaus “Nosferatu” Schwab.

  Rumors are that Lucifer, in his privileged underground abode, is green with envy.

  There’s also “Ukraine: What Next?” with another bunch of nullities, and “War in Europe: Year 2” featuring Moldova woke chick Maia Sandu and Finnish party girl Sanna Marin.

  In the War Criminal section, pride of place goes to “A Conversation with Henry Kissinger: Historical Perspectives on War”, where Dr. K. will sell all his trademark Divide and Rule permutations. Added sulphur will be provided by Thucydides strangler Graham Allison.

  In his Special Address, “Liver Sausage” Chancellor Olaf Scholz will be side by side with Nosferatu, hoping he won’t be – literally – grilled.

  Then, on Wednesday, January 18, comes the apotheosis: “Restoring Security and Peace” with speakers Fareed Zakaria – the US establishment’s pet brown man; NATO’s Jens “War is Peace” Stoltenberg; Andrzej Duda – again; and Canadian warmonger Chrystia Freeland – widely rumored to become the next NATO Secretary-General.

  And it gets juicier: the coke comedian posing as warlord may join via zoom from Kiev.

  The notion that this panel is entitled to emit judgments about “peace” deserves nothing less than its own Nobel Peace Prize.

  How to monetize the whole world

  Cynics of all persuasions may be excused for lamenting Mr. Zircon – currently on oceanic patrol encompassing the Atlantic, the Indian Ocean and of course “Mare Nostrum” Mediterranean – won’t be presenting his business card at Davos.

  Analyst Peter Koenig has developed a convincing thesis that the WEF, the WHO and NATO may be running some sort of sophisticated death cult. The Great Reset does mingle merrily with NATO’s agenda as agent provocateur, financer and weaponizer of the proxy Empire vs. Russia war in black hole Ukraine. NAKO – an acronym for North Atlantic Killing Organization – would be more appropriate in this case.

  As Koenig summarizes it, “NATO enters any territory where the ‘conventional’ media lie-machine, and social engineering are failing or not completing their people-ordaining goals fast enough.”

  In parallel, very few people are aware that on June 13, 2019 in New York, a secret deal was clinched between the UN, the WEF, an array of oligarch-weaponized NGOs – with the WHO in the front line – and last but not least, the world’s top corporations, which are all owned by an interlinked maze with Vanguard and BlackRock at the center.

  The practical result of the deal is the UN Agenda 2030.

  Virtually every government in the NATOstan area and the “Western Hemisphere” (US establishment definition) has been hijacked by Agenda 2030 – which translates, essentially, as hoarding, privatizing and financializing all the earth’s assets, under the pretext of “protecting” them.

  Translation: the marketization and monetization of the entire natural world (see, for instance, here, here and here.)

  Davos superstar shills such as insufferable bore Niall Ferguson are just well rewarded vassals: western intellectuals of the Harvard, Yale and Princeton mould that would never dare bite the hand that feeds them.

  Ferguson just wrote a column on Bloomberg titled “All is Not Quiet on the Eastern Front” – basically to peddle the risk of WWIII, on behalf of his masters, blaming of course “China as the arsenal of autocracy”.

  Among serial high-handed inanities, this one stands out. Ferguson writes, “There are two obvious problems with US strategy (…) The first is that if algorithmic weapons systems are the equivalent of tactical nuclear weapons, Putin may eventually be driven to using the latter, as he clearly lacks the former.”

  Cluelessness here is a euphemism. Ferguson clearly has no idea “algorithmic weapons” mean; if he’s referring to electronic warfare, the US may have been able to maintain superiority for a while in Ukraine, but that’s over.

  Well, that’s typical Ferguson – who wrote a whole Rothschild hagiography just like his column, drinking from the Rothschild archives that appeared to have been sanitized as he knows next to nothing meaningful about their history.

  Ferguson has “deduced” that Russia is weak and China is strong. Nonsense. Both are strong – and Russia is more advanced technologically than China in their advanced offensive and defensive missile development, and can beat the US in a nuclear war as Russian air space is sealed by layered defenses such as the S-400 all the way to the already tested S-500s and designed S-600s.

  As far as semiconductor chips, the advantage that Taiwan has in chip manufacture is in mass production of the most advanced chips; but China and Russia can fabricate the chips necessary for military use, though not engage in mass commercial production. The US has an important advantage here commercially with Taiwan, but that’s not a military advantage.

  Ferguson gives away his game when he carps about the need to “deter a nascent Axis-like combination of Russia, Iran and China from risking simultaneous conflict in three theaters: Eastern Europe, the Middle East and the Far East.”

  Here we have trademark Atlanticist demonization of the top three vectors of Eurasia integration mixed with a toxic cocktail of ignorance and arrogance: it’s NATO that is stoking “conflict” in Eastern Europe; and it’s the Empire that is being expelled from the “Far East” (oh, that’s so colonial) and soon from the Middle East (actually West Asia).

  An AMGOT tale

  Nobody with an IQ over room temperature will expect Davos next week to discuss any aspect of the NATO vs. Eurasia existential war seriously – not to mention propose diplomacy. So I’ll leave you with yet another typical tawdry story about how the Empire – who rules over Davos – deals in practice with its vassals.

  While in Sicily earlier this year I learned that an ultra high-value Pentagon asset had landed in Rome, in haste, as part of an unscheduled visit. A few days later the reason for the visit was printed in La Repubblica, one of the papers of the toxic Agnelli clan.

  That was a Mafia scam: a face-to-face “suggestion” for the Meloni government to imperatively provide Kiev, as soon as possible, with the costly anti-Samp-T missile system, developed by an European consortium, Eurosam, uniting MBDA Italy, MBDA France and Thales.

  Italy possesses only 5 batteries of this system, not exactly brilliant against ballistic missiles but efficient against cruise missiles.

  National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan had already called Palazzo Chigi to announce the “offer you can’t refuse”. Apparently that was not enough, thus the hasty envoy trip. Rome will have to toe the line. Or else. After all, never forget the terminology employed by US generals to designate Sicily, and Italy as a whole: AMGOT.

  American government occupied territory.

  Have fun with the Davos freak show.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 23:50

• Visualizing The Most Valuable Brands From 2000–2022
  Visualizing The Most Valuable Brands From 2000–2022

  How much money is a brand truly worth?

  As Visual Capitalist’s Omri Wallach details below, for some companies, a brand is something that helps slightly boost customer engagement and sales. But for others, including some of the largest companies in the world, a strong brand is one of their most valuable assets.

  this animated graphic by James Eagle uses the annual brand rankings from Interbrand to track the world’s most valuable brands from 2000 to 2022.

  Measuring Brand Value

  One of the difficulties of brand valuation is its subjectivity.

  In accounting, the value of a brand is sometimes represented as an intangible asset called goodwill on the balance sheet. That’s because the brand power associated with a company (i.e. brand recognition, brand loyalty, customer base, reputation, etc.) often makes a company more valuable than just the sum of its tangible assets like land, buildings, or product inventory.

  This works for accounting purposes but is still a rough estimation, and doesn’t precisely quantify a brand’s true value.

  For Interbrand’s studies, a consistent formula for brand strength was utilized which is based on a company’s financial forecast, brand role, and brand strength. It uses estimates of the present value of earnings a brand is forecasted to generate in the future.

  The Top 10 Most Valuable Brands Since 2000

  When the 2000s started, the internet was top-of-mind in terms of both markets and customer perception. The Dotcom bubble was driving the world’s largest companies, and brand value at the time reflected tech’s popularity:

  

  Half of the top 10 most valuable brands at the time were in tech or telecom, including Microsoft, IBM, and Nokia.

  Others were classic American brands and companies at the top of their fields, including Coca-Cola, General Electric, Ford, and McDonald’s.

  But over the next 20 years, much of the old guard was replaced by new and rising brands. By 2022, only three of the top 10 most valuable brands from 2000 remained at the top:

  

  Apple’s brand is now worth an estimated $482 billion, even though the company didn’t even crack the top 10 list back in the year 2000.

  In fact, four of the top five brands on the 2022 list are directly in tech, and even Amazon (#3) is often considered a tech giant. Not surprisingly, brand value in the top 10 has grown almost across the board, though Coca-Cola is a notable exception, dropping $15 billion in estimated brand value over 22 years.

  How will the most valuable brands continue to evolve over the coming decades?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 23:15

• Why TikTok Must Be Banned In US And Free World
  Why TikTok Must Be Banned In US And Free World

  Authored by Judith Bergman via The Gatestone Institute,

  The United States recently banned TikTok from all federal government devices over growing security concerns. That is a good start.

  TikTok, FBI Director Christopher Wray warned at the beginning of December, is controlled by the Chinese government, which is a national security concern.

  TikTok, a video-sharing app owned by Chinese company ByteDance, has, according to TikTok’s own estimates, 1 billion users worldwide. In 2021, TikTok had approximately 87 million users in the US, according to Statista. Disturbingly, a recent study found that 10% of US adults get their news from the Chinese app, up from 3% in 2020.

  

  Wray said that China’s government can control the app’s recommendation algorithm, “which allows them to manipulate content, and if they want to, to use it for influence operations.”

  “All of these things are in the hands of a government that doesn’t share our values, and that has a mission that’s very much at odds with what’s in the best interests of the United States. That should concern us,” Wray said in a speech at the University of Michigan.

  Wray’s comments echoed those he made at the “Worldwide Threats to the Homeland” hearing held at the House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee on November 15.

  “We do have national security concerns at least from the FBI’s end about TikTok,” Wray stated.

  “They include the possibility that the Chinese government could use it to control data collection on millions of users. Or control the recommendation algorithm, which could be used for influence operations if they so chose. Or to control software on millions of devices, which gives it opportunity to potentially technically compromise personal devices.”

  Wray’s concerns are not new — actually, they come a bit late. In 2020, President Donald J. Trump, citing similar security concerns, tried to ban the app in the US, in addition to sanctioning the company, but several federal judges ruled against both sanctions and a ban, blocking his attempts. One judge ruled that the ban failed “to adequately consider an obvious and reasonable alternative before banning TikTok” and that the ban was “arbitrary and capricious.”

  “ByteDance’s submission and compliance with Chinese law has rendered it a reliable, useful, and far reaching ear and mouthpiece for the Party and State,” the Trump administration wrote at the time in a document motivating the proposed ban. The document cited ByteDance’s commitment to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as resulting in “systemic censorship of content across its platforms” and “the harvesting of user data.”

  In the document, the Trump administration stressed noted:

  “ByteDance, as a company, and its subsidiaries are subject to PRC national security laws that require or compel the assistance of any Chinese citizen or entity in surveillance and intelligence operations. As ByteDance is subject to PRC jurisdiction, PRC laws can compel cooperation from ByteDance…”

  Chinese law requires all Chinese companies to turn over information to the Communist Party upon request — and ByteDance reportedly employs more than 130 Party members to ensure compliance, among other matters.

  The Trump administration stated :

  “One of the foremost national security risks presented by the TikTok mobile application in the United States is the possibility that the PRC government could, through lawful authority, extralegal influence (Communist Party) influence, or PRCISS, compel TikTok to provide systemic access to U.S. user’s sensitive personal information. A number of press reports clearly indicate the PRC Government has already compelled TikTok to assist them for domestic surveillance, censorship, and propaganda action within China, and their compliance is indicative of how they are likely to respond to intelligence requests on U.S. users. Given the bounty of information TikTok could offer on foreign users, as well as the aforementioned cyber tactics employed by the PRC, the Department of Commerce assesses the PRC and PRCISS would not limit their use of TikTok to domestic concerns and would instead use it for foreign intelligence and surveillance.”

  Furthermore, similar to the concerns expressed by Wray, the Trump administration argued,

  “The PRC government and the CCP can exert influence on ByteDance and, through the TikTok app, censor and shape content available to U.S. users in ways that can influence their opinions and views of China.”

  In April 2021, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley wrote:

  “TikTok is a Trojan Horse for the Chinese Communist Party that has no place on government devices—or any American devices, for that matter…. TikTok has repeatedly proven itself to be a malicious actor.”

  According to Adonis Hoffman, a former chief of staff and senior legal advisor at the FCC who has served in legal and policy positions in the U.S. House of Representatives:

  “Its algorithm is at once simple and sinister. Download the app on your smartphone and you have given China access to all your data… This opens a treasure trove of data on millions of Americans for the Chinese government to use whenever and however they choose. And history shows they use that data for nefarious purposes.”

  President Joe Biden reversed Trump’s attempt at banning TikTok, signing an executive order in June 2021 that revoked Trump’s proposed ban. Instead, the Biden administration has sought to work out the security concerns with ByteDance through a negotiated deal with the Chinese company that would reportedly allow TikTok to continue operating in the US without any change of ownership.

  “Well, I think Donald Trump was right,” Senator Mark Warner, D-Va., chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, recently said.

  “I mean, TikTok is an enormous threat. So, if you’re a parent, and you’ve got a kid on TikTok, I would be very, very concerned. All of that data that your child is inputting and receiving is being stored somewhere in Beijing.”

  Brendan Carr, a Republican commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission, said in November that the only way to resolve the national security concerns regarding TikTok would be to ban the app.

  “I don’t believe there is a path forward for anything other than a ban,” Carr said. According to Axios:

  There simply isn’t “a world in which you could come up with sufficient protection on the data that you could have sufficient confidence that it’s not finding its way back into the hands of the [Chinese Communist Party],” Carr said.

  In October, Forbes revealed that a China-based team at ByteDance had planned to use TikTok to track the locations of an unspecified number of Americans.

  In December, it was revealed that ByteDance had used the app to surveil several journalists to track down the journalists’ sources.

  According to Texas Governor Greg Abbott:

  “TikTok harvests vast amounts of data from its users’ devices — including when, where and how they conduct internet activity — and offers this trove of potentially sensitive information to the Chinese government,”

  Also in December, Indiana became the first U.S. state to sue TikTok, for misleading users about the Chinese government’s capacity to access their data and showing mature content to minors.

  “The company’s ownership of TikTok is problematic for two reasons,” wrote Republican Senator Marco Rubio and Republican US Representative Mike Gallagher.

  “First, the app can track cellphone users’ locations and collect internet-browsing data — even when users are visiting unrelated website.

  “That TikTok, and by extension the CCP, has the ability to survey every keystroke teenagers enter on their phones is disturbing. With this app, Beijing could also collect sensitive national security information from U.S. government employees and develop profiles on millions of Americans to use for blackmail or espionage…

  Even more alarming than that possibility, however, are the potential abuses of TikTok’s algorithm…

  Its algorithm is a black box, in that its designers can alter its operation at any time without informing users… in the hands of ByteDance, it could also be used to subtly indoctrinate American citizens.

  TikTok has already censored references to politically sensitive topics, including the treatment of workers in Xinjiang, China, and the 1989 protests in Tiananmen Square. It has temporarily blocked an American teenager who criticized the treatment of Uyghurs in China. In German videos about Chinese conduct toward Uyghurs, TikTok has modified subtitles for terms such as ‘reeducation camp’ and ‘labor camp,’ replacing words with asterisks.”

  In China, the content available on TikTok could not be more different. China serves up the “spinach version“: science, physics, engineering and patriotism. In the US, TikTok serves up the “opium version.” Tristan Harris, a former Google employee, said of China’s approach to TikTok on CBS’ 60 Minutes:

  “It’s almost like [the Chinese] recognize that technology is influencing kids’ development, and they make their domestic version a spinach version of TikTok, while they ship the opium version to the rest of the world.”

  “If you’re under 14 years old, they show you science experiments you can do at home, museum exhibits, patriotism videos and educational videos,” said Harris of the content served by TikTok within China, adding that Chinese children were limited to only 40 minutes a day on the app.

  “There’s a survey of pre-teens in the U.S. and China asking, ‘what is the most aspirational career that you want to have?’ and in the U.S., the No. 1 was a social media influencer, and in China, the No. 1 was astronaut. You allow those two societies to play out for a few generations and I can tell you what your world is going to look like.”

  TikTok urgently needs to be banned from the US and the rest of the free world.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 22:40

• "A Historic Turning Point": China Reports Blowout Q4 Economic Data As Population Falls For First Time In Decades
  “A Historic Turning Point”: China Reports Blowout Q4 Economic Data As Population Falls For First Time In Decades

  If there was any doubt that China is back – or was back even when it was still largely mostly locked down with various now defunct Covid zero restrictions – all those doubts were magically whisked away moments ago when Beijing’s not-so-random number goalseekatron published the data dump for Q4 which – drumroll – not only beat across the board, but absolutely smashed expectations.

  Here is what China’s National BS (which stands for Bureau of Statistics of course), reported moments ago for a quarter when Covid Zero was still all the rage (before China mysteriously called time on the worst economic policy of the past three years):

  • Q4 GDP +2.9% y/y; down predictably from the Q3 +3.9% as zero Covid policies hammered growth for most of Q4 (China was mostly locked down during the quarter), but smashing the estimate of +1.6% and not far from the highest forecast (range -1.1% to +3.5% from 28 economists).
  • 2022 cumulative GDP +3% y/y; also beating expectations of +2.7%; curiously this was unchanged from the estimate of the first 9 months which was also at +3%
  • Dec. industrial production +1.3% y/y; beating expectations of  +0.1%, and down from Nov’s +2.2%
  • Dec. retail sales -1.8% y/y; smashing expectations of a -9% plunge, and a big improvement from Nov’s -5.9% plunge.
  • Jan.-Dec. fixed-asset investment excluding rural households +5.1% y/y; also beating expectations of +5%, and a modest slowdown from the Jan.-Nov. print of +5.3%
  • Dec jobless rate 5.5%, down from 5.7% in Nov.

  Solid data dump aside, there was continued weakness across property and housing, although as we already know this sector is poised for a huge surge now that China is phasing out its “three red lines” and its bad debt firms are planning up to $24 billion in support for developers.

  • Jan.-Dec. property investment -10% y/y vs -9.8% in Jan.- Nov.
  • Jan.-Dec. residential property sales -28.3% y/y vs -28.4% in Jan.-Nov.

  A snapshot of the data:

  

  On paper, all of the above looks great. On paper, however, it’s of course all fake as Australia’s Bill Birties points out:

  It is extraordinary that an economic quarter that saw restrictions across multiple cities for Covid followed by mass nationwide outbreak in December… would see not only as much economic activity as the same period a year earlier, but almost 3% more…

  But while the “surprise” beat in China’s GDP (and everything else) was tonight’s big headline, there was another big headline in the big (non-surprise) decline in China’s population. As the NBS reported, China’s total population fell by 850,000 in 2022, to about 1.41 billion at end-2022, a drop for the first time since 1961, the final year of the Great Famine under former leader Mao Zedong.

  China’s population started shrinking in 2022 marking the first drop since 1961, the final year of the Great Famine under former leader Mao Zedong https://t.co/waPxjeqC3q pic.twitter.com/XNR3pKbcCP

  — Bloomberg (@business) January 17, 2023

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

  According to the data, a total of 10.41 million people died, a slight increase from around 10 million recorded in recent years (good thing there were no pandemic at the time). At the same time, some 9.56 million babies were born in 2022, down from 10.62 million a year earlier, the lowest level since at least 1950, despite efforts by the government to encourage families to have more children.

  “This is a truly historic turning point, an onset of a long-term and irreversible population decline,” said Wang Feng, an expert on Chinese demographic change at the University of California, Irvine.

  While the decline officially began last year, with deaths outstripping births, the FT notes that some demographers argue that the trend likely started before then. Fuxian Yi, a demographer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, estimated that China’s population started to fall in 2018, but the drop was obscured by “faulty demographic data”.

  “China is facing a demographic crisis that far exceeds the imagination of Chinese authorities and the international community,” said Yi, noting that the trend will act as a long-term drag on the country’s property market, a crucial engine of growth.

  “Abundant labor has been the fuel that has driven China’s rapid growth for more than four decades,” said Yi, “and now China is flying at high speed without enough fuel.”

  Some economists argue that the rise of automation will offset rising labour costs as the number of workers shrinks.

  China’s demographic disaster aside, the stellar economic data – at least in the context of consensus expectations – was still quite poor: China’s economy grew at the second slowest pace since the 1970s in 2022 as Covid restrictions hammered activity, though better-than-forecast fourth quarter and December data add to optimism it may be primed for a recovery; it was also well below the governments target last year of around 5.5%, although that’s where 2023 comes in. According to Ho Woei Chen, an economist at United Overseas Bank in Singapore, China’s latest economic data suggest the momentum for recovery will be stronger in 1Q this year with the reopening of the borders and relaxation of the regulatory oversight in some sectors including property. And it’s all uphill from there.

  “We are maintaining our forecast for 2023 at 5.2%. Economic recovery is likely to accelerate in 2Q as the population achieves herd immunity, which will pave the way for further normalization in activities and a v-shaped recovery in private consumption”

  “On the key risks, we remain cautious on the external outlook and the sluggish real estate market could also take the tailwind out of this recovery.”

  Still, even 5.2% might not be enough. According to the head of the National Bureau of Statistics, Kang Yi, China has to more than double the current per capita GDP of about $12,700 in order to achieve its 2035 goal, although now that the population is declining, this target may be easier to achieve even if it means eventually surrendering the superpower status to India which as of this moment is officially the world’s most populous country.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 22:18

• Did The Deep State Turn On Biden?
  Did The Deep State Turn On Biden?

  Authored by Christopher Roach via AmGreatness.com,

  Lately political analysis in the United States seems closer to Cold War-era Kremlinology. Small hints of what is really happening must be divined from the unintentional slips and innocuous gestures of officials. The reality of governance is concealed by a cloak of normality, procedural regularity, and legality. 

  This is to be expected within party politics, where things are resolved with deals among party insiders, i.e., the proverbial “smoke filled rooms.” This is why Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar rather suddenly dropped out to make way for Joe Biden in 2020, after it appeared the divided field could end up with Bernie Sanders as the nominee. 

  But this approach – secret groups secretly deciding how to control events – is not supposed to dominate ordinary governance. 

  

  The Deep State Revealed Itself Under Trump

  Donald Trump faced harassment from the Intelligence Community and other unelected parts of government throughout his term as president. Delaying the provision of funds Congress appropriated for Ukraine—something well within his authority as president—formed the basis of the first impeachment. A crew of insiders and bureaucrats waxed eloquent about their sacred “interagency consensus,” but the Congress and the American people were not buying it. Americans still think elections are supposed to matter. 

  In spite of his manifest unpopularity and refusal even to campaign, Biden was installed as president in 2020. Having rarely met an actual Biden supporter, Trump voters were skeptical and angry. The extended recounts, unceremonious dismissal of legal challenges, and videos of disappearing ballots, along with strident denunciations of “election deniers,” did not reassure anyone. Later revelations showed the coordinated way government officials, the media, NGOs, billionaires, and others conspired to “fortify” the 2020 election. 

  Biden governed as he ran: mostly hidden from the public, beholden to donors and party elders, doing as little as possible. This seemed acceptable for a while, since it allowed the various constituent parts of the government to do what they wanted with little interference. Everyone knows Biden’s never been that sharp and seems more decrepit than ever, that his vice president is even dumber than he is, and that he’s not really running anything. 

  But this is all a feature, not a bug, for the cabal that brought him to office. For them, the more independence they have from oversight, the better. 

  Biden Has Enemies

  Lately, it seems there’s a disturbance in the force. Biden and his allies have continued their vendetta against Trump, exposing his tax returns and raiding his home for possessing documents he supposedly owed the National Archives. This did not go over as well as Attorney General (and all-around hack) Merrick Garland anticipated, and it seems Garland and the January 6 Committee have each decided to scale back their demands. 

  This is why the recent exposure of top secret documents in Biden’s old office, his garage, and a mysterious third location suggests something is afoot. We went from a Monday disclosure to a special counsel being appointed on Thursday. Nothing like this happens this quickly unless it is by design. 

  There are, of course, ways to deal with this situation that do not involve public exposure. Couldn’t Biden or his staff order some FBI agents or White House people to pick them up and take them to wherever they’re supposed to be stored? 

  It’s in the news because somehow his lawyers found the documents and reported them before the story could go through White House channels. And, lawyers being lawyers, they followed the street-lawyer rule that if someone has to go to jail, make sure it’s your client and not you. Concerned about individual culpability for obstruction or mishandling documents, they made this hot potato someone else’s problem as fast as possible. 

  Someone is responsible for the way this information came out, and that someone is an enemy of Biden. There are plenty of possibilities: some secret Republicans at the Justice Department, Kamala Harris and her people, a committee of Democratic Party insiders concerned about Dementia Joe being president for another four years. The whole thing has a whiff of a conspiracy, and, like the various allegations and pretexts employed to investigate Trump, it may very well originate in the intelligence community. 

  As Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) once said, “You take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.” In this instance, the hypothesis is not completely satisfying. Biden has not really taken on the intelligence community, so far as I can tell, unless they’re still smarting about how he ended the Afghanistan boondoggle. 

  Republicans Should Put Country Over Party

  Republicans seem gleeful over the news. This is unsurprising. It’s the millionth example of rank hypocrisy from Democrats. But, judging by past results, pointing out such hypocrisy does not seem to get us anywhere. It may put a damper on Merrick Garland’s pursuit of Trump for his alleged violations of the Presidential Records Act, but this already seemed to have lost steam on its own.

  Republican glee should be more restrained, as their excitement is akin to aristocrats in Revolutionary France cheering on Robespierre’s Terror when it turned on the revolutionaries themselves. Such a development makes things more dangerous for everyone, even if it sweeps up some of one’s enemies. 

  If the exposure of Biden’s apparent mishandling of classified documents arose from an intelligence community operation, it shows that the unelected deep state is beholden to neither Democrats nor Republicans. In other words, it will have revealed itself as a completely unaccountable branch of government, subject neither to Congress, the president, the judiciary, or any ideological faction. 

  This would be a profoundly un-American development, but it would not be a huge surprise. Instead of accepting the small fry of defeating an already unpopular, not-quite-elected president, Republicans should instead join forces with everyone of good will and focus on exposing and defanging the unelected portions of government, which mean to place themselves above every branch of government, as well as the American people themselves.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 21:30

• MSM Outlets Demand To Know Who Guaranteed Bankman-Fried's $250 Million Bond
  MSM Outlets Demand To Know Who Guaranteed Bankman-Fried’s $250 Million Bond

  Eight MSM outlets have asked the US judge overseeing the case of Sam Bankman-Fried to make public the names of two people who helped front the FTX founder’s $250 million bond.

  

  The outlets – AP, Bloomberg, CNBC, WSJ publisher Dow Jones, the Financial Times, Insider and WaPo – along with a separate request by the NY Times – argue that the public interest “cannot be overstated,” saying that the public’s right to know outweighs the guarantors’ rights to privacy.

  In a letter to U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan, the lawyers distinguished the case from another judge’s December 2020 decision not to reveal who guaranteed a bond for British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, then accused and later convicted of aiding in financier Jeffrey Epstein’s sex crimes. –Reuters

  “While Mr. Bankman-Fried is accused of serious financial crimes, a public association with him does not carry nearly the same stigma as with the Jeffrey Epstein child sex trafficking scandal,” wrote lawyers for the outlets.

  Notably, the judge in the SBF case is the same one who presided over Ghislaine Maxwell’s case, while SBF’s lawyers, Mark Cohen and Christian Everdell, also represented Maxwell in her criminal case. SBF also hired James P. Harkins, a private investigator known as the “real hound dog,” who also worked for Ghislaine.

  SBF’s lawyers have argued that his parents – who co-signed the $250 million bond using their house as (very fractional) collateral, have been harassed and received physical threats since the early November collapse of FTX. One of the conditions of his bail would be house arrest at his parents’ home in Palo Alto, California.

  

  According to the NY Post, the family had contracted a private security firm in the Bay Area to patrol the grounds for $10,000 per week to protect SBF from mounting death threats. 

  One source told the Post, “They’re [family] nervous … there have been numerous death threats. They’re not taking any chances.

  Bankman-Fried’s parents hired workers to construct a network of security cameras around the home on the edge of Stanford University’s campus. 

  SBF’s lawyers say there is a “serious cause for concern” over the two other guarantors if their names went public.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 20:55

• China Reopening Boosts Copper Outlook
  China Reopening Boosts Copper Outlook

  By Ewa Manthery of ING Economics

  Copper jumped above $9,000/t for the first time since June at the beginning of 2023 on optimism about China’s economy, after Beijing abandoned its zero-Covid policy.

  

  We believe there is more upside for copper prices as demand in China picks up after the Lunar New Year holiday at the end of this month.

  

  Copper benefits from zero-Covid exit

  Copper has been rallying since late November amid a series of supportive policies in China and Beijing’s abrupt abandonment of Covid controls. The red metal has also received support from the weaker US dollar, which slid to a near seven-month low recently on growing expectations for a less hawkish Federal Reserve after cooler inflation and employment data.

  In our November outlook, we said China remained the big question mark for the copper market going forward. There have been important developments since then, with China making a full U-turn on its zero-Covid strategy.

  The virus was officially downgraded on 8 January when international arrivals were no longer required to quarantine.

  China’s lifting of Covid measures will, in time, help the economy to normalise, our China economist believes. But we can expect the short-term to be dominated by the very high level of Covid cases, which have come at a time when the economy is already very weak.

  Looking at other economies in the region which have suffered similar severe waves of Covid (India’s Delta wave) we would expect this wave to last no more than three months at which time the economy could start to revert to a more normal footing. Zeng Guang, the former chief scientist at the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, has recently said that China’s Covid outbreak could continue for another two to three months.

  However, this could also coincide with the US and Europe entering recession, which will weigh on any manufacturing recovery and export growth even as China’s domestic issues abate.

  We believe, for copper, China’s Covid policy change should prove supportive for demand in the medium to long run, although rising Covid infections could weigh on demand in the immediate term.

  Copper is rising on China reopening, slower Fed rate hikes

  

  Property stimulus improves confidence

  Beijing has released a raft of policy measures in recent weeks which have increased confidence that the economy is stabilising, improving the outlook for industrial metals, including copper. For almost two decades, China’s property sector growth and the country’s rapid urbanisation have been the key driver of growth for copper demand. 

  China will return to “normal” growth soon as Beijing steps up support for households and businesses, Guo Shuqing, party secretary of the People’s Bank of China, told state media recently.

  The world’s biggest consumer of copper is expected to quickly rebound because of the country’s optimised Covid response and after its economic policies continue to take effect, Guo said.

  In its most recent move, China is planning to allow some property firms to add leverage by easing borrowing caps and pushing back the grace period for meeting debt targets. The move would relax the strict “three red lines” policy which had contributed to a historic property downturn, hitting demand for industrial metals. The easing would add to a raft of policy moves issued since November to bolster the ailing property sector, which accounts for around a quarter of the country’s economy.

  China’s economy ended 2022 in a major slump. Factory activity in the country contracted in December at the fastest pace in nearly three years. The official manufacturing purchasing managers’ index (PMI) slumped to 47 last month from 48 in November, according to the National Bureau of Statistics.

  It was the biggest drop since February 2020 and also marked the third straight month of contraction for the index.

  The non-manufacturing PMI, which measures activity in the services sector, plunged to 41.6 last month from 46.7 in November. It also marked the lowest level in nearly three years.

  And although the government has stepped up its support for the property market, the effects are still slow to take effect – home sales fell again in December. The 100 biggest real estate developers saw new home sales drop 30.8% from a year earlier to 677.5 billion yuan ($98.2 billion) in December, according to data from China Real Estate Information Corp. That compared with a 25.5% decline in November.

  Housing prices fell 0.25% in December from the previous month, the 16th consecutive month of declines.

  We believe more stimulus and infrastructure spending could be unveiled at the National People’s Congress in March, which is likely to boost demand for commodities further.

  Global stocks at multi-year lows

  The demand boost for copper comes at a time when global stockpiles held by exchanges remain low. Last year, shrinking inventories were overshadowed by weakening global demand, but a revival in demand this year could set up the market for further squeezes and spikes in prices.

  Copper stocks in LME warehouses remain low, representing just two days’ worth of global usage. Inventories on the SHFE and COMEX are also extremely low. Between the three exchanges, global copper inventories are now down to just a few days of consumption.

  More price upside ahead

  We have increased our 2023 copper price forecast amid China’s reopening optimism, but we maintain a cautious view for the first quarter as Covid cases across China continue to rise. We now see copper prices averaging $8,700/t in the first quarter. We believe any further gains are likely to be capped as the Lunar New Year approaches.

  Following a surge in cases, economic activity will start to revert to a more normal footing with demand recovering by the second quarter.

  But we expect this to be temporary and China’s Covid policy change should prove supportive for copper demand in the medium and long term.

  We believe that once China gets over the current wave of Covid-19 infections and the country learns to live with Covid, a recovery in Chinese demand will boost copper prices further.

  We expect prices to continue to recover from the second quarter onwards on the back of improving reopening sentiment and tight inventories with prices hovering around $9,100/t in the fourth quarter.

  However, global macroeconomic headwinds are likely to persist in 2023 and the risk of global recession will remain a threat to the demand recovery in China, capping further gains.

  Any further spikes in copper prices will also depend on the US Federal Reserve’s stance towards its monetary policy. Less aggressive tightening would limit any upside in the US dollar and could further boost copper prices.

  Longer-term, we still believe copper demand will improve amid the accelerated move into renewables and electric vehicles (EVs). In EVs, copper is a key component used in the electric motor, batteries, and wiring, as well as in charging stations. Copper cannot be substituted in EVs or wind and solar energy, and its appeal to investors as a key green metal will support higher prices over the next few years.

  ING forecasts

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 20:20

• Beijing Gives Didi Green Light To Sign Up New Users, Signaling End Of Regulatory Crackdown
  Beijing Gives Didi Green Light To Sign Up New Users, Signaling End Of Regulatory Crackdown

  ADRs of Didi will be on watch heading into the shortened trading week as the company has reportedly “secured the green light to resume signing up new users”, according to new reports from Bloomberg and Yahoo. 

  The resumption of business as somewhat normal came as Didi was made the poster child for a Beijing-led crackdown on China’s internet industry. The decision to allow Didi to continue operating is being hailed as a “clear sign” that Beijing is prioritizing re-starting the country’s economy after locking down for Covid. 

  Didi’s app had been removed from app stores in 2021, but services could “soon return to Apple and Android stores” as a result of the resumption. Didi has long been compared to Uber in China, but most recently became famous alongside of the halted Ant Group Co.’s IPO as a symbol of China’s crackdown on its internet industry. 

  The crackdown on Didi came after the company “pushed ahead with a $4 billion-plus US initial public offering against Beijing’s wishes”. It is being speculated that now, with the resumption of signing up users, the company may eventually list in Hong Kong.

  

  Combined with recent concessions made regarding Ant Group, it sends a signal that the government may be easing up on the industry as a whole. Guo Shuqing, party secretary of the People’s Bank of China, has alluded to the regulatory clampdown drawing to a close, Bloomberg wrote. 

  Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Catherine Lim said in a report this weekend: “The relaunch of Didi apps supports earlier indications from Beijing that required reforms within local technology sector are near-completion. Disruptions to the operations of tech giants such as Alibaba, Tencent should be minimal in 2023.”

  It may also see Didi stock – which had traded on the over the counter markets – once again attempt an uplisting in the United States. 

  “In the future, the company will take effective measures to guarantee the security of our platform infrastructure and big data, and maintain national cybersecurity,” Didi said in a company-issued statement this weekend.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 19:45

• Will You Beat Uncle Sam's Relentless Pursuit Of Your Wealth?
  Will You Beat Uncle Sam’s Relentless Pursuit Of Your Wealth?

  Authored by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

  The United States is lurching towards an epic financial catastrophe.  This isn’t a novel insight.  The great tragedy has been in the works for decades.  Anyone with a mild inkling of curiosity knows what’s going on.

  

  According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s population clock, the U.S. population is over 334 million.  This, no doubt, is a lot of mouths to feed and people to clothe and shelter.  But that’s not all.

  Many of these people also need some sort of medical care throughout the year.  Some may break their arm.  Others may have their appendix burst or suffer cardiac arrest.  There are also serious medical emergencies from car accidents or other hazards.

  In an economy characterized by limited government and individual liberty people are self-supporting.  They provide the means to pay for these needs through the fruits of their own labors.  Minors are supported by their families until they can provide for themselves.  The elderly may fall back on their kids if they didn’t squirrel away enough nuts during their working years.

  In an economy characterized by central planning this is not the case.  Large segments of the population are dependent on government programs for their daily bread.  They also look to the benevolent hand of government to pay for their drugs and other medical needs.

  The U.S., over the last 100 years, has transformed from a nation of self-supporting individuals to a nation of collective dependents.  In fact, the U.S., at this very moment, is closing in on a significant milestone.

  Several days before the Ides of March, 100 million people – or approximately 30 percent of the total population – will be on Medicaid.  Can you believe it?

  Forced Philanthropy

  An outfit out of Naples, Florida, called the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), even has a special website with a countdown clock so you can monitor precisely when this magical moment arrives.  The FGA is forecasting that Medicaid enrollment will hit the 100 million mark sometime between the late evening of March 12 and early morning of March 13.

  Will you pop a bottle of bubbly and toast this momentous accomplishment?

  The actual significance of 100 million is found primarily in the number itself.  It’s big.  And round.  It offers a unique opportunity to pause and contemplate the madness of what’s been erected.

  How is it that 100 million Americans ended up on Medicaid?  Could it be that the entire Country will one day be ensnared by this program’s wide casted nets?  What happens to the quality of medical care when payments for services rendered are diverted through an ultra-mega government program?

  Politicians, by and large, are enamored by transfer payment programs.  The more idealistic of the lot may believe that through their programs of forced philanthropy they’re making the world a better place.  Others just get a thrill out of employing central planning to control the masses.

  “The way to Hell is paved with good intentions,” remarked Karl Marx in Das Kapital.  The devious fellow was bemoaning evil capitalists for having the audacity to use their own money for the purpose of making more money.

  Marx, a wordy busybody, was consistently wrong.  The road to hell is paved with plenty more than good intentions.  Grift, graft, larceny, corruption, and fake money all compose the pavement.  Good intentions are simply sprinkled on top to improve the aesthetic.

  Government Scam

  Perhaps Medicaid, when it was first created under the Social Security Amendments of 1965, was established with good intentions.  Who, but a complete Scrooge, could possibly be against providing medical aid to low-income residents?

  But what you may not know is that Medicaid, in its current form, is an absolute government scam.  Strings from the coronavirus fiasco have been attached to the program, which places state governments at the mercy of the federal government.  The FGA offers the following details:

  “The sharp rise in enrollment is largely due to the federal government’s continued extension of the COVID-19 public health emergency which locks states in ‘Medicaid Handcuffs.’  While the emergency is in effect, states receive extra Medicaid funding on the condition that everyone enrolled remains locked into the program.  This has led to an additional 24 million enrollees, more than 21 million of whom would previously not have qualified because they earn too much money or are otherwise ineligible.” 

  The price tag for these 21 million otherwise ineligible Medicaid enrollees comes to $16 billion per month – or $192 billion per year.  The taxpayer – that’s you – foots the bill.

  As perspective, to better understand how many ineligible people 21 million represents let’s look to Florida.  The population of Florida, the third largest state in the Country, is 22 million.  So, the equivalent of nearly the entire population of Florida, is illegitimately on Medicaid.

  Think about that on Monday morning when you rise at the crack of dawn to start up your daily grind once again.  Think about that the next time you peruse your paycheck and see the massive federal income tax deduction being confiscated.

  How many other government scams are you working to pay for?

  The actual costs of the scam portion of Medicaid are much, much more than $16 billion per month.  As the FGA notes, as welfare enrollment – including Medicaid enrollment – increases, workforce participation decreases.  So, the ability of the U.S. economy to pay for Medicaid and other government scams is diminished.

  Yet the madness continues.  Washington policies are handcuffing people to dependency who are entirely ineligible for the programs they’re dependent on.  What’s more, they’re doing this at the worst possible time.

  Will You Beat Uncle Sam’s Relentless Pursuit of Your Wealth?

  Presently, the U.S. national debt is over $31.4 trillion.  Factor in unfunded liabilities – such as social security, Medicare parts A, B, and D, federal debt held by the public, and federal employee and veteran benefits – and the number jumps to $173.5 trillion.  That comes to over $519,000 per citizen.

  These debts won’t magically disappear.  However, they won’t be directly paid either.  Simple arithmetic doesn’t allow it.  But they will be paid, nonetheless.

  You’ll pay with your time and your talents.  You’ll pay with a declining standard of living.  In fact, you already are.

  This week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the latest inflation data.  According to the government’s aggregate data manufacturers, consumer prices, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI), increased at an annual rate in December of 6.5 percent.  After peaking in June 2022 at 9.1 percent, the rate of inflation has steadily slowed.

  Should you be happy that you’re only being robbed of 6.5 percent of your savings per year instead of 9.1 percent?

  Remember, at an ‘official’ inflation rate of 6.5 percent it only takes 11 years for the purchasing power of your savings to be cut in half.  And 11 years is only about one-fourth of a person’s working years.  In other words, over the duration of a person’s working life their earnings will be cut in half at least four times.

  Wage and salary increases may soften the blow.  But they won’t keep pace with government sponsored inflation.  In truth, real wages have declined for 21-months in a row.

  And what about after retirement when employment income disappears?  In this regard, a retiree should expect the purchasing power of their savings to be cut in half at least once – possibly twice.

  This, in essence, is how you’ll pay for Washington’s massive debts and unfunded liabilities.  The Medicaid scam is but one example of the servitude you’re indentured to.

  By this, saving and investing your income and wealth has never been more important.  With hard work, diligence, unending perseverance, and some luck, you can maintain your independence and standard of living in the face of Uncle Sam’s relentless pursuit of your wealth.

  The challenge is great.  The stakes are grave.

  *  *  *

  This is a very challenging time for investors.  Inflation.  Deflation.  Recession.  The dangers are prominent.  However, it’s also the genesis of the next great wave of wealth over the next decade.  And we intend to ride it all the way.  If this interests you, take a gander at my Financial First Aid Kit.  Inside, you’ll find everything you need to know to prosper and protect your privacy as the global economy slips into a worldwide depression.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 19:10

• Ron Paul: Isn't It Time For Adam Schiff To Be Expelled From Congress?
  Ron Paul: Isn’t It Time For Adam Schiff To Be Expelled From Congress?

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

  With each new release of the “Twitter Files” we learn more and more about the deep corruption in Washington. We sensed during Covid that something was really wrong – for example the bizarre denial of natural immunity. But thanks to Elon Musk’s decision to open the books, our worst fears have been proven true. Each new release seems to show something even more criminal inside America’s rotten ruling class.

  In the latest release, thanks to the excellent reporting of independent journalist Matt Taibbi, we see outgoing Chair of the House Intelligence Community, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), continuously pressuring Twitter to validate his fantasies of “Russian bots” manipulating US politics.

  

  The short version of what Taibbi reported comes from around the time then-Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) was about to release his Committee’s findings about the FBI misuse of the FISA Court to spy on the Trump presidential campaign. The FBI, it turns out, relied exclusively on the widely-discredited “Steele Dossier” – paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign – as justification to spy on the Trump campaign.

  When pressure grew to release the Nunes findings, Twitter exploded with users demanding that Congress “release the memo.”

  That’s where then-ranking Member Schiff and his staff began relentlessly pressuring Twitter to show that the accounts demanding the release of the memo were actually Russian agents, out to help their supposed favorite, Donald Trump. Schiff was not alone. Fellow “Russiagate” hoaxers like Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) also pressured Twitter to find Russians behind the demand to release Nunes’ findings.

  Over and over, Twitter – which was hardly sympathetic to Trump – told Schiff and his colleagues there was simply no evidence of Russian involvement. As much as some Twitter employees may have liked to report the opposite, to their credit they refused to participate in the scam.

  Even after Twitter had informed Schiff and his fellow hoaxers that there was no Russian involvement, Sen. Blumenthal released a statement he knew was not true:

  “We find it reprehensible that Russian agents have so eagerly manipulated innocent Americans.”

  Again, this was right after he had been informed by Twitter employees – who were by-and-large strongly opposed to Trump – that there was just no evidence to back up such a statement.

  We are moving closer and closer to a nuclear showdown with Russia over Ukraine. For political gain the Democrats – and plenty of Republicans – have been pushing the “Russiagate” hoax and in so doing have fertilized the ground for the obsessive Russia hatred prevalent in the US today.

  I do not believe it is an exaggeration to say that if US/Russia relations had not been poisoned by the lie of “Russiagate” for pure political gain, we would not be anywhere near our current state of near-direct conflict with the largest nuclear power on earth, Russia.

  It is shocking that Schiff and his “Russiagate” allies would potentially sacrifice millions of dead Americans to defeat Trump and other political enemies.

  Let’s not forget: Rep. Jim Trafficant was expelled from Congress for asking his staffers to wash his boat.

  Shouldn’t there be at least equal punishment for Senators and Members who are lying us into World War III?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 18:35

• Economists Warn Americans Recession Is Coming: "Don't Be Fooled"
  Economists Warn Americans Recession Is Coming: “Don’t Be Fooled”

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  Two top economists said that despite contrary predictions, a recession will likely hit the United States in the near future.

  “Some economists argue that the strength of the labor market – as well as household balance sheets – will keep the economy strong enough to avoid a recession,” wrote Lakshman Achuthan and Anirvan Banerji, the co-founders of the Economic Cycle Research Institute, in a Friday opinion article.

  “We disagree,” they wrote, saying that “it remains our expectation that the U.S. economy will enter a recession this year.”

  That’s because, in part, because of the Federal Reserve’s recent decisions to raise interest rates to their highest levels in decades in a bid to slow inflation levels not seen since the early 1980s, they wrote. The rate hike appears to have worked to an extent as the Labor Department last week confirmed that the consumer price index that measures inflation fell 0.1 percent in December to 6.5 percent.

  

  Last month, the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rates by half a percentage point, while the last four hikes were all three-quarters of a percentage point.

  “Recessions always entail noticeable declines in both GDP and jobs, but such pullbacks are not necessarily obvious at the recession’s outset,” the two wrote for CNN, telling Americans “don’t be fooled” by rosy forecasts saying otherwise.

  “While GDP and jobs do move in step with the economy, by the time they are released, they only tell us where the economy had been in the recent past.”

  There have been similarities made to the current U.S. economy and the 2008 Great Recession, they wrote.

  

  Cartons of eggs are seen for sale in a Sprouts Farmers Market in Houston, Texas, on Aug. 15, 2022. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

  “Then, many—including then-President George W. Bush—were not concerned about a recession because GDP hadn’t declined yet, even though job losses had begun,” their article said.

  “We pushed back against the prevailing complacency, writing for CNN at the time, ‘While GDP has yet to decline, we have already seen four straight months of payroll job losses. That suggests that the economy is on a recession track. And it implies that either one or both of the recent, slightly positive GDP estimates will be revised down to negative readings by next year.’”

  A recession would include job losses. There have already been layoffs carried out this winter in the tech sector, led by Amazon, Meta and Facebook, Twitter, and others.

  “That is why—having predicted that the economy would enter a recession—last spring we urged job seekers ‘to update the resume and make any career moves while the job market is still hot,” Banerji and Achuthan wrote.

  And while a dropping GDP, or gross domestic product, and higher unemployment rates are telltale signs that a recession is underway, the two economists said that those two factors “do move in step with the economy, by the time they are released, they only tell us where the economy had been in the recent past.”

  “Employment, in particular, can hold up longer than expected in a recessionary scenario,” they added.

  “That was true in the inflationary era around the 1970s. Most notably, unemployment didn’t peak until eight months after the start of the severe 1973-1975 recession.”

  The Biden administration hasn’t released its December jobs report. In November, the country added 263,000 jobs, and unemployment held at 3.7 percent.

  More Forecasts

  Another economist, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, said in a recent interview that the U.S. economy still faces a recession sometime in 2023. That’s despite the encouraging reports in recent weeks about lower inflation and steady jobs numbers.

  “One has to be careful of false dawns,” Summers told Bloomberg last week. “I would stick with my view that a recession this year is more likely than not.”

  And about 61 percent of Wall Street Journal-surveyed economists predicted there would be a downturn within the next 12 months.

  “While recent inflation prints have shown some progress, a few persistent categories like core services are associated with the historically tight labor market, suggesting that there is still ‘a long way to go’ for the Fed,” Deutsche Bank economists Brett Ryan and Matthew Luzzetti said in the WSJ survey, released Sunday. “The Fed would stay on its tightening trajectory to restore the rebalance of labor market and price stability, which in our view would engineer a sharp rise in unemployment and recession,” they added.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 18:00

• World Economic Forum Invents New Word To Describe The Extreme Chaos Gripping Our Planet
  World Economic Forum Invents New Word To Describe The Extreme Chaos Gripping Our Planet

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The End of The American Dream blog,

  This week, 2,658 of the “world’s decision-makers” will gather in Davos, Switzerland for the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum. 

  

  Protected by thousands of police officers and soldiers, the elite of the world will feast and party throughout the week as they shape the global agenda for the coming year.  Needless to say, our input is not desired or welcomed.  In order to get into this conference, you have got to be a part of their club, and in order to be a part of their club you must be a very important person.  It is being reported that the official list of 2,658 attendees this year includes “heads of state, business royalty, actual royalty, media honchos, and academics”…

  The world’s decision-makers are gathering in Switzerland this week for the World Economic Forum meeting. The annual event of business and government leaders is expecting a solid turnout as it returns to its traditional winter time slot following two years of covid disruptions.

  According to the official list, which is accurate as of Jan. 10, 2,658 attendees are registered for the event. Among them are heads of state, business royalty, actual royalty, media honchos, and academics. There are hundreds more participating on the sidelines, whether organizing, catering, or attending corporate events along the promenade that cuts through the center of Davos.

  I suppose that someone could try to show up at the conference unannounced, but it is not likely that anyone that is not authorized will get very close.

  All of the roads leading to the conference have checkpoints, and apparently fingerprint scanners are being used in some cases to verify identities.

  NOW – Police and military have blocked the access roads to Davos, where Klaus Schwab is holding his World Economic Forum summit.

  People, vehicles, and fingerprints are now being checked. pic.twitter.com/K5p1r2iMas

  — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) January 13, 2023

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

  I can’t recall ever seeing anything quite like this.

  In addition to hordes of regular police, the Swiss military will be providing “up to 5,000 soldiers” to bolster security…

  With one week to go until the who’s who of the most radical globalists descend upon the picturesque ski resort town of Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting, up to 5,000 soldiers from the Swiss army will be deployed to offer military support to the civil authorities of the canton of Graubünden, who are responsible for securing the summit’s premises and its participants.

  In a statement released Friday, January 6th, the Swiss Defense Department (VBS) said that the Federal Assembly, the country’s parliament, had approved the deployment of the Swiss army contingent to ensure the security of thousands of participants, the Swiss German-language newspaper Blick reports. This year’s deployment is part of a three-year commitment, from 2022 to 2024, by Parliament to support these high profile civic activities.

  Somehow, Klaus Schwab and his minions have turned this annual gathering in Davos into a “must attend” event for the global elite.

  And if there is anything that the global elite do not like, it is mixing with the general population.

  As Paul Joseph Watson has aptly observed, it is a big club and you and I are not part of it.

  Leading up to the conference, the WEF issued a “global risks report”, and in that report they actually created a brand new term to describe the extreme chaos that is gripping our world right now…

  The collective vocabularies stored in the world’s great dictionaries didn’t appear to hold a single world to sum up all this strife. So here’s a new one: Polycrisis.

  The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2023 uses the term, to explain how, “present and future risks can also interact with each other to form a ‘polycrisis’ – a cluster of related global risks with compounding effects, such that the overall impact exceeds the sum of each part”.

  Normally, I disagree with everything that the World Economic Forum does, but I actually kind of like this new term that they have come up with.

  We are definitely facing “a cluster of related global risks with compounding effects, such that the overall impact exceeds the sum of each part”, and 2023 will almost certainly be another year when we are hit by one crisis after another.

  I have often referred to what we are facing as “a perfect storm”, but I think that “polycrisis” is a pretty good descriptor as well.

  Unfortunately, virtually every “solution” that will be on the agenda at Davos will be bad for humanity.

  The globalists don’t seem to realize that the system that they have worked so hard to carefully construct is rapidly failing, and many in the general population are sick and tired of the self-destructive policies that they have been trying to push on all the rest of us.

  Interestingly, as the global elite gather in Davos an extremely rare “green comet” will be making a run toward Earth…

  A rare green comet, last seen in Earth’s skies 50,000 years ago, is revisiting our solar system and may become visible to the naked eye within the next few weeks.

  The comet – formally identified as C/2022 E3 (ZTF) but commonly called the “green comet” – won’t be as bright as other famous comets such as Halley’s or Hale-Bopp.

  “The brightness of comets is notoriously unpredictable, but by (Feb. 1) C/2022 E3 (ZTF) could become only just visible to the eye in dark night skies,” NASA said in its blog.

  This comet will be the closest to our planet on February 1st and 2nd, and that will be the best opportunity to potentially see it with the naked eye.

  Before I end this article, I wanted to acknowledge the passing of Lisa Marie Presley.

  Lisa Marie Presley dead at 54 due to cardiac arrest 💉 pic.twitter.com/KHILRupP5z

  — Sharaiya Negron 🗣 (@SharaiyaN) January 13, 2023

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

  It is such a tragedy to lose her at such a young age.

  If Elvis was alive today, how do you think he would have responded to the sudden death of his little girl?

  2023 is just a little over two weeks old, and already there has been so much sadness.

  Unfortunately, I believe that much more sadness is coming, because the “polycrisis” that we are facing will only intensify even more as global events continue to accelerate.

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 16:50

• US NatGas Prices Rise As Models Suggest 'Polar Vortex To Unload On US'
  US NatGas Prices Rise As Models Suggest ‘Polar Vortex To Unload On US’

  Natural gas futures bounced off 18-month lows during the holiday session period as the latest runs of long-term weather models suggest winter might not be over for the Lower 48. 

  US NatGas futures for February delivery moved up 21 cents to $3.63 per million British thermal units. The price is now trading above the 76.4% Fibonacci retracement level of the main drop from the high of $10 in August 2022 and the low of $1.43 in June 2020. 

  

  The price of NatGas tumbled to an 18-month low last week as mild weather boosted injections into storage facilities by slashing demand. Last week, the Energy Information Administration announced a rare rise in inventories of 11 billion cubic feet in stocks.

  However, as we’ve pointed out in recent weeks and even days, first in “US NatGas Prices Slide To 18-Month Low On Warm Spell; Some Models Forecast Cold Blast In Weeks” and “California Pounding Continues, But Upcoming Large-Scale Weather Pattern Change On The Way,” as well as “Siberia Records Minus-80 Degrees As Talk Of Polar Vortex Grows,” long term weather models are showing the increasing possibility for colder weather. 

  The latest run of the Global Forecast System (GFS) shows the possibility of the return of winter by the end of the month. 

  

  Both GFS and European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) models for the Lower 48 show the possibility of a cold spell — when both long-term models suggest colder weather, the likelihood increases. 

  

  More mainstream meteorologists, such as Ryan Maue, are now pointing out that a wicked cold spell might be headed for the Lower 48. 

  100%. Combination of Greenland and Siberian polar vortex to unload on Lower 48 in 13-17 day time frame.

  — Ryan Maue (@RyanMaue) January 15, 2023

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

  “Winter coming back,” tweeted Weather forecaster Joe Bastardi. 

  Week 2 all ensembles go to positive TNH which is widespread cold stormy pattern for US. Winter coming back pic.twitter.com/8hBFEezXlm

  — Joe Bastardi (@BigJoeBastardi) January 15, 2023

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

  NatGasWeather said cold returns around Jan. 26-30 and might last through the first week of Feb. 

  Weekend weather data trends colder for Jan 26-30 and has led to higher nat gas prices to open new trading week. Longer-range data suggests cold can last into first week of Feb. Although, still very light demand the next 7-days to trudge through first. #natgas #oilandgas pic.twitter.com/S4u71B5pAV

  — NatGasWeather.com (@NatGasWeather) January 16, 2023

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

  Winter isn’t over yet. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 16:15

• Chevron Sold Venezuelan Oil To Phillips 66
  Chevron Sold Venezuelan Oil To Phillips 66

  By Julianne Geiger of OilPrice

  Chevron Corp has sold a cargo of Venezuelan crude oil to another U.S. refinery, Phillips 66, anonymous sources have said.

  

  Chevron Corp recently sold 500,000 barrels of heavy Hamaca to U.S. refiner Phillips 66 to be used in its Sweeny, Texas refinery, the sources told Bloomberg.

  It would be the first such sale since the United States sanctioned Venezuela’s crude oil.

  In separate news, ConocoPhillips, which spun off its downstream business now known as Phillips 66 back in 2012, has expressed its willingness to sell Venezuela’s crude oil in the United States as a way to claw back some of the $10 billion owed by Venezuela. ConocoPhillips’ Venezuelan assets were nationalized in 2007—along with many other oil companies’ assets. ConocoPhillips has been authorized by the United States to negotiate debt recovery with PDVSA.

  Earlier this week, PDVSA assigned a third crude oil cargo to Chevron under the latter’s new license to import sanctioned Venezuelan crude oil after a more than three-year ban.

  Venezuela’s heavy crude oil is prized by U.S. refiners, who, until recently, looked to Russia’s heavy crude to replace it. In December, it was reported that several refiners were hitting up Chevron to get their hands on the rare Venezuelan crude oil.

  It was originally thought that Chevron could prioritize its own refineries, which have a history of using Venezuela’s heavy crude—and the first delivery of 500,000 barrels of Venezuelan crude oil—also Hamaca crude—did go to its Pascagoula, Mississippi refinery.

  Hamaca crude is an extra-heavy, sour blend, and the recent cargoes came from the Petropiar oil JV operated by Chevron and PDVSA. 

  While Chevron is the only oil company with approval from the U.S. to import crude oil from Venezuela, other oil and gas companies are looking for a similar authorization—including foreign oil and gas companies who are demanding fair treatment.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 15:40

• The Best Video On Climate Change That You Will Ever See
  The Best Video On Climate Change That You Will Ever See

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  If you only play one video this year, the video below is the one you should play…

  

  Annual CO2 emissions chart from Data in Our World.

  This is an absolutely brilliant speech by British satirist, Konstantine Kisin.

  Brilliant speech addressed to our ‘woke’ youth fighting #climatechange by Konstantine Kisin. pic.twitter.com/mFS8w0t2ip

  — Brandon Taylor Moore (@LetsGoBrando45) January 14, 2023

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

  Is Kisin’s Video For You?

  • If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will do anything that matters about climate change, the video is for you.

  • If you think that you, president Biden, Gretta, Al Gore, or anyone in government will not do anything that matters about climate change, the video is also for you.

  It’s less than seven minutes long. Play it.

  Play the video then think about the lead chart and the path of China and India while noting the whole continent of Africa is not even on the scale. 

  By the way, the population of India will soon to surpass China. 

  Importantly, and on a personal level, the single best thing you can do for the environment is to not have kids. 

  Climate Deniers

  I have been accused of being a climate denier. Mercy. Actually, I am a climate realist.

  Climate change is real and constant and has been ever since the earth formed. 

  The debate is over how much is manmade and even more importantly, what to do about it, whether it’s manmade or not.

  Regarding what percentage is manmade, I don’t know, nor does anyone else. But let’s say you disagree. 

  Then OK, I agree with you. Let’s assume recent climate change is 100% manmade. So what do we do about it?

  That has been my line of questioning for a long time. I just have never been able to express my line of thinking as clearly as Kisin in the above video.

  A Big Green Mess in Germany With Coal a Stunning 31 Percent of Electricity

  Assume there is a problem, then if there is a solution, it will not be the like of Gretta, AOC, Al Gore, president Biden, or the Green Party hypocrites who will fix it.

  Look no further than the Big Green Mess in Germany for what happens when politicians are faced with the decision to heat homes cheaply or cut back on CO2. 

  The EU plans to tax other nations for not addressing climate change, while Germany bulldozes a town to increase the size of a coal mine. It’s also lignite coal, the dirtiest kind.

  Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, a Green who is Germany’s economy and climate minister, defended the agreement as “a good decision for climate protection” that fulfills many of the environmentalists’ demands and saves five other villages from demolition.

  World’s Largest Tax Scheme

  For discussion of the EU’s hypocritical carbon tax scheme, please see EU Imposes the World’s Largest Carbon Tax Scheme.

  Meanwhile, the US is marching down an idiotic path towards electric vehicle mandates with no plan on where to get the minerals for the batteries. Nor does president Biden have an reasonable plan for the infrastructure needed. 

  Fed Chair Warns President Biden “We will not be a climate policymaker”

  Preposterous ideas have gotten so out of hand that Fed Chair Warns President Biden “We will not be a climate policymaker”

  “Without explicit congressional legislation, it would be inappropriate for us to use our monetary policy or supervisory tools to promote a greener economy or to achieve other climate-based goals. We are not, and will not be, a climate policymaker,” said Jerome Powell.

  I am not one who often praises the Fed, but that paragraph deserves a standing ovation. 

  Constant Hype

  The hype is constant and has been consistently wrong. In 2019 I noted Ocasio-Cortez Says World Will End in 12 Years: Here’s What to Do About It

  The world will still be here in 2050.

  On October 29, 2022, I noted UN Seeks $4 to 6 Trillion Per Year to Address Climate

  Yeah right. Politicians are going to give Africa, India, and third world countries trillions of dollars and tax the hell out of them if they don’t comply.

  The Hope of Fusion vs the Pomp of Politicians and Climate Activists

  If there is a climate problem, science will find the answer, not politicians or activists.

  For discussion, please see The Hope of Fusion vs the Pomp of Politicians and Climate Activists

  Nonetheless, there’s A Mad Rush to Build More EV Factories despite the fact we have no idea or plan to secure the minerals needed for the batteries. 

  And Germany has turned to bulldozing towns to produce more coal. 

  What a hoot.

  *  *  *

  Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 14:54

• All The President's Men: Biden's Use Of Lawyers Raises Additional Concerns Over Handling Classified Material
  All The President’s Men: Biden’s Use Of Lawyers Raises Additional Concerns Over Handling Classified Material

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in the New York Post on the curious use of lawyers by President Joe Biden in the classified document controversy. There was a clear decision made to rely on his own counsel rather than the FBI or security officers after the discovery of highly classified documents in a closet in a private office. The decision clearly brings greater control and protection for the President, but it can itself be viewed as additional evidence of gross mishandling of classified material. In the movie “All The President’s Men,” Woodward chastises his colleague Bernstein that “I don’t mind what you did; I mind how you did it.” President Biden may face the same objection in his decision to use counsel to search for classified material.

  

  Here is the column:

  The discovery of a fourth set of classified documents, at the Biden residence in Delaware, has further undermined the White House’s virtual mantra that the president “takes classified documents very seriously.”

  Putting aside the repeated movement of highly classified documents over six years, one curious element has emerged in this scandal: the use of private counsel.

  Not only did President Joe Biden enlist lawyers to clear out his private Washington office; he then used them — rather than security officers or the FBI — to search for additional classified documents.

  The initial use of lawyers is notable. While it seems a fairly pricey moving crew, Biden could argue a trove of documents might require a judgment on where they should be sent and whether they belong to Biden, the Penn Biden Center or the government.

  But why was a legal team sent in six years after Biden took the documents on leaving as vice president? Were the lawyers specifically selected because they had clearances, an acknowledgment there might be classified material unlawfully housed in the office?

  After the fourth batch of documents was discovered this week (the third found in Delaware), Richard Sauber, referred to as the “special counsel to the president,” stressed that he has a clearance. Sauber admits the lawyers who found the first batch at the residence didn’t have clearances but says he found the later documents.

  It remains unclear which lawyers were involved in which discoveries, whether they had clearances and (if so) at what level.

  In fact, it seems to suggest Biden continued to use uncleared lawyers after his team found highly classified documents Nov. 2 in the Penn Biden office closet in Washington.

  That itself could be viewed as gross mishandling of classified information.

  It’s strange Biden did not use security officers or the FBI to conduct further searches. The president has a host of people who regularly handle classified material. So why use the lawyers?

  The answer appears the same as in the case of Hillary Clinton’s emails: control. Using private counsel allows Biden to raise attorney-client privilege. Trump also used counsel, but eventually the FBI raided his home to search and remove not just classified material but documents found in boxes with that material.

  While that attorney-client privilege can be overcome under a “crime/fraud exception,” it adds a level of initial protection. It also allowed Biden to control the discovery and initial record of the discovery of classified information.

  The key to any investigation will be the chain of custody extending back to the documents’ removal in 2017 when Biden left office. How these documents appeared in their discovered locations is known only to his lawyers. It’s a link in the chain of custody that Biden effectively controls.

  With Mar-a-Lago, the FBI was criticized for staging documents to be shown in the storage room. The photos were then leaked to an eager media. There will be no staged photos of documents alongside Time magazine covers for Biden.

  Nor were documents he housed with classified documents removed. Indeed, it’s not clear if the FBI will know what documents were stored in the same boxes.

  What was potentially lost is significant. Classified documents are generally supposed to be in folders with a thick, colored border and large printed classification warnings. Were some of those folders observable before they were moved? If so, anyone could tell a pile contained classified material, including the president and passersby.

  Likewise, the initial discovery could show the context of surrounding material. The FBI at Mar-a-Lago carefully photographed that context and its search. Here, we’re relying on counsel to have kept such a record when most lawyers would be reluctant to do so given the risk to their client.

  The key is that unlike FBI agents, these lawyers are not acting on behalf of the public interest but for the president’s personal interests.

  If there are criminal charges, the key witnesses will be lawyers representing the president as an individual. They are more likely to minimize incriminating or embarrassing elements.

  And they are themselves under scrutiny. Since they may not have had sufficient clearances to do this work, it is in their interest to downplay any expectations or warnings of additional classified material scattered around Biden’s home or office.

  Concern over the use of lawyers has only grown with time. Biden not only continued to have his lawyers search after the first discovery, but did so for months through subsequent discoveries.

  After finding highly classified material in Biden’s garage Dec. 20, private counsel — not the FBI — found another document in an adjacent room Jan 11. Sauber found more classified documents the next day.

  Those last two findings followed White House assurances that the “thorough” search was “completed.” It obviously wasn’t thorough enough.

  They raised another question. It would seem unlikely a document with a proper classified cover could be missed. The folder has thick red or yellow borders running around the edges and large black classifications like “TOP SECRET” emblazoned across the top. If that was missed, the earlier searches were clearly negligent.

  Alternatively, and more concerning, the internal documents might have been removed from the folders and stored without cover. That would indicate someone removed and reviewed them — an act showing knowledge of the classified status. If they were removed at Biden’s residence, he would be the chief suspect in such use.

  It would utterly destroy the “inadvertence” defense.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 14:30

• Musk Says ZeroHedge Did "Nothing Warranting Suspension" After 'Twitter Files' Expose Big Pharma Bullying
  Musk Says ZeroHedge Did “Nothing Warranting Suspension” After ‘Twitter Files’ Expose Big Pharma Bullying

  Today’s Twitter Files drop contains several notable pieces of evidence.

  

  First, that lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry launched a ‘massive lobbying blitz to crush any effort to share patents/IP for new covid-related medicine,” according to The Intercept‘s Lee Fang. As part of this effort, lobbying group BIO “wrote to the newly elected Biden admin, demanding the U.S. gov sanction any country attempting to violate patent rights and create generic low cost covid medicine or vaccines.“

  Of note, Pfizer and BioNTech raked in $37 billion in revenue in 2021 alone from the COVID-19 vaccine, while Moderna made $17.7 billion the same year (and has recently announced a plan to hike the price of the Covid-19 vaccine by approximately 400%).

  BioNTech, which developed the Pfizer vaccine, “reached out to Twitter to request that Twitter directly censor users tweeting at them to ask for generic low cost vaccines.“

  5. That brings us to Twitter. The global lobbying blitz includes direct pressure on social media. BioNTech, which developed Pfizer’s vaccine, reached out to Twitter to request that Twitter directly censor users tweeting at them to ask for generic low cost vaccines. pic.twitter.com/6cVIRcUDZV

  — Lee Fang (@lhfang) January 16, 2023

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

  According to Fang, “Twitter’s reps responded quickly to the pharma request,” while “A lobbyist in Europe asked the content moderation team to monitor the accounts of Pfizer, AstraZeneca & of activist hashtags like #peoplesvaccine.”

  Meanwhile, the “fake accounts” flagged by the pharmaceutical companies for action were real people – one of whom Fang spoke with on the phone.

  8. It’s not clear what actions Twitter ultimately took on this particular request. Several Twitter employees noted in subsequent messages that none of this activism constituted abuse. But the company continued monitoring tweets.

  — Lee Fang (@lhfang) January 16, 2023

  “For more than two years, a global movement has been speaking out against pharmaceutical greed and demanding that everyone, everywhere has the tools to combat pandemics,” said Maaza Seyoum, a campaigner for the People’s Vaccine Alliance. “Whatever nasty tricks companies and governments pull,” she continued, “we cannot and will not be silenced.”

  

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsSecond, ‘Pfizer & Moderna’s lobbying group, BIO, fully funded a special content moderation campaign designed by a contractor called Public Good Projects (PGP), which worked w/Twitter to set content moderation rules around covid “misinformation.”‘ according to Fang.

  BIO funded the PGP campaign, “Stronger,”  to the tune of $1.275 million. Its focus? Helping Twitter ‘create content moderation bots,’ selecting which public health accounts would be verified, and helping to crowdsource content takedowns.

  Of note, the Moderna/Pfizer-funded campaign included regular emails to Twitter officals with takedown and verification requests.

  “Here’s an example of those types of emails that went straight to Twitter’s lobbyists and content moderators. Many focused on @zerohedge, which was suspended.“

  Fang includes a screencap of an email with two excel spreadsheets containing said requests.

  13. Notably, this massive push to censor and label covid misinfo never applied to drug companies. When big pharma wildly exaggerated the risks of creating low-cost generic covid vaccines, Stronger did nothing. The rules applied only to critics of industry. https://t.co/FTzQsGKM9i

  — Lee Fang (@lhfang) January 16, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsFrom Fang’s Intercept piece, below is one of the flagged tweets in question – which links to a ZeroHedge article aggregated from NakedCapitalism, and which logically posits; “if a vaccinated person and an unvaccinated person have roughly the same capacity to carry, shed and transmit the virus, particularly in its Delta form, what difference does implementing a vaccination passport actually make to the spread of the virus?”

  “if a vaccinated person and an unvaccinated person have roughly the same capacity to carry, shed and transmit the virus, particularly in its Delta form, what difference does implementing a vaccination passport actually make to the spread of the virus?”https://t.co/HNiND8uInP

  — Stephanie Seneff (@stephanieseneff) August 29, 2021

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

  “To try and stifle digital dissent during a pandemic, when tweets and emails are some of the only forms of protest available to those locked in their homes, is deeply sinister,” said Nick Dearden, director of Global Justice Now.

  More on one of the people behind this effort, courtesy of Twitter user @TexasLindsay_

  2. The woman advocating for the censorship of inconvenient truths at the behest of her funders rife with COI’s is Savannah Knell, MPH MSSP, the Senior Director of Strategic Partnerships at The Public Good Projects (PGP). pic.twitter.com/vkdUaAt5xQ

  — TexasLindsay™ (@TexasLindsay_) January 16, 2023

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

  4. Knell claims to have extensive experience in Public Health Comm. & Social Marketing. And aims to “largely focus on managing the development & execution of strategically targeted & tailored behavior change campaigns with an eye toward health equity.” pic.twitter.com/2N7yFsBGsn

  — TexasLindsay™ (@TexasLindsay_) January 16, 2023

  “To translate the above into layman’s terms she is a narrative enforcer. She’s funded by Big Pharma and aided by Big Brother to be the ministry of truth. She aims to create social norms by means of censorship and propaganda. She wants to tell you & I—how/what to say and think.“

  Meanwhile, as this bullying progressed this was happening…

  *PFIZER JUMPS AS MUCH AS 6.8% TO RECORD DEFYING MARKET ROUT

  behold Pfizer McPfizerface pic.twitter.com/hCZwT0DAW6

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 26, 2021

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

  Finally, as this latest ‘Twitter Files’ thread spreads across a holiday market, Elon Musk himself has opined on the efforts to bully the former Twitter executives into censoring ZeroHedge:

  Zerohedge can be jerks at times, but they did nothing warranting suspension

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 16, 2023

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

  We’ll take the ‘being jerks’ jab… isn’t that what the media is supposed to be?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 13:55

• Peter Schiff: The Recession Everybody Denies Exists Is Going To Get Worse
  Peter Schiff: The Recession Everybody Denies Exists Is Going To Get Worse

  Via SchiffGold.com,

  Peter Schiff recently appeared on Dan Bongino’s Unfiltered on Fox News to talk about the economy, inflation, the stock market, the Federal Reserve and investing in 2023. Peter said the recession that everybody denies exists is going to get worse, and so is inflation.

  Some people in the mainstream seem to think a big stock market rally is in the cards. Peter said the optimism is unfounded.

  I don’t think it’s going to be a good year for the stock market. I think there are going to be some stocks that do well. Unfortunately, most Americans don’t own those stocks.”

  Peter said the ones that most investors do own are going to go down.

  The very popular stocks that a lot of people have crowded into during the bubble – these stocks, even though they’ve come down a lot in 2022, they still have a long way to fall. And I think there’s a lot of risk in 2023, not just in the market, but in the economy.”

  Bongino referenced an op-ed in the New York Post by Ken Fisher arguing that the bad news, especially in the job market, is already written into the script and priced into the market. That means we may well have a “summer of love” in the stock market with a healthy rebound. Peter said people are underestimating just how bad the news is going to get.

  First of all, a lot of people think inflation is going to come down. It’s not. I think the decline is what’s transitory. I think we’re going to be making new year-over-year highs in inflation before the end of the year.”

  Peter has been arguing that a declining dollar and an ultimate Fed pivot away from monetary tightening will mean more inflation down the road, even if we get some relief in the CPI over the next few months. He drove this point home in a recent podcast.

  That is the really important point that seems to be lost on everybody. What investors are trying to figure out is ‘has inflation peaked?’ Have we seen peak inflation? Now, I think the answer to that question is no. I don’t think inflation has peaked. Now, it may have peaked for a short period of time. It may take until the second half of 2023 before we get a year-over-year rate of inflation that was higher than the high water mark for 2022. Who knows? Maybe it will take into 2024. But the one thing that I’m certain of is that we’re not going anywhere near 2%. And that is what investors still don’t understand — that the days of low inflation are over, and we’re living in an era of high inflation. That is a complete game-changer for the Fed and the Fed has yet to come to terms with this new reality, nor has the market.”

  And during his discussion with Bongino, Peter said the notion the economy is about to rebound is nothing but a fantasy.

  The recession that everybody denies exists is actually going to get worse. So, we’re going to have a weaker economy and stronger inflation. The markets are not expecting that, and neither is the Fed.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 13:20

• Republicans Call Out 'Double Standard' Over Biden Classified Docs Hypocrisy
  Republicans Call Out ‘Double Standard’ Over Biden Classified Docs Hypocrisy

  Congressional Republicans are crying foul over the double standard applied to President Biden’s mishandling of classified materials vs. the treatment former President Trump received.

  

  To review, President Biden’s lawyers – who didn’t have clearance to view classified documents, allegedly stumbled upon a cache of them at his old office at the Penn Biden Center on Nov. 2, 2022, the day before midterm elections. After waiting nearly two months, more documents were found on December 20, January 9 and January 12 – the date on which AG Merrick Garland finally appointed a special counsel to investigate.

  

  Trump, on the other hand, who has a potential constitutional argument that he could have declassified the documents recovered from his locked safe at his highly surveilled Mar-a-Lago residence, was treated to a raid by Biden’s DOJ

  “Where’s the raid of Biden’s garage?” asked House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA).

  There’s always a double standard. @FBI, where’s the raid of Biden’s garage?

  — Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) January 12, 2023

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

  “Now, we learn that Biden kept additional classified materials at his home in Delaware in his GARAGE. Yet there was no raid. No ransacking of Biden’s home. Nothing,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw tweeted, trying to get back in MAGA’s good graces.

  House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) called the situation “another faux pas by the Biden administration,” by “treating law differently based upon your political beliefs.”

  “That’s why we had to provide a new entity from our Church-style [committee] to look after the weaponization of what’s gone on that you want an equal playing of the law to all Americans.”

  McCarthy also pointed out the fact that officials have not released any photos of the documents recovered from Biden’s office and home. The Justice Department included a photo of materials retrieved from Trump’s residence in a court filing that was made public. –The Hill

  “More classified documents Biden took from the Obama White House have been found at Biden’s Delaware house next to his Corvette. Biden assures the public it’s OK because his garage is locked… So, when’s the FBI raid?” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) in a Thursday tweet.

  Trump was also ‘raided’ by the media, so to speak.

  .@jheil: “Despite the possible political ramifications … the right decision on that is going to be you can’t let this go … you can’t let it go without accountability.” pic.twitter.com/AvBqqQ0Rtx

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 16, 2023

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

  .@MilesTaylorUSA: “This is a big national security concern … It is very likely the ex president will be indicted. After the indictment … I worry that if the Republicans will retake the House and Senate, they will try to find a way to give the ex-president amnesty.” pic.twitter.com/Rc1TLaQ8uI

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 16, 2023

  And crickets over Biden aside from scant cardboard reporting on the matter.

  In fact, CNN‘s Jake Tapper is earning his paycheck carrying water for the regime:

  CNN asks Comer, who’s trying to make a big deal out of Biden’s handling of classified documents, to explain a clip of him saying last November that investigating Trump’s mishandling of classified docs is “not a priority” for him pic.twitter.com/jaGSbnC4Ew

  — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 15, 2023

  Meanwhile, House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY) has sent letters to the National Archives and the White House Counsel’s office requesting documents and communications pertaining to the classified materials, along with a request for information about the documents themselves and who may have been able to access them.

  And Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), the top GOP member of the House Intelligence Committee, sent AG Garland and DNI Avril Haines a request for a classified briefing about the documents.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/16/2023 – 12:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

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

  Authored by Pete Hoekstra via The Gatestone Institute,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Were political appointees in the review loop?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  Most Populous Countries: 2022 vs. 2050

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

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

  

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

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

  Countries with Declining Populations

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

  

   

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

  All-cause deaths in Yokohama 2016-2022

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

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

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

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

  The cause of increased Covid deaths? “Dunno.”

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

  Well, what were you expecting them to say?

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

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

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

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

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

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

  

  Empirical evidence

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

  Remove all taxes from savings.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  The theory behind savings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Savings in the context of national finances

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Supplying a reserve currency 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  The future role of China’s yuan 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  Let’s gaze into the crystal ball.

  

  The Economic Vibe Check

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

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

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

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

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

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

  AI is Eating the World

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  The China Factor

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

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

  

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

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

  Energy

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  The Elon Playbook

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Monica Showalter via AmericanThinker.com,

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

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

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

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

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

  

  The banned flag looks like this:

  

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

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

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

  The excuses from headquarters were really pathetic:

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  According to Wikipedia:

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

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

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

  • 9.62% or 962 was African American

  • 7.66% or 766 was Asian

  • 2.46% or 246 was Filipino American

  • remaining were Indian and Other Ethnicities.

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

  Don’t think so.

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

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

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

  Note that word “vehemently.” 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) September 30, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

  

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

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

  

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

  

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

  

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

  More in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

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

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

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

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

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

  Vinyl

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

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

  8-Track

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

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

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

  Cassettes

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

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

  CDs

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

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

  Digital Music Formats

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

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

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

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

  RankMusic formatsRevenue in 2021

  1Streaming$11.5 billion

  2Vinyl$1.0 billion

  3CD$0.6 billion

  4Downloads$0.5 billion

   Other$1.4 billion

   Total$15.1 billion

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

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

  The Vintage Comeback?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — Rob Lee (@RALee85) January 14, 2023

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  1. CONVICTED BITCOIN INVESTORS

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

  

  Unique bitcoin addresses continues to grow across the board.

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

  

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

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

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

  2. TOTAL ADDRESSABLE MARKET

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

  

  Estimations of global stores of wealth.

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

  3. TRANSFER VOLUME

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

  

  Bitcoin transfer volume was higher than ever in USD terms.

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

  4. RARE OPPORTUNITY IN BITCOIN’S PRICE

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

  

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

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

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

  5. MACROECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

  Source: Dylan LeClair

  6. BITCOIN MINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE

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

  

  Bitcoin mining difficulty continues to rise.

  

  Bitcoin hash rate continues to rise.

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

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

  

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

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

  7. INCREASING SCARCITY

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

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

  

  Bitcoin’s illiquid supply continues to grow.

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

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

  

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

  

  Bitcoin balance on exchanges decreased in 2022.

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

  CONCLUSION

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

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

  *  *  *

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  As the Epoch Times notes,

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

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

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

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

  Previous Expungement Attempts

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

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

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

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

  A ‘Political Hoax’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Yes, yes they are.

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  *  *  *

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  — Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) January 12, 2023

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  As the Post continues:

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

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

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

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

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

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

• "For The Record"
  “For The Record”

  By Peter Tchir, chief strategist at Academy Securities

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

  For the Record #1

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

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

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

  For the Record #2

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

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

  For the Record #3

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

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

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

  On the Record

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

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

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

  On the Road

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

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

  Consensus is Neutral

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  What’s Next for Inflation?

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

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

  What Will the Fed Do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

  What Will the Economy Do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

  What About Earnings?

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

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

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

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

  It’s a Moving Picture, not a Snapshot

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Bottom Line

  Stocks

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

  Rates

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

  Credit

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

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

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

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

  You know it’s bad when…

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  via @RNCresearch pic.twitter.com/kq8k0f0pVU

  — TRUTH PUKE (@TruthPuke) January 15, 2023

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

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

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

Digest powered by RSS Digest

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

  Authored by Abir Ballan via The Brownstone Institute,

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  Let’s dive into this year’s findings.

  2023’s Risk Profile

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

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

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

  How Prepared Are We?

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Submitted by Gun Owners Of America.,

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

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

  🚨BREAKING🚨

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  *   *   * 

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

  

  Global food prices remain at crisis levels.

  

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Pfizer and Moderna did not respond to requests for comment.

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

  The Data

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Initial Thoughts

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

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

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

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

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

  Standards Fall

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

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

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

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

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

  Other Calls

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

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

  Read more here…

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Read more here…

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Via Consortium News/ProPublica,

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

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Read her full report here.

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

  Gas Stoves Linked to Childhood Asthma

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

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

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

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

  

  ‘Unrealistic’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Republican Bill

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

   

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

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

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

  Regulator Says He’s Not Seeking a Ban

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

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

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

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

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

  

  Credit is much more than bank deposits

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Interest rates in 2023

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  A funding crisis is in the making

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

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

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

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

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

  Funding difficulties are ahead

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Foreign ownership of dollars and dollar assets

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

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

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

  

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

  The decline of the petrodollar and rise of the petroyuan

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

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

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

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

  Russia is likely to stir the currency pot

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Weather for NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida is predicted to be favorable for this evening. Launch time is expected at 5:55 pm EST.

  Looking forward to seeing Falcon Heavy fly tonight! Launch is schedule for 5:55 pm Eastern just after sunset. Should be spectacular! pic.twitter.com/bXLdKWaewG

  — Michael Baylor (@nextspaceflight) January 14, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The partially classified mission for the Space Force is called USSF-67. The rocket’s payload is two military satellites that support communications and technology demonstration experiments. 

  

  The most recent Heavy launch was in early November. Its classified payload was for the Space Force. Today’s launch will be the fifth Heavy launch, and three more are planned for the first half of 2023. 

  In addition to the Heavy launches, SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket launched 60 times in 2022. A lot of attention has turned to SpaceX to help propel the American space race. 

  Weeks ago, CNBC reported SpaceX raised $750 million in a new round of funding that values the company at $137 billion. 

  SpaceX was just considered a possible option for astronauts leaving the International Space Station as their return to Earth could be jeopardized by the Russian Soyuz spacecraft that sprang a coolant leak. 

  *  *  *

  Watch the launch live here:

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 17:00

• Heavy Storms Help California To Almost Eliminate Extreme Drought From State
  Heavy Storms Help California To Almost Eliminate Extreme Drought From State

  Authored by Naveen Anthrapully via The Epoch Times,

  California, which has been reeling under the grip of drought, has received respite due to the multiple storms that hit the state and elsewhere in the past weeks, helping it deal with drought conditions in several regions and filling up many of the smaller reservoirs.

  “A long-term drought, dating back to the 2019–2020 winter, continues across California, the Great Basin, and parts of the Pacific Northwest,” according to the National Drought Summary on Jan. 10.

  “However, the intense precipitation in California the past few weeks—particularly late December and early January—has significantly reduced drought intensity in California. Most of the state saw a 1-category improvement this week.”

  According to the Jan. 12th drought map for California, regions classified as facing extreme drought conditions, dubbed “D3,” have almost disappeared from the interior areas of the state.

  

  In just a single week, the portion of the state facing D3 conditions declined from 27.1 percent to 0.32 percent. Regions classified as facing severe drought, D2, fell from 71.14 percent to 46 percent during this period.

  During the past couple of weeks, 24.5 trillion gallons of water fell in California owing to a series of atmospheric river storms. Since Dec. 26, 2022, seven atmospheric rivers have dumped up to 30 inches of rain in some regions of the state.

  Filling Up Reservoirs

  The heavy rains have resulted in small reservoirs getting filled in several communities across California. In, for example, the Marin Municipal Water District, in the north of the state, all seven reservoirs recently hit 100 percent capacity.

  Four of the 10 reservoirs owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District are also full. Seven reservoirs run by the East Bay Municipal Utility District are 84 percent full. However, the largest reservoirs are not yet full, officials warn, because drought conditions in the state are not yet over.

  The Oroville reservoir up north in Butte County, the second-largest reservoir in California, is only 49 percent full, which is 90 percent of its historical average. Shasta Lake is only 44 percent full, which is 77 percent of its historical average.

  “The sum of the state’s six largest reservoir stores increased from 5 million as of Nov. 30, 2022, to 7.3 million as of Jan. 10, 2023 (from 54 percent of long-term average to 74 percent of long-term average),” the National Drought Summary said.

  “Only one of the six largest reservoirs is near its long-term average, and three of them hold only 43–61 percent of their long-term averages as of Jan. 10.”

  Drought Conditions Elsewhere

  A study published in the journal Nature last year found that the past 22 years have been the driest period in the American Southwest’s last 1,200 years. To completely get rid of drought conditions in the region, multiple seasons of precipitation at 120–200 percent of the normal levels are estimated to be needed.

  

  The current storm conditions are not, however, a guarantee that California’s drought conditions would end soon. In December 2021, the conditions were very wet, which raised hopes that the drought was ending. However, the months of January, February, and March ended up being the driest in California’s recorded history.

  The same happened in 2013, when a wet December was followed by a very dry January and February. Though big snow totals are welcome, there is still a “long way to go before the critical April 1 total,” said Sean de Guzman, manager of the snow surveys and water supply forecasting unit at the California Department of Water Resources, according to a news release on Jan. 31.

  “It’s always great to be above average this early in the season, but we must be resilient and remember what happened last year. If January through March of 2023 turns out to be similar to last year, we would still end the water year in severe drought with only half of an average year’s snowpack,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 16:30

• We Must Have The Truth
  We Must Have The Truth

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  I have been trying to tackle the “fringe” issues (read: the issues the mainstream won’t give way on) regarding Covid since the pandemic first began in 2020. So far, I think I’ve done a decent job in helping flesh out many “conspiracy theories” about Covid that instead, have turned out to be “conspiracy facts”.

  Among them, I’ve written about managing our Orwellian response to Covid, the notoriously sensitive nature of PCR testing, the CDC moving its data goalposts, the likely nature of Covid coming from a lab leak (here and here and here) and the U.S.’s role in said leak and the media’s hysterical coverage of ivermectin.

  Additionally, for those that haven’t heard it yet, in an attempt to continue the “other side” of Covid discourse, I published a new podcast with Dr. Peter A. McCullough, who has dozens of peer-reviewed publications on Covid-19 and has commented extensively on the medical response to the COVID-19 crisis in The Hill, America Out Loud, and cable networks like ABC and Fox News. 

  I am always happy to welcome new content from The Brownstone Institute, one of the last few beacons of common sense left in the world of actual journalism.

  This week they published a new piece on Covid and our response to it, called We Must Have The Truth. I reached out to the publication last year and requested permission to share their content when I enjoy it, in full, with my readers, which they kindly granted. If you’re interested in the topic – or simply just having a grasp on the objective truth – I believe it is a “must read”.

  The article is written by Pat Fidopiastis, who is a Professor of Microbiology at California Polytechnic State University.

  ---

  On April 2, 2020, a paddle boarder was chased by authorities and taken into custody. This event should have caused unanimous outrage over the absurdity of what happened – law enforcement arrested a lone paddle boarder on Santa Monica Bay for the crime of “flouting coronavirus closures.” 

  Traditional voices that could have questioned unscientific authoritarian policy instead provided cover. The Los Angeles Times justified law enforcement’s ridiculous response by quoting a scientist who made the claim (presumably with a straight face): “..[SARS-CoV-2] could enter coastal waters and transfer back into the air.” Setting aside the absurdity of this and every other justification for closing beaches, hiking trails, and parks, think of the narrative it perpetuated — the virus is so insidious that even those who dared to paddle board alone on the ocean might somehow spread it to the rest of us. 

  The paddler’s arrest was an early indication that something had changed in our country. A “new normal” was spawning from the chaotic, unscientific, politicized pandemic messaging mainly coming from biased news media and the once venerable Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Dr. Anthony Fauci. The result was bitter contempt between two sides of the COVID-19 debate that metastasized into a deep distrust for science. 

  In an understatement of the century, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky recently summed up her agency’s role in promoting distrust in science by stating that they did not “reliably meet expectations.” Thus, it’s pretty clear that for their part, nothing much will change. Dr. Fauci proclaimed that because he “represents science” any criticism of him is a direct attack on science. Translation, we shouldn’t expect any productive capitulation from him either. 

  Although the CDC acknowledged playing a role in the growing distrust in science, none of their professed forms of atonement, such as promising to share data faster and doing a better job of translating science into policy will restore trust without a process that includes honest debate. 

  Over the past two years, the CDC cherry-picked data from articles rushed to print in their own journal (Morbidity Mortality Weekly Report) to justify a lot of bad policy, including masking schoolchildren, which is still happening today, or pushed the completely unscientific assertion that vaccine immunity is superior to natural immunity. 

  On the other hand, they buried data showing that upon reinfection, vaccinated people without prior COVID-19 diagnosis were at greater risk of hospitalization than the unvaccinated with prior COVID-19. 

  Dr. Walensky also boldly stated that, “Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick.” The untruthful messaging that vaccination stopped infection and transmission was justification for an appalling trend of people mocking the COVID-19-related deaths of the unvaccinated. 

  It’s unlikely the families targeted by such attacks will hear any apologies, even though Dr. Fauci’s four shots did not protect him from reoccurring COVID-19, or that Dr. Birx admitted that inflated vaccine efficacy claims were based on hope, not science. 

  ---

  Get 60% Off: If you enjoy pieces like this and you are still not a subscriber of QTR’s Fringe Finance, here’s 60% off: Get 60% off forever

  ---

  At the start of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci told us not to buy masks because they do not work. When the politics changed, Fauci reversed himself and became the proponent of wearing not just one mask – but several. Dr. Fauci’s excuse for the flip-flop was his only truth on the matter – he admitted that he lied, albeit “nobly.”

  For his encore, Dr. Fauci confidently opined on the level of vaccine uptake required for herd immunity. Eventually he admitted to guessing at numbers to frighten people into compliance. To be clear, Dr. Fauci used deception, not science, to support his version of public health policy. 

  Anybody who was “on the fence” about trusting Fauci, the self-proclaimed embodiment of “the science,” should have been forcefully pushed off after his attempts to obfuscate when testifying to Congress on whether the US government funded “gain of function” research that very likely created SARS-CoV-2. 

  The loss of trust was greatly amplified by activist scientists and most of the news media. Dr. Fauci refused to say anything critical of the nationwide social justice protests that might have discouraged people from participating in behaviors known to spread respiratory viruses. 

  However, scientists and news sources eagerly reported alleged death tolls purportedly caused by Trump rallies, while claiming “no evidence of protest spread.” 

  How could scientists determine whether the protests caused any disease transmission or death if contact tracers were not allowed to ask if someone attended a protest?

  The weaponization of science to censor, persecute, delegitimize, and threaten those who had differing opinions has never happened on this scale in this country. 

  

  Fig. 1. Comparison of daily per capita cases between Texas (orange), which lifted its mask mandate in March 2021, California (red), and New York (Green), which continued their masking policies. 

  Even President Biden capitalized on the politicization of mask-wearing by accusing the elected leader (and by extension the citizens) of Texas of “Neanderthal thinking” for removing the mask mandate in 2021. Meanwhile, states such as California and New York were praised for “following the science.” 

  A simple comparison of the epidemic curves between these states did not justify the divisive rhetoric (Fig. 1). But rather than have these conversations, it was easier to just slander dissenters and censor intelligent discussion. 

  As the old saying goes, “a lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on.” Thankfully, the truth finally has its boots on and is catching up on many fronts, such as the questionable effectiveness of mask mandates. 

  The “Neanderthal thinking” jab was uttered around the time the news media, outraged by Governor Ron DeSantis’ steady leadership in Florida, hoped to get “Ron DeathSantis” trending on social media. 

  Not surprisingly, the data told a different story about Florida (Fig. 2). It’s clear that “follow the science” was just a slogan. Politics, lies, and vindictive moral superiority are baked into our nation’s COVID-19 policy.

  

  Fig. 2. Age-adjusted COVID-19 deaths in Florida and California. The circles are proportional to state population. Although these states adopted dramatically different policies, they had comparable outcomes.

  Trust in science might never be restored in people who lost their livelihood to unscientific lockdowns or vaccine mandates. But, here’s some advice for people like Dr. Walensky and Dr. Fauci to get back some of the trust.

  1) Go back to the basics of Public Health: “Voluntary measures are more likely to induce cooperation and protect public trust than coercive measures, and are more likely to prevent attempts to avoid contact with the healthcare system.” 

  2) Invite dissenting experts to the table for open policy debate. Excess malaria and opioid deaths in young people, while millions of children were thrusted into acute starvation, are examples of significant COVID-19 policy failures. Great Barrington Declaration scientists warned about such collateral damage, but were maligned and censored. At the very least, the public would have benefitted from a different perspective on the risk of catching COVID-19 from ocean spray. 

  3) Vindictive moral superiority is terrible public health messaging. Heed the advice from an article in The Atlantic: “Viruses are not moral agents, and infection is not a personal failure.”  

  4) Sincerely apologize to people who were fired, maligned, censored, or physically harmed, then tell us your justification for ignoring counter data and continuing policy that encouraged these unnecessary outcomes.

  5) none of the above will matter if public health officials do not tell the truth, including the nuance, and trust that the American people can handle it. George Santayana famously said, “Those that cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Let’s hope we’ve learned from our mistakes, because given the state of the world right now, we cannot afford to repeat them. 

  ---

  About The Brownstone Institute

  The Brownstone Institute is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization founded May 2021. Its vision is of a society that places the highest value on the voluntary interaction of individuals and groups while minimizing the use of violence and force including that which is exercised by public or private authorities. This vision is that of the Enlightenment which elevated learning, science, progress, and universal rights to the forefront of public life. It is constantly threatened by ideologies and systems that would take the world back to before the triumph of the ideal of freedom.

  The motive force of Brownstone Institute was the global crisis created by policy responses to the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020. That trauma revealed a fundamental misunderstanding alive in all countries around the world today, a willingness on the part of the public and officials to relinquish freedom and fundamental human rights in the name of managing a public health crisis, which was not managed well in most countries. The consequences were devastating and will live in infamy.

  About the Author

  Pat Fidopiastis is a Professor of Microbiology at California Polytechnic State University.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 15:30

• Wind Farms Eyed In Surge Of Dead Whales On NJ, NY Beaches
  Wind Farms Eyed In Surge Of Dead Whales On NJ, NY Beaches

  In a case of odd bedfellows, environmental groups and Republican politicians are calling for a pause in offshore wind farm development following a string of whales washing up dead on New Jersey and New York beaches.  

  Seven whales have turned up dead in little over a month. The latest victim, a 20- to 25-foot juvenile Humpback whale, turned up in Brigantine, New Jersey on Thursday afternoon, close to a Coast Guard station. 

  “The wave of dead whales is the ocean sounding the alarm, and we must heed the warning,” said Cindy Zipf, executive director of Jersey-based Clean Ocean Action, after the sixth whale washed up in Atlantic City on Jan. 7 with signs of head trauma. “[The wind farm development] is too much, too fast. It’s outrageous and our ocean deserves better.” 

  

  On Friday, Congressman Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ) announced he would seek a federal investigation. “Ocean life is being put at risk as our governor and president force through their Green New Deal policies, without giving full consideration to their real-world impacts.

  Drew sits on the House Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee. New Jersey Republican state Senator Vince Polistina called for a pause in the offshore construction:

  “The work related to offshore wind projects is the primary difference in our waters, and it’s hard to believe that the death of (seven) whales on our beaches is just a coincidence.”

  For others officials, though, it’s damn the whales, full speed ahead. Democratic New Jersey governor Phil Murphy, on Friday said that, while “this is tragic, obviously,” suspicions that tie the dead whales to the wind farm development were “unfounded and premature.” 

  New Jersey has been on a quest to distinguish itself as the top offshore-wind state on the east coast. The Garden State has already approved three offshore wind farms and is soliciting more requests. 

  

  Clean Ocean Action says the installation of offshore windmills usually involves exploration of the sea floor using low-frequency sounds in the same frequency that whales use, with the risk that they could become disoriented or otherwise harmed.  

  Earlier this week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said it was unaware of any humpback whale having previously been confirmed as a victim of offshore wind projects. Among other human perils, whales can fall victim to ship strikes…but could sonar disorientation increase that risk? 

  The Marine Mammal Stranding Center said it can take months to figure out a beached whale’s cause of death. In the meantime, expect Governor Murphy to continue racing to bolster New Jersey’s green energy credentials.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 15:00

• FDA Adviser Says Young And Healthy People Shouldn’t Get Latest COVID Boosters
  FDA Adviser Says Young And Healthy People Shouldn’t Get Latest COVID Boosters

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A vaccine adviser to the Food and Drug Administration is questioning whether young, healthy people should get new COVID-19 boosters, arguing those shots should be used for older individuals.

  “I believe we should stop trying to prevent all symptomatic infections in healthy, young people by boosting them with vaccines containing mRNA from strains that might disappear a few months later,” wrote Dr. Paul A. Offit, an FDA vaccine panel adviser and professor of pediatrics at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, in New England Journal of Medicine on Jan. 11.

  

  In his article, Offit cited two studies suggesting that bivalent boosters, which target the original COVID-19 strain and two Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA. 5, do not “elicit superior immune responses.”

  “Why did the strategy for significantly increasing BA.4 and BA.5 neutralizing antibodies using a bivalent vaccine fail?” he asked. “The most likely explanation is imprinting. The immune systems of people immunized with the bivalent vaccine, all of whom had previously been vaccinated, were primed to respond to the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2. They therefore probably responded to epitopes shared by BA.4 and BA.5 and the ancestral strain, rather than to new epitopes on BA.4 and BA.5.”

  Offit noted that based on those studies, “boosting with a bivalent vaccine is likely to have a similar effect as boosting with a monovalent vaccine” but stressed that “booster dosing is probably best reserved for the people most likely to need protection against severe disease.”

  Another doctor appeared to agree with Offit’s conclusions regarding “imprinting.” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told U.S. News that “it may be that people’s immune systems are so primed to respond to the ancestral strain spike protein that a reformulated booster is unable to fully stimulate the immune system because it has been ‘imprinted’ by the original version of the virus.”

  More Details

  Data and studies have shown that older adults and people who have compromised immune systems are most at risk of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms, hospitalization, and death. Children, meanwhile, have long been shown to have the lowest chance of death, hospitalization, or developing severe symptoms since the pandemic started.

  Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and FDA said that everyone over the age of 6 months get updated boosters at least two months after their last doses of the vaccine. The bivalent boosters were authorized under emergency use for children aged 6 months to 4 years on Dec. 9.

  Meanwhile, a small number of Americans have received the updated boosters, according to the CDC. As of Jan. 4, some 15 percent of individuals aged 5 and older received the bivalent shots, while about 38 percent of adults aged 65 and older have gotten them.

  That same CDC data also shows that about 80.9 percent of all Americans received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine since they were rolled out two years ago, while 69 percent have completed their initial, “primary series.”

  An FDA spokesperson Abigail Capobianco responded to Offit’s article this week, telling NBC News that Offit allegedly used “selective” data to reach his conclusions and that “we strongly believe that the totality of the available evidence continues to support the use of these vaccines in all age groups.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 14:30

• Roomba Robot Vacuum Testers Find "Intimate" Photos Of Themselves On The Web
  Roomba Robot Vacuum Testers Find “Intimate” Photos Of Themselves On The Web

  Well, it looks like you can score one for all of the “conspiracy theorists” who have said they don’t like “smart” appliances in their home because they feel like they were being spied on.

  And you can tell those writing off these concerns that intimate photos of some Roomba tester vacuums have magically turned up on Facebook after being ascertained by Venezuelan gig workers.

  One woman even found photographs of herself on the toilet, taken by her robot vacuum. What a time to be alive!

  Breitbart reported last week that gig workers had posted pictures online where they were discussing “work-related matters”. One photo was a woman sitting on a toilet seat with her shorts pulled down to her mid thighs – it was taken by her Roomba J7 series robot vacuum, the report says.

  

  The photos were sent to iRobot by Scale AI, a startup that contracts workers to label AI data used to train artificial intelligence, the report says. Users had agreed to “participate in the data collection” as part of a testing. They signed consent forms but now say they feel “misled” about the true nature of the consent. 

  Albert Fox Cahn, executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, told Brietbart: “There is a real concern about whether the company is being deceptive if people are signing up for this sort of highly invasive type of surveillance and never fully understand… what they’re agreeing to.”

  The MIT Technology Review conducted an investigation and determined it to be gig workers in Venezuela. There were also photos of a child and a woman using the restroom, the report says. iRobot has terminated its agreement with ScaleAI in response to the investigation.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/14/2023 – 14:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Nixon Threatened To Reveal CIA's Involvement In Kennedy Assassination, Roger Stone Claims
  Nixon Threatened To Reveal CIA’s Involvement In Kennedy Assassination, Roger Stone Claims

  Authored by Roger Stone via Stone Cold Truth with Roger Stone,

  A stunning, long-overlooked Nixon Watergate-era tape shows Richard Nixon warning CIA Director Richard Helms that he knows of CIA involvement in the murder of John F. Kennedy- “I know who shot John.” 

  This shocking new tape depicts Nixon increasingly besieged by Watergate but unaware that at least four of the Watergate burglars were still on the CIA payroll at the time of the break-in, and that the CIA had thus infiltrated the burglary team. Recently declassified documents reveal that Watergate Special Prosecutor Nick Akerman was aware of both the CIA’s advance knowledge and involvement in the break-in — but said and did nothing.

  Senator Howard Baker, the Republican Leader on the Senate Watergate Committee and his counsel Fred Thompson himself, a future U.S. Senator from Tennessee, like Baker, stumbled on the CIA’s deep advanced knowledge and direct involvement in the Watergate break-in. Baker and Thompson both knew that at least four of the Watergate burglars were on the CIA payroll at the time of the break-in and that through CREEP Security Director James McCord, had infiltrated the burglary team. Senate Watergate Committee Chairman Sam Ervin stoutly refused to allow Baker and the Committee Republicans including Edward J. Gurney of Florida the right to publish a Minority Report which noted this stunning information regarding the CIA.

  Nixon deeply distrusted the CIA because he knew that President Eisenhower had ordered the agency to give top secret briefings to both Nixon and Kennedy after both were the certain nominees of their parties. Nixon was sore that Kennedy utilized the information in their debates, attacking Nixon for being “soft” on communist Cuba, knowing full well that Nixon had chaired a working group as Vice President overseeing preparations for the “Bay of Pigs” invasion. Nixon, of course, could not reveal this upcoming attempt to topple Castro in the details.

  White House Domestic Policy Chief John Ehrlichman wrote that when he served as the White House Legal Counsel, Nixon ordered him to request that the CIA hand over all documents pertaining to John Kennedy’s murder. Nixon was furious when Richard Helms, the CIA Director, refused his presidential order to hand them over.

  This stunning new Watergate-era tape captures an increasingly besieged Nixon desperately seeking to mobilize the CIA in his defense by threatening to expose their greatest secrets. Nixon also knew that Congressman Gerald Ford, as a member of the Warren Commission, had, at the explicit direction of J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI Director, altered the official autopsy diagram for President John F. Kennedy; moving the marking from a bullet in his upper back to his neck in order to accommodate the single-bullet theory and to conceal the fact that Kennedy had been hit with more than the reported three shots.

  Nixon was acutely aware of Ford’s act of treachery in concealing the truth about Kennedy’s murder and the CIA’s involvement in it.

  White House Chief of Staff General Alexander Haig told me in an interview that “Nixon had Ford by the balls.”

  The five-star General said, “Nixon had me tell Ford that is he (Nixon) was going down, he was taking everybody with him.”

  Subscribe to Stone Cold Truth here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:40

• The Vinyl Comeback Continues
  The Vinyl Comeback Continues

  Continuing one of the more surprising comebacks of the digital age, vinyl album sales in the United States have grown for the 17th consecutive year.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter reports, according to Luminate, 43.5 million LPs were sold in the U.S. last year, up more than 48-fold compared to 2006 when the vinyl comeback began.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  So how big is vinyl’s comeback really?

  Should we all dust off our old record players to prepare for the analog future of music?

  According to Luminate’s 2022 Year-End Music Report, LPs accounted for 43 percent of album sales in the United States last year, which is quite substantial.

  Factoring in streaming and downloads of single tracks, however, that number drops to less than 5 percent of album equivalent music consumption, which puts things in perspective.

  However big or small the impact of rising LP sales on the music industry’s bottom line may be, it’s fascinating to witness a hundred year-old technology come back from near extinction. Physical goods, it appears, still hold value for many people, even in the digital age.

  Interestingly, vinyl LPs appear to have become a bit of collectors’ item for fans, who listen to music digitally but still want to own a physical object: according to Luminate, only 50 percent of vinyl buyers actually have a record player.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:20

• Pelosi Punts Stocks, Takes Huge Losses In Tesla, Salesforce And PayPal
  Pelosi Punts Stocks, Takes Huge Losses In Tesla, Salesforce And PayPal

  Now-former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has filed her latest periodic transaction report detailing recent stock trades – and she booked a ton of year-end losses.

  

  For starters, Pelosi booked $854,000 in losses on PayPal

  

  She also took a $733,000 loss in Salesforce, Inc.

  

  Pelosi also took a $511,000 loss in Tesla.

  

  Pelosi also took smaller losses in Roblox Corporation ($235,836), Netflix ($129,000), Disney ($114,138), and Alliance Bernstein ($11,500).

  Interestingly, Pelosi also sold $2.6 million worth of Google parent Alphabet ($GOOGL), but doesn’t list details of a gain or loss, as was the case with her losses.

  

  Is Nancy taking advantage of “tax loopholes for the rich” to avoid paying her fair share?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:10

• What Is The US "Gas Stove Ban" Really About?
  What Is The US “Gas Stove Ban” Really About?

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  What sounds like overeach in itself, is actually a cover for something potentially far, far worse…

  

  The Biden administration is apparently looking to ban gas stoves, calling them a “hidden danger”. But while that sounds bad enough, a deeper dive shows – as usual – it’s not really about what they say it’s about.

  Talk of banning gas stoves and “unregulated indoor air quality” could be a Trojan horse designed to get even more “smart” monitoring technology into your home.

  Let’s jump in.

  ARE GAS STOVES DANGEROUS?

  Well, according to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the New Scientist and million other outlets and pundits who started talking about it in the last two days, yes.

  Earlier this week near-identical articles from the National Review, Bloomberg and CNN detail how the US Consumer Product Safety Commission will be opening “public comment on the dangers of gas stoves sometime this winter”.

  The articles claim:

  The emissions have been linked to illness, cardiovascular problems, cancer, and other health conditions. More than 12 percent of current childhood asthma cases are linked to gas stove use, according to peer-reviewed research published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health last month.

  Now would be a good time to talk about the phrase “linked to”. It’s always a good one to look out for in any mainstream publication. Journalists love it because it implies causation without stating it.

  Consider, one hundred per cent of serial killers have been linked to the ingestion of water and the wearing of shoes.

  If this manipulative use of language were not evidence enough of an agenda, the rather premature deployment of the race card proves it:

  Senator Cory Booker (D., N.J.) and Representative Don Beyer (D., Va.) wrote a letter to the agency last month urging the commission to address the issue and calling the harmful emissions a “cumulative burden” on black, Latino and low-income households.

  SO, WILL THEY BAN THEM?

  Actually, probably not.

  Considering that, according to Bloomberg, some 40% of US homes use gas stoves to cook, an outright ban would be impractical to the point of madness. You can’t criminalise 40% of the country. It would be almost unenforceable.

  Perhaps they might try a “phasing out”, as they plan for petrol cars in California.

  But most likely of all is that this was never really about banning stoves in the first place.

  OK, SO WHAT’S IT REALLY ABOUT?

  What we’re seeing here looks to be your classic bait-and-switch. Having established a “problem”, the powers that be suggest a solution they have no intention of ever carrying out (the more unreasonable the better).

  When this measure is inevitably rejected by the public, the government will then proceed to suggest – or pay an NGO to suggest to them – a “compromise” measure.

  The compromise is no compromise at all, of course, but actually what they wanted to do from the beginning. Nevertheless, the whole process is sold in the media as a victory for whichever party happens to be in opposition, and cited as evidence that “the system works”.

  Tellingly, as I am writing this, Biden has already “ruled out a ban due to backlash”, and Vox were already using the “compromise” a lot in an article they published yesterday.

  However, what that “compromise” would be in this case isn’t clear at first, you have to do a little digging.

  One clue is present in the National Review article [emphasis added]:

  The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers argues that cooking produces harmful emissions regardless of the kind of stove used. “Ventilation is really where this discussion should be, rather than banning one particular type of technology,” Jill Notini, a vice president at the association, told Bloomberg. “Banning one type of a cooking appliance is not going to address the concerns about overall indoor air quality. We may need some behavior change, we may need [people] to turn on their hoods when cooking.”

  And you’ll find another in the abstract of the original report on “Cooking With Gas, Household Air Pollution, and Asthma: Little Recognized Risk for Children”, published in the Journal of Environmental Science in April 2021:

  The impact [of gas stove cooking] on children can be substantial because […] indoor air is unregulated.

  “Ventilation is where this discussion should be”, after all “cooking produces harmful emissions regardless of the kind of stove” and a ban wouldn’t address “concerns about overall indoor air quality” which is currently “unregulated”.

  Do you see where this is going?

  It’s not about gas stoves, and it’s not about asthma – it’s about “indoor air pollution”, and more importantly how they plan on “regulating” it.

  In one of those startling coincidences we’ve all got so used to witnessing in modern geopolitics, just as the US is talking about indoor air quality because of gas stoves, other countries around the world are doing the same thing for totally different reasons.

  Singapore is considering new regulations on indoor air quality too, but because of formaldahyde.

  Last month The Conversation was running articles claiming “indoor air pollution kills”, while Sir Chris Whitty, the UK’s chief medical officer, was “demanding action on indoor air pollution”.

  On Monday, in a Guardian lifestyle piece purportedly about scented candles, Svetlana Stevanovic calls indoor air quality a “going concern”.

  Two days ago The Tyee, an “independent” Canadian magazine which receives some funding from the Canadian government, ran an op-ed headlined:

  We Need a Revolution in Clean Indoor Air

  Which attempts to link improving indoor air quality to “ending Covid” (whilst making sure to sufficiently fluff the vaccines, of course).

  Just yesterday the Irish Times published an article about the dangers of poor indoor air quality.

  In a rather interesting piece of timing, the air hygiene technology company AeroClean and Molekule, a market leader for air purifiers, finalised a public stock merger…also just yesterday.

  Two days ago it was announced IKEA would be selling their own smart air monitors, the same day Samsung announced their new “smart air purifier”.

  Earlier today Chinese tech giant Xiaomi issued a media release about their new smart air monitoring technology.

  A recent report expects the global air monitor technology market to swell to nearly 6 billion dollars in the next three years.

  But I’m sure this is all just a coincidence.

  WHERE DOES THIS LEAD?

  Well, if I had to guess I would suggest some new “smart” technology is coming that will monitor air quality and indoor C02 emissions. Like smart electricity and water meters, but for your air.

  Interestingly, the World Economic Forum agrees with me, publishing an article on their website last July headlined “Indoor air pollution: What causes it and how to tackle it”, which claims:

  indoor air pollutants can now be detected with more precise, efficient, and compact sensors thanks to advances in environmental sensing technology. As a result, intelligent home systems may soon use sensors like these to keep track of indoor air quality and notify the ventilation system before dangerous levels are reached.

  As part of “backing down” from the stove ban, they will introduce a new bill which sees “smart air monitors” become mandatory in all new-build houses, hotels and rented accommodation.

  Just like smart electricity meters, smart air monitors would almost certainly be used to harvest huge amounts of data and give states or corporations the ability to control your home.

  If your “indoor air” isn’t “clean” enough; if you use your stove too much, burn too many scented candles or emit too much co2, expect to get penalized  in some fashion until you learn how to be more responsible.

  More smart technology, more monitoring, and ultimately more control.

  So, while it’s possible the gas stove ban talk will resolve itself into the cliche new tax or fines or some other petty scheme for bilking the many out of their wages, the signs are certainly there it might be something more sinister.

  Meanwhile, expect to keep seeing reports on gas stoves damaging the climate, or stories about poor indoor air quality making covid worse.

  The usual bought-and-paid-for columns that support every new normal narrative.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 23:00

• Where 'Military-Style' Weapons Are Banned In The US
  Where ‘Military-Style’ Weapons Are Banned In The US

  An so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazine ban has come into effect in Illinois after the state legislature voted for the law and governor J.B. Pritzker signed it this week.

  During the signing ceremony, Pritzker mentioned the mass shooting the state saw last year at a July 4 parade in Highland Park near Chicago as a reason to pass concrete legislation instead of paying lip service to improvements and sending “thoughts and prayers”.

  2022 saw a slew of mass shootings that rocked the United States, also including those at a supermarket in a predominantly black neighborhood in Buffalo, N.Y., at a primary school in Uvalde, Texas, at an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs, Colo., and a Cheasapeake, Va., Walmart, among others. Semiautomatic rifles, often of the AR-15 style, were used in the majority of 2022 mass shootings.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, Illinois joins eight states and the District of Columbia in implementing such a ban on ‘military-style’ weapons.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The vast majority of U.S. states do not restrict the sale of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, according to Giffords Law Center.

  Seven more states currently have restrictions in place that fall short of an assault weapons ban, including bans on high-capacity magazines in five states.

  Large capacity magazines are capable of holding up to 100 rounds, while states that restrict these magazine usually only allow ten to 15 rounds per magazine.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 22:40

• What We Know About Robert Hur, Special Counsel Probing Biden’s Handling Of Classified Documents
  What We Know About Robert Hur, Special Counsel Probing Biden’s Handling Of Classified Documents

  Authored by Samantha Flom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Robert K. Hur, the special counsel appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to lead the probe into President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents, is a former federal prosecutor with a “long and distinguished career,” according to Garland.

  “As U.S. Attorney, [Hur] supervised some of the Department’s more important national security, public corruption, and other high-profile matters,” the attorney general noted in announcing Hur’s appointment on Jan. 12.

  

  Hur held the role of U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland from April 2018 until February 2021. He was appointed to that role by former President Donald Trump, and unanimously confirmed by the Senate in March 2018.

  Adding that he would ensure Hur received all of the necessary resources to perform his investigation, Garland continued, “I am confident that Mr. Hur will carry out his responsibility in an even-handed and urgent manner, and in accordance with the highest traditions of this Department.”

  Hur’s appointment as special counsel follows a tumultuous week for the Biden administration as new details regarding the classified documents discovered at President Joe Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware, home and former office at the Penn Biden Center in Washington continue to come to light.

  “I will conduct the assigned investigation with fair, impartial, and dispassionate judgment,” Hur said in a Jan. 12 statement released by the Justice Department (DOJ). “I intend to follow the facts swiftly and thoroughly, without fear or favor, and will honor the trust placed in me to perform this service.”

  A ‘Distinguished Career’

  A graduate of Harvard University and Stanford Law School and former law clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Hur joined the DOJ’s Criminal Division in 2003, where he served as counsel and special assistant to then-Assistant Attorney General Christopher Wray.

  Wray, who is now the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has come under scrutiny in recent months for his leadership as fears of political bias against conservatives have escalated in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach and the bureau’s August raid of former President Donald Trump’s home.

  While working for Wray, Hur worked on counterterrorism, corporate fraud, and appellate matters.

  Between 2003 and 2018, Hur went back and forth between the Justice Department and private law practice at King & Spalding, serving as an assistant U.S. attorney from November 2007 to January 2014 and principal associate deputy attorney general from June 2018 to April 2018.

  In the latter role, Hur served as the principal counselor to then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, assisting with oversight of the National Security, Civil, Criminal, and Antitrust divisions, all 93 U.S. attorneys’ offices, and the FBI.

  Rosenstein is noteworthy for his involvement in the Trump-Russia collusion investigation—particularly for appointing Robert Mueller as special counsel and signing off on the application to spy on former Trump associate Carter Page.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 22:20

• Most Expensive And Cheapest Appliances To Use By Region
  Most Expensive And Cheapest Appliances To Use By Region

  Wholesale power prices jumped last year and are yet another cost burden on consumers’ wallets. A new study breaks down the cheapest and most expensive household appliances to use based on geographical region. 

  Jonathan Merry, CEO of MoneyTransfers, revealed the biggest electricity users in American homes are air conditioners. The average AC unit costs consumers up to $1,062 per year. While the cost per kilowatt differs a few cents across the country, this can translate into cost-savings by region. 

  For example, consumers in the Midwest who run air conditioners for eight hours a day benefited the most from lower power prices and saw a $200 reduction in their energy bill than those in the West, with an average annual cost of $826. 

  Electric heaters, tumble dryers, washing machines, fridge freezers, and dishwashers were found to be other appliances that cost the most to run, but there are cost benefits to living in certain parts of the country where appliances are cheaper to operate. 

  Another example of the cost savings of living on a cheaper power grid is a tumble dryer costs up to $8.64 per month in the West but only $6.72 monthly in the Midwest. 

  Cheapest and most expensive appliances to run per year by region. 

  

  And average monthly costs to run appliances by US region. 

  

  “Many households are looking for ways to save money on their energy bills amidst the rising cost of living worldwide – and our hope is that this data will educate people on what everyday household appliances have the biggest impact on energy usage,” Merry said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 22:00

• Johnstone: Western Journalists Are Cowardly, Approval-Seeking Losers
  Johnstone: Western Journalists Are Cowardly, Approval-Seeking Losers

  Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

  Research conducted by New York University’s Center for Social Media and Politics into Russian trolling behavior on Twitter in the lead-up to the 2016 US presidential election has found “no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.”

  

  Which is to say that all the years of hysterical shrieking about Russian trolls interfering in US democracy and corrupting the fragile little minds of Americans — a narrative that has been used to drum up support for internet censorship and ever-increasing US government involvement in the regulation of online speech — was false.

  And to be clear, this isn’t actually news.

  It was established years ago that the St Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency could not possibly have had any meaningful impact on the 2016 election, because the scope of its operations was quite small, its posts were mostly unrelated to the election and many were posted after the election occurred, and its funding was dwarfed by orders of magnitude by domestic campaigns to influence the election outcome.

  What’s different this time around, six years after Trump’s inauguration, is that this time the mass media are reporting on these findings.

  “Journalists” do this thing where they hype Party propaganda when needed, and then when the story is no longer relevant they quietly publish the truth about how they were totally lying. This way they can say “we DID report the facts!”

  Truly bad people. https://t.co/NlIkeIpVKy

  — ⚡David Angelo⚡ (@MrDavidAngelo) January 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The Washington Post has an article out with the brazenly misleading headline “Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on 2016 voters“. Anyone who reads the article itself will find its author Tim Starks acknowledges that “Russian accounts had no measurable impact in changing minds or influencing voter behavior,” but the insertion of the word “little” means anyone who just reads the headline (the overwhelming majority of people encountering the article) will come away with the impression that Russian trolls still had some influence on 2016 voters.

  “Little influence” could mean anything shy of tremendous influence. But the study did not find that Russian trolls had “little influence” over the election; it failed to find any measurable influence at all. 

  Starks does some spin work of his own in a bid to salvage the reputation of the ever-crumbling Russiagate narrative, eagerly pointing out that the report does not explicitly say Russia definitely had zero influence on the election’s outcome, that it doesn’t examine Russian trolling behavior on Facebook, that it doesn’t address “Russian hack-and-leak operations,” and that it doesn’t say “doesn’t suggest that foreign influence operations aren’t a threat at all.”

  None of these are valid arguments. Claiming Russia definitely had no influence on the election at all would have been beyond the scope of the study, the report’s authors do in fact argue that the effects of Russian trolling on Facebook were likely the same as on Twitter, the (still completely unproven) “Russian hack-and-leak operations” were outside the scope of the study, as is the question of whether foreign influence operations can be a threat in general.

  What Starks does not do is make any attempt to address the fact that mainstream news and punditry was dominated for years by claims that Russian internet trolls won the election for Donald Trump. He does not, for example, make any mention of his own 2019 Politico article telling readers that the Russian Twitter troll operation ahead of the 2016 election “was larger, more coordinated and more effective than previously known.”

  

  Starks also does not take the time to inform The Washington Post’s readership about the false reporting this story has received over the years from his fellow mainstream news media employees, like The Washington Post’s David Ignatius and his melodramatic description of the St Petersburg troll farm as “a sophisticated, multilevel Russian effort to use every available tool of our open society to create resentment, mistrust and social disorder” in an article hysterically titled “How Russia used the Internet to perfect its dark arts“. Or The New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg in her article “Yes, Russian Trolls Helped Elect Trump“, in which she argues that it looks increasingly as though the Internet Research Agency “changed the direction of American history.” Or NBC’s Ken Dilanian (a known CIA asset), who described Russian trolling on Twitter in the lead-up to the election as “a vast, coordinated campaign that was incredibly successful at pushing out and amplifying its messages,” a claim that was then repeated by The Washington Post. To pick just a few out of basically limitless possible examples.

  Starks and his editors could easily have included this sort of information in the article. It would have greatly helped improve clarity and understanding among The Washington Post’s audience if they had. It would have been entirely possible to clearly spell out the fact that all those other reports appear to have been incorrect in light of this new information, or at least to acknowledge the fact that there is a glaring difference between this new report and previous reporting. It would do a lot of good for awareness to grow, especially among Washington Post readers, that there’s been a lot of inaccurate information circulating about Russia and the 2016 election these past several years.

  But they didn’t. And nobody else in the mass media has done so either. Even The Intercept’s report on the same story, despite having the far more honest headline “Those Russian Twitter bots didn’t do $#!% in 2016, says new study,” doesn’t name any names or criticize any outlets for their inaccurate reporting on Russian trolls stealing the election for Donald Trump.

  Indeed, it’s very rare in the west to see mainstream journalists hold other mainstream journalists accountable for their false reporting, facilitation of propaganda, or journalistic malpractice, unless it’s journalists whose approval they don’t care about like members of the opposite political faction or independant media reporters. This is because western journalists are worthless, obsequious cowards whose entire lives revolve around seeking the approval of their peers.

  How interesting that this is coming out now. Will the Washington Post address the countless stories they wrote hyping Russian influence on the 2016 race? The Pulitzer they won for such coverage? https://t.co/NKVV58SB8Q

  — Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) January 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The most important reporting a journalist can do in the western world today is help expose the lies, propaganda and malpractice of other western journalists and news outlets. But that is also the last thing a western journalist is ever likely to do, because western journalists seek praise and approval not from the public, but from other western journalists.

  You can see this in the way they post on Twitter, with their little in-jokes and insider references, how they’re always cliquing up and beckoning and signaling to each other. Twitter is a great window through which to observe western journalists, because they really lay it all out there. Watch their bootlicking facilitation of status quo power, their ingratiating tail-wagging with each other, the way they gang up on dissenters like zealots burning a heretic. To see what I’m talking about you have to pay attention not to their viral tweets that go off but to all the rest that receive little attention, because the ones that take off are the ones the public are interested in. If you watch them carefully it becomes clear that for most of them the intended audience of the majority of their posts is not the rank-and-file public, but their fellow members of the media class.

  Look at this Twitter conversation between Australian journalists right after the Ecuadorian embassy cut off Julian Assange’s internet access in 2018 for a good illustration of this. Former ABC reporter Andrew Fowler (now a vocal supporter of Assange) questions ABC’s Michael Rowland for applauding Ecuador’s move, and ABC’s Lisa Millar rushes in to help Rowland argue that Assange is not a journalist and doesn’t deserve the solidarity of journalists, and that Fowler is putting himself on the outside of the groupthink consensus by claiming otherwise. Millar and Rowland are part of the clique, Fowler is being ostracised from it, and Assange is the heretic whose lynching they’re braying for:

  

  Western journalists have a freakish herd-like mindset that makes the derision and rejection of their class the most nightmarish scenario possible and the approval of their class the most powerful opiate imaginable. They’re terrified of other journalists turning against them, of being rejected by the people whose approval they crave like a drug, of being kicked out of the group chat. And that’s exactly what would happen if they began leveling valid criticisms at mass media propaganda in public. And that’s exactly why that doesn’t happen.

  The western media class is a cloistered, incestuous circle jerk that only cares about impressing other members of the cloistered, incestuous circle jerk. It doesn’t care about creating an informed populace or holding the powerful to account, it cares about approval, inclusion and acclaim from its own ranks, regardless of what propagandistic reporting is required to obtain it. The Pulitzers are mostly just a bunch of empire propagandists giving each other trophies for being good at empire propaganda.

  A journalist with real integrity would spurn the approval of the media class. It would nauseate and repel them, because it would mean you’ve been aligning yourself with the most powerful empire in history and the propaganda machine which greases its wheels. They would actively make an enemy of the mainstream western press.

  Journalists without integrity — which is to say the overwhelming majority of journalists — do the opposite.

  US Military Thanks And Praises Retiring CNN “Journalist” For Her Service

  “The US military has such adoration for Barbara Starr because she is a war propagandist, just like the rest of the mainstream western news media who report on US foreign policy.”https://t.co/jD6xiyFQn6

  — Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) December 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  None of this will be news to any of my regular readers, who will likely understand that the role of the mass media is not to inform but to manufacture consent for the agendas and interests of our rulers. But we shouldn’t get used to it, or lose sight of how odious it is.

  It’s important to be clear about how gross these people are. You can never be sufficiently disdainful of these freaks.

  *  *  *

  My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal, or buying an issue of my monthly zine. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

  Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

  Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 21:40

• China Still Dominates The Rare-Earth Market
  China Still Dominates The Rare-Earth Market

  Rare earth elements (REE) are metals used in many of today’s key technologies, such as wind turbines, phone screens and even electric motors.

  As this infographic from Statista’s Martin Armstrong reveals, anyone who needs one of these 17 chemical elements will have a hard job sourcing them from anywhere but China.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The People’s Republic has the world’s largest reserves of these not so rare metals.

  According to analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey, around 44 million tons of REO (rare earth oxides) lie dormant in the Chinese soil.

  The second largest stockpile is in Vietnam, but according to geologists’ estimates, it is only half as large as China’s, at 22 million REO tons. Likewise, more than 20 million tons are believed to lie hidden beneath Russian and Brazilian ground.

  While not catapulting it to a rare earth superpower, Sweden just announced the discovery of what could be the largest known deposit in Europe – an area estimated to contain over one million metric tons of REO.

  Currently, rare earths are being mined nowhere in Europe, with 98 percent of rare earths used in the EU in 2021 imported from China.

  China is responsible for around 61 percent of global mine production and thus mines by far the largest share of the elements traded on the world market.

  The United States, on the other hand, while the second largest producer, is a small player relatively speaking with a market share of around 15.5 percent.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 21:20

• 'Normalization' Of Emergency Use Authorizations Concerns Health Experts
  ‘Normalization’ Of Emergency Use Authorizations Concerns Health Experts

  Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved an unprecedented number of emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for drugs, tests, and medical devices since the beginning of the pandemic.

  

  Between March 2020 and June 2021, more than 600 EUAs were authorized, according to Fortune.

  This has caused concern among healthcare professionals, with some studies claiming that overreaction by regulators may have led to a decline in industry standards (1, 2).

  As clarified in the journal Yale Medicine, “An EUA can only be granted when no adequate, approved, available alternatives exist, and when the known and potential benefits outweigh the potential risks. A EUA also only lasts as long as the public health emergency for which it was declared.”

  Prior to 2020, the public health emergency that allowed the highest number of EUAs was the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, with 22 EUAs overall for personal protective equipment (PPE), antivirals, and diagnostic tests. The only emergency-authorized vaccine prior to the 2020 pandemic was the anthrax vaccine.

  Given the drastic increase in EUAs, experts worry that this time, the FDA has gone too far.

  The Normalization of EUA Drugs and Lack of Informed Consent

  Cardiologist Dr. Jack Askins has pointed out that the unprecedented onslaught of emergency authorizations in drugs, vaccinations, medical devices, COVID tests, and PPE has normalized EUA drugs and products as being fully FDA-approved rather than being investigational.

  Prof. Linda Wastila from the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, whose expertise is in pharmacotherapy and drug policy, told The Epoch Times that the torrent of 600 EUAs makes it very difficult for healthcare professionals to remain informed of the approval statuses of new drugs.

  For example, Askins previously told The Epoch Times that he noticed some of his colleagues who prescribe Paxlovid lacked adequate awareness of the many interactions and contraindications Paxlovid has with other drugs.

  Paxlovid can interact with 43 different drug classes and over 550 active drug ingredients.

  Even before the pandemic, it was hard for clinicians and pharmacists to keep up, given that around 40 novel therapeutics are approved by the FDA yearly, not counting generic drugs.

  Wastila said that compared to traditional FDA-approved products, there has been less informed consent with the EUA products during the pandemic.

  Informed consent is defined as “the process in which a health care provider educates a patient about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of a given procedure or intervention,” and patients must make their own voluntary decision.

  Informed consent is especially important with EUA products as they are investigational products. Articles on EUAs have compared taking these products to participating in experimental trials (1, 2).

  

  Part of informed consent is letting patients know that what they are taking is experimental and that they have the right to refuse.

  But Askins highlighted that very few patients were provided informed consent when they took EUA products such as the vaccine.

  He said that three patients, each of whom received the bivalent booster as a fourth shot, were admitted to his clinic. He asked all three if they were given information on the potential risks and the emerging data on concerns and problems with it.

  “All three said no,” he said, “I do not think they understand emergency use authorization versus full FDA approval.”

  It also should be noted that EUAs do not come with long-term safety data.

  While drugs fully approved by the FDA come with a densely written package insert on side effects and drug mechanisms, for many EUA products, such as the COVID-19 vaccines, these sections are left blank.

  A Johnson & Johnson spokesperson said this was intentional, leaving it to consumers to search online for the most up-to-date information on safety and effectiveness as the data is published.

  However, Wastila sees this lack of information as potentially dangerous.

  “To me at least, [it] conveys the fact that they don’t really know whether a product is safe and effective when it’s an EUA product.”

  The Erosion of Drug Safety Standards

  Dr. David Bell, formerly a medical officer with the World Health Organization, said that the overuse of EUAs during the pandemic has lowered drug safety standards put in place to protect patients.

  EUA products are very different from FDA-approved drugs. However, public health agencies’ encouragement to use EUAs has blurred the separation between EUAs and FDA-approved drugs.

  Wastila fears that EUA is replacing FDA approval as the norm.

  “[EUAs] have lost all meaning,” said board-certified internist and nephrologist Dr. Richard Amerling. “People don’t hear ‘emergency use;’ they only hear ‘authorized.’”

  Askins argued that there has been intentional public messaging from the FDA to make EUA appear just as safe and equivalent to a fully tested and licensed product.

  In August 2021, the FDA approved the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine under the label of Comirnaty.

  Having an FDA-approved vaccine should have nullified the EUA for other COVID-19 vaccines, or at the very least, the Pfizer EUA vaccine.

  Yet, the Pfizer EUA vaccine remains on the U.S. market. The FDA also wrote that for the Pfizer vaccine, “doses distributed under the EUA are interchangeable with the licensed doses.”

  

  An order issued in November 2021 by Judge Allen Windsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida rejected this claim, stating that while the two versions may be medically interchangeable, they are not legally interchangeable.

  Judge Windsor’s order also mentioned that FDA officials could not prove that Comirnaty vaccines even exist in the United States.

  Nevertheless, the full FDA approval of Comirnaty has led many health providers to assume that the Pfizer injections being administered are the licensed versions.

  Wastila recounted an experience at her former local pharmacy.

  She was picking up some antibiotics and, while chatting with the pharmacist, she asked about the uptake of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

  “[The pharmacist] goes, ‘Oh, they’re great. Everyone’s so happy that they’re FDA approved,’” Wastila recounted. “That’s literally a quote from the pharmacist’s mouth.”

  “I said, ‘They’re not FDA approved, though.’ She goes, ‘Oh, Pfizer is.’”

  So Wastila asked to see an unopened package of the vaccine, and the pharmacist showed the doctor a vial.

  The pharmacist presented an EUA vaccine; it did not have the Comirnaty label, which would be printed according to labeling requirements.

  Wastila told the pharmacist that the pharmacy was still using the EUA vaccines.

  “[The pharmacist] was just like kind of amazed,” said Wastila, “But there’s no informed consent if even your dispensers aren’t aware that it is EUA or FDA approved.”

  More Emergency Declarations and EUAs Likely To Come

  Health experts argue that COVID-19 pandemic management has already lowered the standards for future emergency declarations and EUAs.

  Dr. Robert Malone, biochemist and one of the inventors of the mRNA drug platform, said that monkeypox, which was declared a public health emergency in August 2022 with no deaths in the U.S. at the time, is a good example of this reduced standard.

  Given that the disease almost exclusively affects men who have sex with men, a specific population demographic, and has led to 20 deaths in the United States thus far, Bell and Wastila both said that it was ludicrous that it was deemed a public health emergency.

  “Now the cat’s out the bag, [public health emergency declarations] can be used really easily now because there are precedents [such as] COVID-19 and monkeypox that were not very severe,” Bell said.

  The smallpox vaccine, commercially labeled as JYNNEOS, was also rapidly given EUA approval in a matter of days.

  The FDA wrote that it was “inferred” that a smallpox vaccine would be effective against monkeypox, given that both viruses are from the same family.

  However, according to a statement made by the CDC on Oct. 19, 2022, there was no data on the effectiveness of JYNNEOS or ACAM2000, an alternative to JYNNEOS, for monkeypox.

  

  The vaccine also has cardiological side effects. Pooled data across 22 studies showed that of the more than 7,800 people vaccinated, six developed cardiac-related adverse events that were determined to be causally related to vaccination.

  Concerns have been raised about the respiratory syncytial virus, known as RSV, in children. Though the virus has not been declared a national public health emergency, declarations have been made in Oregon and Colorado, and some health experts have urged a national declaration.

  “We’ve had RSV and the flu every year, and all of a sudden, it’s become a big issue again, and it’s because we’re afraid of every viral infection, [we’re] normalizing being fearful of every contagion,” said Wastila.

  Loss of Trust in Public Health

  As a pharmacotherapy professor who is in contact with pharmacists and staff working with the FDA, Wastila confessed that the pandemic has been a “rude awakening” for her.

  “Physicians, dispensers, and pharmacists just blindly follow the safety and effectiveness of a product just because it has the FDA seal of approval, even if that ‘approval’ is an EUA.”

  Though financial backdoor dealings have been suspected and discussed for decades, Malone argues that the pandemic has brought “corruption” to the surface.

  Financially, 65 percent of the FDA’s budget comes from pharmaceutical companies, with a large proportion of this money coming through sponsorship for drug approval applications.

  

  The 1992 Prescription Drug User Fee Act, also known as the PDUFA, requires pharmaceutical companies to pay the FDA for drug approvals.

  Wastila said that after speaking to colleagues and students who work in the FDA, she senses that the PDFUA may have established “a culture of entitlement” from the drug companies to have their drugs approved and marketed.

  “The sponsors feel like, hey, we’ve paid for this,” she said, “It’s like a pay-for-play situation.”

  Many members of drug evaluation boards also receive financial payments from drug companies.

  When evaluating a drug, there needs to be “zero conflict of interest,” said Amerling. “Declaring that you have a financial conflict of interest doesn’t make it go away.”

  Bell said that the low uptake of vaccines in children under five years of age is a sign that people no longer trust public health agencies.

  “They [The FDA] were unable to produce any solid data showing that there’s an all-cause benefit to those children,” said Bell.

  For healthcare professionals and members of the public who once trusted the FDA, some feel that they no longer have a place to go for advice on treatments.

  Amerling said this would force clinicians to be very conservative with their treatment.

  As the Chief Academic Officer at The Wellness Company, Amerling educates doctors to prescribe only medications with a safety record of at least several years.

  “Don’t be that person to jump on the bandwagon with a new product,” he said, “Post-marketing experience can reveal unanticipated adverse events, and you’re not going to see them even with the initial studies, even if they’re well done.”

  “When medium and long-term risk is unknown, it’s best to err on the side of caution, especially if benefits are small.”

  Wastila added that there has been a considerable information gap on drug safety since the pandemic, with little scrutiny from drug regulators.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 21:00

• These Are North America's Biggest Sources Of Electricity By State And Province
  These Are North America’s Biggest Sources Of Electricity By State And Province

  On a national scale, the United States and Canada rely on a very different makeup of sources to generate their electricity.

  The U.S. primarily uses natural gas, coal, and nuclear power, while Canada relies on both hydro and nuclear. That said, when zooming in on the province or state level, individual primary electricity sources can differ greatly.

  In the infographic below, Visual Capitalist’s Selin Oğuz takes a look at the electricity generation in the states and provinces of these two countries using data from the Nuclear Energy Institute (2021) and the Canada Energy Regulator (2019).

  

  Natural Gas

  Natural gas is widely used for electricity generation in the United States. Known as a “cleaner” fossil fuel, its abundance, coupled with an established national distribution network and relatively low cost, makes it the leading electricity source in the country.

  In 2021, 38% of the 4120 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity generated in the U.S. came from natural gas. Not surprisingly, more than 40% of American states have natural gas as their biggest electricity source.

  Here are some states that have the largest shares of natural gas-sourced electricity.

  

   

  In Canada, natural gas is only the third-biggest electricity source (behind hydro and nuclear), accounting for 11% of the 632 TWh of electricity produced in 2019. Alberta is the only province with natural gas as its main source of electricity.

  Nuclear

  Nuclear power is a carbon-free energy source that makes up a considerable share of the energy generated in both the U.S. and Canada.

  19% of America’s and 15% of Canada’s electricity comes from nuclear power. While the percentages are close to one another, it’s good to note that the United States generates 6 to 7 times more electricity than Canada each year, yielding a lot more nuclear power than Canada in terms of gigawatt hours (GWh) per year.

  As seen in the map, many states and provinces with nuclear as their main source of electricity are concentrated in the eastern half of the two countries.

  In the U.S., Illinois, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina are top producers in terms of GWh/year. Illinois and South Carolina also have nuclear as their primary electricity source, whereas Pennsylvania’s electricity production from natural gas exceeds that from nuclear.

  The vast majority of Canada’s nuclear reactors (18 of 19) are in Ontario, with the 19th in New Brunswick. Both of these provinces rely on nuclear as their biggest source of electricity.

  Renewables: Hydro, Wind and Solar

  Out of the different types of renewable electricity sources, hydro is the most prevalent in North America. For example, 60% of Canada’s and 6% of the U.S.’s electricity comes from hydropower.

  Here are the states and provinces that have hydro as their biggest source of electricity.

  

   

  Wind and solar power collectively comprise a small percentage of total electricity generated in both countries. While no state or province relies on solar as its biggest source of electricity, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota rely primarily on wind for their electricity, along with Canada’s Prince Edward Island (PEI).

  Coal and Oil

  Coal and oil are emission-heavy electricity sources still prevalent in North America.

  Currently, 22% of America’s and 7% of Canada’s electricity comes from coal, with places such as Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia still relying on coal as their biggest sources of electricity.

  Certain regions also use petroleum to generate their electricity. Although its use for this purpose is declining, it is still the biggest source of electricity in both Hawaii and Nunavut.

  Over the next few years, it will be interesting to observe the use of these fossil fuels for electricity generation in the U.S. and Canada. Despite the differences in climate commitments between the two countries, lowering coal and oil-related emissions may be a critical part of hitting decarbonization targets in a timely manner.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 20:40

• The Tyranny Of Minorities
  The Tyranny Of Minorities

  Authored by Bill King via RealClearPolitics.com,

  We hear a great deal today about the “protection of democracy.”

  For Democrats, it is all about voter suppression and election denial, and for Republicans, election fraud. But the great irony, and far greater threat to democracy, comes from both political parties as they routinely thwart the will of the majority of American people to satisfy their primary base voters and the special interests that finance their parties.

  

  Neither really give a tinker’s damn about what the majority of Americans want.

  Case in point. In 2019, Texas passed a near total ban on abortion after fertilization. The law became effective on the overturning of Roe v. Wade. There is an exception for a serious health risk to the mother but there is no exception for cases of rape or incest.

  A recent University of Texas poll showed that only 13% of Texans thought there should be no exception in cases of rape or incest. 87% supported such an exception up to six weeks into the pregnancy and 64% up to twelve weeks. Only 29% supported the exception at any time during the pregnancy.

  Yet, the Texas legislature passed a bill without a rape/incest exception, notwithstanding that 87% of Texans think the law should include one. How can that be described as anything other than undemocratic?

  Of course, the same is true with Democrats. Polling has consistently shown that a supermajority of Americans oppose President Biden’s immigration policies since he was elected. Nonetheless, it took him two years to even acknowledge there was a problem and then offer only half-hearted measures.

  On issue after issue, contrary to the popular media narrative that Americans are hopelessly divided and polarized, the truth is a majority of Americans agree with centrist, common-sense policies. Morris Fiorina, in his book, Unstable Majorities, uses American National Election Survey data going back over five decades to show that “normal Americans continue to be centrists.”

  Both Democrats and Republicans are correct: Our democracy is under siege. But it is not under siege from voter suppression, election denial, or election fraud. It is under siege because our historic two-party system has been perverted by primaries that seek to discourage participation by anyone but “true believers,” by computer-driven gerrymandering, and by a media industry that profits by pandering to the extremes of the ideologic spectrum. As Jason Altmire so vividly explained in his book Dead Center, any elected official that tries to buck the system is punished, frequently by being voted out of office by primary voters. As result, our two legacy parties represent the views of the voters that show up for their primaries, not the views of the majority of Americans.

  When it comes to threats to our democracy, both parties should be reciting the words of the great American philosopher, Pogo (aka Walt Kelly): “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 20:20

• How Do You Feel About Religion?
  How Do You Feel About Religion?

  How do you feel about religion?

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, depending on which country you are in, this question is more or less likely to be met with a shrug or even an objection to religious belief.

  In China, the highest percentage of people among the 56 countries and territories included in the Statista Global Consumer Survey is non-religious or atheist, the latter describing people rejecting the idea that there is a God.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Among European countries, Germany ranks high for the share of its non-religious and atheist population, which stands at around a third of survey respondents aged 18 to 64.

  Even in a country often associated with religiousness – Italy – a quarter of people between these ages are not religious today.

  Religion has a somewhat stronger hold on the United States, Russia and Brazil, while in South Africa, the non-religious are in the single digits at just 9 percent of adults under the age of 65. In India, finally, being non-religious or atheist is virtually unheard of, with just two percent of survey respondents saying they fell into one of the two categories.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 20:00

• What The January 6 Videos Will Show
  What The January 6 Videos Will Show

  Authored by Julie Kelly via AmGreatness,

  The jury trial of Richard Barnett, the man famously photographed with his feet on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office on January 6, 2021, is underway in Washington, D.C.

  Nearly two years to the date of his arrest, Barnett finally had a chance to defend himself in court on multiple charges, including obstruction of an official proceeding.

  But it was not the fiery, outspoken Barnett who provided the most jaw-dropping testimony in the trial so far.

  To the contrary, one of the government’s own witnesses confirmed under defense cross-examination that “agents provocateur” were heavily involved in instigating the events of January 6. 

  

  Captain Carneysha Mendoza, a tactical commander for U.S. Capitol Police at the time, testified Wednesday how a group of agitators destroyed security barriers and lured people to Capitol grounds that afternoon:

  Defense Counsel Brad Geyer: Isn’t it true that you had a lot of people, a large quantity of people walking down two streets that dead-ended at the Capitol?

  Mendoza: Yes, sir.

  Geyer: And would it be fair to say that at least at some of the leading edges of that crowd, they contained bad people or provocateurs; is that fair? 

  Mendoza: It’s fair.

  Report Ad

  Report Ad

  Geyer: Dangerous people?

  Mendoza: Yes.

  Geyer: Violent people?

  Mendoza: Yes.

  Geyer: Highly trained violent people?

  Mendoza: Yes.

  Geyer: Highly trained violent people who work and coordinate together?

  Mendoza: Yes

  It was a stunning admission, representing the first time a top law enforcement official stated under oath (to my knowledge) that a coordinated, experienced group of agitators engaged in much of the mischief early that day. Under further questioning, Mendoza acknowledged those same individuals “pushed through barriers, removed barriers, threw barriers over the side, removed fencing, and eased the flow of people into places where they shouldn’t be.” This happened around 1:00 p.m., the same time the joint session of Congress convened to debate the results of the 2020 presidential election.

  Hiding the pivotal role of still unidentified—and uncharged—agitators on January 6 is just one reason why the government has successfully sought to conceal thousands of hours of footage captured by the Capitol police’s security system before, during, and after the protest. 

  As I explained in May 2021, Capitol police immediately designated roughly 14,000 hours of surveillance video as “security information” that should not be released to the public.

  Thomas DiBiase, general counsel for Capitol police, the technical owner of the video trove, signed an affidavit in March 2021 objecting to the widespread dissemination of footage “related to the attempted insurrection.” DiBiase claimed the agency wanted to prevent “those who might wish to attack the Capitol again” from accessing interior views of the building.

  The Department of Justice subsequently labeled the footage as “highly sensitive government material” subject to strict protective orders in court proceedings. Defendants must comply with onerous rules before viewing any surveillance video associated with their case.

  There are, of course, exceptions for any party helping to enforce the “insurrection” narrative. For example, the House committee handling Donald Trump’s post-January 6 impeachment was allowed to use portions of the super-secret reel. So, too, was HBO in producing its January 6 documentary. The January 6 select committee aired extensive if highly selective surveillance footage during their televised performances.

  And that brief clip of Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) running in a hallway on January 6? It was clearly an image intended to mock his alleged cowardice that day. And, of course, it was Capitol surveillance video.

  If it’s safe to place the video in the hands of Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the biggest deceiver in Congress, and random HBO film producers, then it’s safe to place all the footage in the hands of the American people. Which is why calls by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to fully release the surveillance video are a welcome, and necessary, step in providing a complete account about the events of January 6 to the public.

  (The Committee on House Administration, now under Republican control, is one of two congressional committees with access to the full library of video.)

  The recordings, Gaetz said in an interview this week, “would give more full context to that day rather than the cherry-picked moments that the January 6 committee tried to use to inflame and further divide our country.”

  That demand undoubtedly will be met with fierce resistance by the same lawmakers, government agencies, and media organizations incessantly bleating about the need to “tell the truth” about what happened before and on January 6.

  So, what exactly will the tapes reveal? 

  The footage, which captured the inside and outside of the building, will show how many agitators and/or federal assets were staged at various locations early in the day. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) might finally get an answer to the question that FBI Director Christopher Wray refused to answer during a congressional hearing last year—whether FBI informants disguised as Trump supporters were planted inside the building prior to the initial breach.

  To that end, the video could show who instructed two men how to open the two-ton Columbus Doors on the east side of the Capitol Building, creating an access point for hordes of protesters.

  Ditto for entry points at other locations.

  Will the video identify the individuals who erected the “gallows” featuring an orange noose allegedly built to “hang” Vice President Mike Pence? Just like the identity of the suspect who allegedly planted the pipe bombs at the DNC and RNC, no one has been identified or charged with constructing that stage on government property—another unanswered question the footage will answer.

  The public undoubtedly will be shocked to see police officers from Capitol police and D.C. Metropolitan Police Departments viciously attacking crowds of people assembled outside the Capitol. Mendoza’s testimony also confirmed that Capitol police officers used nonlethal “munitions” on hundreds of individuals beginning shortly after 1:00 p.m. Weaponry included pepper balls—projectiles containing a chemical irritant shot from a launcher similar to a paintball gun—gas, rubber bullets, and flashbangs, a less-than-lethal grenade that likely caused the fatal heart attacks of two Trump supporters that afternoon.

  Not only will the public see what happened to those two men, Kevin Greeson and Benjamin Phillips, but they will also see evidence of the numerous, serious injuries inflicted on dozens of people, including children and elderly women, at the hands of police. Are Americans prepared to see how law enforcement handled the dead bodies of Ashli Babbitt and Rosanne Boyland?

  It will be tough to watch.

  More importantly, the footage will indicate which cameras were disabled before the protest. The government’s claim that security cameras are not installed outside the Columbus Doors is questionable at best. A full comparison between the Capitol’s closed-circuit television system and the cameras operable on January 6 is a must.

  House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Thursday endorsed Gaetz’s calls to release the footage.

  “I think the American public should actually see all what happened,” McCarthy told reporters.

  “Yes, I’m engaged to do that.”

  If McCarthy follows through on his promise, the world will see the biggest inside job—an actual coup—in U.S. history unfold before their eyes.

  Not only is it necessary to expose the truth of January 6 but to exonerate innocent Americans whose lives have been destroyed in the aftermath.

  Roll the tapes…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 19:40

• US Navy Veteran Released From Russian Custody In Kaliningrad
  US Navy Veteran Released From Russian Custody In Kaliningrad

  Another American who had been quietly held in Russian detention, and whose case has received no media spotlight or coverage since his arrest, has been released by the Kremlin after a year of detention. 

  US Navy veteran Taylor Dudley was released where he had been in detention in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, which lies between Poland and Lithuania. It comes following last year’s high profile prisoner exchange involving Brittney Griner and Victor Bout, and involved the mediation of former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. Dudley was delivered to the Polish border by Russian authorities, where he crossed back. The US had deemed his a “wrongful” detention.

  

  But unlike with the Griner case, or with other still detained Americans like Paul Whelan or Marc Fogel, the 35-year old Dudley – a Michigan native – had crossed into the Russian province of Kaliningrad during the Ukraine war, in April. The other American cases involved arrests and detentions prior to the Feb.24 Ukraine invasion.

  “Today, the Russian govt released my client, Taylor Dudley, a Navy vet, cross the Polish border,” , a spokesperson for the family, Jonathan Franks tweeted Thursday morning.

  According to background first reported in CNN:

  Taylor Dudley, 35, of Lansing, Michigan, was detained by Russian border patrol police in April 2022 after crossing from Poland into Kaliningrad, a Russian exclave which is territory governed by Moscow between Poland and Lithuania. He was in Poland attending a music festival, and it is not clear why he crossed the border.

  Dudley’s detention – which the US government had not deemed as “wrongful,” or based on arbitrary and discriminatory motivations – had not been widely publicized…

  Working alongside Gov. Richardson was the US Embassy in Warsaw, the Steve Menzies Global Foundation, and the James Foley Foundation – all who helped secure the release of Dudley.

  Franks’ tweet said additionally that “For every case in the James Foley Foundation count that is public, there are 3 that aren’t, and this is one of those cases.” Thus it appears the family and negotiators intentionally kept knowledge of Dudley’s plight out of the public eye, presumably to not negatively impact the negotiation process.

  

  CNN and others are reporting that no known exchange was made for Dudley. “The past 9 months have been difficult ones for the family and they ask the media to respect their privacy and give them the space to welcome Taylor home,” a family statement added. It’s still as yet unclear why he crossed the border in the first place, with all media statements describing this in an ambiguous and somewhat mysterious way.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 19:20

• Yes, Virginia, There Is A Deep State… And It's Worse Than You Think
  Yes, Virginia, There Is A Deep State… And It’s Worse Than You Think

  Authored by William Anderson via The Mises Institute,

  Mention the term “deep state” in polite company and most likely no one will want to speak to you the rest of the evening. The deep state is what Wikipedia calls “discredited,” something reeking of conspiracies, false accusations, and the substitution of fantasy for the truth.

  After the FBI raided Donald Trump’s home in Florida, Trump alluded to “deep state” actions, which brought predictable ridicule from the mainstream media. Trump was speaking conspiratorially, and if one follows the mainstream media these days, the only conspiracies are on the right. (You know, like the one in which the unarmed, ragtag January 6 rioters nearly overthrew the US government.)

  After the recent revelations about how Twitter worked to hide the story of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop, Trump attributed the secrecy to a plot by the “deep state.” However, while the facts of the story really are outrageous, I don’t believe it was as much a secret conspiracy as a case of people being able to engage in certain actions with no political consequences.

  

  Furthermore, journalist Matt Taibbi’s stunning revelations regarding FBI and CIA agents’ outright interference in the 2020 election via Twitter on the pretense that Russian operatives were spreading disinformation has further exposed both the involvement of federal law enforcement agents in partisan activities and the sad fact that those agents need not worry about being held accountable – especially if they are engaged in a “progressive” cause.

  The Standard Deep State Narrative

  One does not have to believe in a single conspiracy (not even about the 9/11 attacks) to understand that there really is what we can call a deep state. Indeed, what we might call the real deep state has nothing to do with conspiracies, secret meetings, and the like. Instead, this deep state operates in the open and in broad daylight, and that makes the deep state narrative an even greater threat than the secret cabal narrative.

  When I was a young adult, I read a novel by two anticommunist journalists called The Spike, in which a young, liberal, and crusading journalist uncovers a nest of Soviet agents embedded in the US government. The journalist’s story on the affair, however, is spiked by his employer (a Washington Post–like paper), but the protagonist manages to get the story out elsewhere. The result is that a compromised president is brought down and the federal government is able to ferret out the Soviet agents.

  Thus, in a dramatic moment, a motivated journalist and political allies expose the equivalent of the “deep state” and the US government makes a rightward turn. The deep state goes away.

  The Hard Truth

  Unfortunately, no novelist can write out our present deep state because that would be a bridge too far. The reason is that our present deep state simply is the executive branch of government, which has been written into our laws and our courts, and this branch has taken over much of the role originally assigned to the judicial wing of government, that of interpreting the laws.

  The real power of the modern state is in its civil service, which is composed of employees of all the federal departments and agencies—employees who hardly are neutral ideologically and politically, employees who are protected by civil service laws and by unions. When progressive regimes such as the Biden and Obama administrations occupy the West Wing and Congress, the federal courts become almost irrelevant. The president and his political appointees govern by executive orders, which, not surprisingly, the allegedly neutral government employees enthusiastically support.

  Much of modern lawmaking is by executive order, with many orders not even having to square with the statutes underlying them, something that has gone on for a long time. For example, when President Franklin Roosevelt seized private gold holdings in 1933, he based his executive order upon the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act. When President Biden announced student loan forgiveness, he based his order on the 9/11 Heroes Act, stretching that law and its obvious intent to the point that it was unrecognizable.

  While not all executive orders have the effect of Executive Order 6102, they nonetheless involve the executive branch of the US government assuming powers that well may violate the Constitution yet are carried out without a worry that any outside agency—including the US Supreme Court—will intervene. (Yes, the courts so far have slapped down Biden’s student loan forgiveness scheme, but the litigation process is not complete, and the courts can be unpredictable.)

  All-Powerful Bureaucracy Has Progressive Support

  One would think that educated Americans would blanch at the prospect of federal agencies making policies independent of congressional or court oversight, but the opposite is true, especially when federal agents pursue progressive policies. For example, when the Supreme Court placed some legal fences around the Environmental Protection Agency’s powers to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, the progressive establishment exploded in anger.

  For example, the New York Times, which carries the progressive standard, declared that the court had placed American lives in danger:

  Regulatory agencies staffed by experts are the best available mechanism for a representative democracy to make decisions in areas of technical complexity. The E.P.A. is the entity that Congress relies upon to figure out how clean the air should be, and how to get there. Asserting that it lacks the power to perform its basic responsibilities is simply sabotage.

  Governance by “experts” has been the progressive mantra for more than a century, the idea being that so-called experts embedded deep in government should be free to make whatever decisions they believe best to govern the rest of us. The assumption of the editors of the NYT is that the “experts” always (or at least usually) know what is best for everyone else and how to achieve those important social and economic ends.

  Likewise, the revelations that the FBI and CIA were coercing social media companies to censor anything that contradicted certain progressive narratives coming from Washington, DC, should have been banner headlines everywhere and the lead story on the evening news. Instead, mainstream progressive journalists attacked Matt Taibbi, or like David French, they downplayed the seriousness of what happened and made excuses for federal agents.

  (French argued that the only real question was whether federal agents had “violated the First Amendment” and that anything else was not fit for discussion. And, yes, he concluded that those agents probably had not violated the Constitution.)

  Conclusion

  We are not speaking of secret conspiracies in which nefarious actions are carried out in the darkness. These things are carried out in daylight, complete with the names of the characters involved, yet people who raise serious questions about the legality of these actions, let alone the question of right and wrong, are excoriated and ignored by our institutional gatekeepers.

  That is why I say that this version of the deep state is much worse than whatever the authors of The Spike might have believed to exist. The people involved do what they darn well please, all the while claiming they are the soul of democracy, and many Americans seem to either believe them or no longer care.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 19:00

• GOP-Led House Launches Probe Into Biden's "Absurd & Disgraceful" Botched Afghan Withdrawal 
  GOP-Led House Launches Probe Into Biden’s “Absurd & Disgraceful” Botched Afghan Withdrawal 

  The Republican-led House has launched a formal probe into the Biden administration’s chaotic and deadly Afghanistan troop withdrawal operation and evacuation of August 2021, which is to be complete with issuing subpoenas for US officials to undergo depositions, in order to gain a clear picture of what happened and the botched decision-making. This as there’s still yet to be any level of accountability for officials that oversaw the disaster.

  The Hill reports Friday, “Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who served as its ranking member previously, said the Biden administration has so far refused to hand over documents but that he is now formally requesting compliance as chair of the panel.”

  McCaul blasted the White House, saying “It is absurd and disgraceful that the Biden administration has repeatedly denied our longstanding oversight requests and continues to withhold information related to the withdrawal.”

  

  “In the event of continued noncompliance, the Committee will use the authorities available to it to enforce these requests as necessary, including through a compulsory process,” he added.

  A Thursday letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken demanded the handing over of relevant intelligence assessments, and internal agency documents, as well as any communications with either the Afghan government or Taliban that occurred in the lead-up to and during the withdrawal.

  It was among the most disastrous withdrawals from a foreign conflict theatre of US troops in American history, which closed a 20-year long. increasingly unpopular occupation. At the time, widespread comparisons were made with the April 1979 fall of Saigon and its images of American helicopters landing on the rooftop of the US embassy to evacuate desperate personnel and their families.

  13 US troops died as a result of a terror attack targeting a gate at Kabul international airport. Additionally about 170 Afghans died, as they had been crowded up against the gate that US Marines were manning.

  Other countries, notably China and Russia widely mocked the US and Pentagon for its handling of the Afghanistan pullout…

  Here come the astonishing scenes from last year when crowds of Afghans chased a #USA military cargo plane as it took off, some even risked their lives to cling to the aircraft to flee #Afghanistan.pic.twitter.com/26MYotiAPJ

  — Zhang Meifang张美芳 (@CGMeifangZhang) August 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The world also witnessed shocking scenes of two Afghans falling to their deaths after they sought to grab a hold of the undercarriage of a departing US Air Force C-17, after Kabul airport security broke down and huge crowds swarmed the runways. The body of another Afghan was found in the aircraft’s landing gear upon landing.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 18:40

• Comet Set To Graze By Earth For First Time In 50,000 Years – Might Be Seen With The Naked Eye
  Comet Set To Graze By Earth For First Time In 50,000 Years – Might Be Seen With The Naked Eye

  Authored by Michael Wing via The Epoch Times,

  An icy visitor from the far reaches of the solar system is expected to shoot past Earth and the sun in the coming weeks and it might be visible with the unaided human eye. This visitor from afar is a comet believed to have brushed by Earth before – some 50,000 years ago.

  Discovered in March 2022, the comet recently passed within Jupiter’s orbit and is heading for the inner solar system. Our witnessing the flyby soon to occur could be a once-in-a-lifetime astronomical occasion.

  Bright Enough for Naked Eyesight?

  Dubbed C/2022 E3 ZTF, the comet displays a greenish coma, the nebulous envelope surrounding a comet’s nucleus, and a yellow-tinged tail of dust and ion particles in its wake.

  Initially showing a stellar magnitude of 17 when it was discovered, according to EarthSky, C/2022 E3 ZTF’s brightness will increase as it approaches the sun, as the frozen matter of a comet’s nucleus sublimates when exposed to solar radiation sometimes causing a spectacular green “glow.”

  Just today the comet reached its perihelion, its closest distance from the sun, and currently shines with a magnitude of 7.4—The lower an object’s magnitude the greater its brightness. It’s magnitude is expected to increase to 5 or 6, the range visible to the naked eye, next month when it reaches its closest distance from Earth.

  So with dark skies and minimal moonlight or streetlight, C/2022 E3 ZTF might be seen without binoculars or a telescope. However, comets are notoriously unpredictable; it could be even brighter.

  

  The comet grows brighter as it speeds toward the sun. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  

  C/2022 E3 ZTF exhibits a green coma and yellow-tinged ion tail. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  Optimal Viewing Geometry

  Typically, as comets near the sun, they are drowned out by sunlight and banished from sight but unlike other comets C/2022 E3 ZTF’s trajectory presents great geometry for viewing from Earth. Appearing slightly past midnight over the coming weeks, it will stay visible despite its proximity to the sun—This holds true for stargazers in the northern hemisphere at least.

  Originally appearing in the north, the comet arced northwest to southwest and then seemed to loop as our vantage point on Earth changed while we orbited the sun. The comet then shot northward in early October, vanishing entirely from view for comet watchers in the southern hemisphere.

  C/2022 E3 ZTF is currently careening toward the Northern Crown and by month’s end will have neared Polaris, all the while getting brighter and closer to Earth. It will become visible to viewers south of the equator again in early February when it pops above their northern horizon.

  The comet will reach its closest distance from Earth on Feb. 2 and you can find it transiting in between the constellations Draco and Camelopardalis just south of Polaris. As it travels in a retrograde orbit (the opposite way as Earth’s orbit), it will be moving very quickly. Try spying it with your naked eye, otherwise use a pair of good binoculars.

  How Close?

  As for the size of this comet, its nucleus was measured to be about 1 kilometer across, according to AFP—relatively small compared to more famous comets such as NEOWISE, which appeared in 2020; more famously, Hale-Bopp appeared in 1997 exhibiting a diameter of 60 miles (37 kilometers). But what C/2022 E3 ZTF lacks in size, it compensates for in closeness.

  

  Comet C/2022 E3 ZTF presents optimal geometry in its trajectory, facilitating excellent viewing opportunities from Earth. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  

  C/2022 E3 ZTF grows brighter as it approaches its perihelion, closest distance from the sun. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  Having just reached its perihelion today, the comet now lies roughly 103 million miles (1.11 AU/166 million kilometers) from the sun. When it “grazes” by Earth on Feb. 2, it will be 27 million miles (0.29 AU/42 million kilometers) away, before it swerves outbound toward the outer solar system again.

  This is the first time said comet has entered our solar system since the Upper Paleolithic period 50,000 years ago. Scientists say it could be permanently ejected once it makes its departure from the solar system, AFP reported.

  But before we bid farewell, it offers an encore.

  A Date With Mars … And Adios

  Particularly for first-time comet spotters, C/2022 E3 ZTF presents a great sighting opportunity on Feb. 10 when it will appear extremely close to Mars. You can try taking a long-exposure photo for 20 to 30 seconds which might yield a fuzzy, tailed object beside the rust-red planet.

  As for where C/2022 E3 ZTF is headed, we might ask where it came from. The comet is believed to originate from the Oort Cloud, a theoretical vast sphere that surrounds the solar system inhabited by mysterious icy objects.

  

  The comet is set to near Mars as it makes its departure from the inner solar system. (Courtesy of Jose Francisco Hernandez)

  As for the comet’s unwieldy name, here’s the story behind that. It was first discovered during a survey on March 2, 2022, by astronomers Bryce Bolin and Frank Masci using the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF), located at Mt. Palomar in Southern California. Its name denotes the facility where it was discovered (ZTF), the year of its discovery (2022), and that it was the third (3) such object found in the year’s fifth half-month (A, B, C, D, E), hence C/2022 E3 ZTF.

  This visitor from afar will vanish from view by late April 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 18:20

• Gallup: Americans Split On Companies Taking Political, Social Stands
  Gallup: Americans Split On Companies Taking Political, Social Stands

  Americans are almost evenly split on whether companies should take public stands on social and political issues. A new Bentley University/Gallup poll finds that 52% of U.S. adults disapprove of such public posturing, while 48% support it. 

  We hasten to note that the pollsters don’t seem to approach the topic from an impartial perspective. That’s initially evident from the name of the undertaking: “The Force for Good Survey.” Then there’s this language on the survey website: 

  “Business can be a powerful force for positive change in our society. But are businesses doing enough to live up to that potential and make the world a better place?” 

  That said, even if the survey seems prone to cultivating the leftist stance on this question — which is asked among a variety of others — it surely provides directional insights, so let’s have a look. 

  While the big picture shows a roughly even split, differences start to emerge when results are sorted by age, with younger adults more prone to support corporate stances on current events. The poll found 59% of those 18 to 29 years old approve, compared to 43% of those 60 and over. 

  

  Those substantial gaps turn into enormous divides when you get to party affiliation: 75% of Democrats want companies to share their beliefs, compared to 18% of Republicans. Only 40% of independents want companies spouting off on current events.  

  

  Turning to other crosscuts, strong majorities of Asians (74%) and blacks (72%) support corporate pontification, while just 49% of Hispanics and 41% of whites do. 

  Meanwhile, women are more likely to back corporate preaching than men, by a 52% to 43% margin.

  

  The findings show the predicament companies face in deciding if they should speak out on everything from racism to LGBT activism and Covid policy, with substantial portions of the population on each side of that question. The pressures aren’t only external: businesses face pressure from their employees too.  

  Other top-level findings from the survey: 

  • 55% think business has a positive impact on society
  • 71% of young Americans think business hurts the environment
  • 84% of young Americans think businesses should promote diversity, equity and inclusion
  • 62% of blacks and 33% of whites think the federal government is effective in making a positive impact on people’s lives

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/13/2023 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Don't Trust The Government With Your Privacy, Property, Or Your Freedoms
  Don’t Trust The Government With Your Privacy, Property, Or Your Freedoms

  Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  How do you trust a government that continuously sidesteps the Constitution and undermines our rights? You can’t.

  

  When you consider all the ways “we the people” are being bullied, beaten, bamboozled, targeted, tracked, repressed, robbed, impoverished, imprisoned and killed by the government, one can only conclude that you shouldn’t trust the government with your privacy, your property, your life, or your freedoms.

  Consider for yourself.

  • Don’t trust the government with your privacy, digital or otherwise. In the two decades since 9/11, the military-security industrial complex has operated under a permanent state of emergency that, in turn, has given rise to a digital prison that grows more confining and inescapable by the day. Wall-to wall surveillance, monitored by AI software and fed to a growing network of fusion centers, render the twin concepts of privacy and anonymity almost void. By conspiring with corporations, the Department of Homeland Security “fueled a massive influx of money into surveillance and policing in our cities, under a banner of emergency response and counterterrorism.” For instance, all across the country, police are installing Flock Safety license plate readers as part of a public-private partnership program between police and the surveillance industry. These cameras, which upload data in real time to fusion crime centers, signal a turning point in the transition from a police state to a police-driven surveillance state.

  • Don’t trust the government with your property. In yet another effort to legitimize warrantless searches, police are employing “hit-and-hold” tactics in which police enter a home, carry out an initial sweep of the property, handcuff the occupants, then wait for official search warrants to be secured and applied retroactively. In the meantime, police have managed to bypass the Fourth Amendment. The rationale, to prevent possible destruction of evidence, is the same one used to deadly effect with no-knock raids. If government agents can invade your home, break down your doors, kill your dog, damage your furnishings and terrorize your family, your property is no longer private and secure—it belongs to the government. Hard-working Americans are having their bank accounts, homes, cars electronics and cash seized by police under the assumption that they have allegedly been associated with some criminal scheme.

  • Don’t trust the government with your finances. The U.S. government—and that includes the current administration—is spending money it doesn’t have on programs it can’t afford, and “we the taxpayers” are being forced to foot the bill for the government’s fiscal insanity. The national debt is $31.3 trillion and growing, and we’re paying more than $300 billion in interest every year on that public debt, yet there seems to be no end in sight when it comes to the government’s fiscal insanity. According to Forbes, Congress has raised, extended or revised the definition of the debt limit 78 times since 1960 in order to allow the government to essentially fund its existence with a credit card.

  • Don’t trust the government with your health. For all intents and purposes, “we the people” have become lab rats in the government’s secret experiments, which include MKULTRA and the U.S. military’s secret race-based testing of mustard gas on more than 60,000 enlisted men. Indeed, you don’t have to dig very deep or go very back in the nation’s history to uncover numerous cases in which the government deliberately conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace—citizens and noncitizens alike—making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins. Unfortunately, the public has become so easily distracted by the political spectacle out of Washington, DC, that they are altogether oblivious to the grisly experiments, barbaric behavior and inhumane conditions that have become synonymous with the U.S. government, which has meted out untold horrors against humans and animals alike.

  • Don’t trust the government with your life: At a time when growing numbers of unarmed people have been shot and killed for just standing a certain way, or moving a certain way, or holding something—anything—that police could misinterpret to be a gun, or igniting some trigger-centric fear in a police officer’s mind that has nothing to do with an actual threat to their safety, even the most benign encounters with police can have fatal consequences. The number of Americans killed by police continues to grow, with the majority of those killed as a result of police encounters having been suspected of a non-violent offense or no crime at all, or during a traffic violation. According a report by Mapping Police Violence, police killed more people in 2022 than any other year within the past decade. In 98% of those killings, police were not charged with a crime.

  • Don’t trust the government with your freedoms. For years now, the government has been playing a cat-and-mouse game with the American people, letting us enjoy just enough freedom to think we are free but not enough to actually allow us to live as a free people. Freedom no longer means what it once did. This holds true whether you’re talking about the right to criticize the government in word or deed, the right to be free from government surveillance, the right to not have your person or your property subjected to warrantless searches by government agents, the right to due process, the right to be safe from militarized police invading your home, the right to be innocent until proven guilty and every other right that once reinforced the founders’ belief that this would be “a government of the people, by the people and for the people.” On paper, we may be technically free, but in reality, we are only as free as a government official may allow.

  Whatever else it may be—a danger, a menace, a threat—the U.S. government is certainly not looking out for our best interests, nor is it in any way a friend to freedom.

  Remember the purpose of a good government is to protect the lives and liberties of its people.

  Unfortunately, what we have been saddled with is, in almost every regard, the exact opposite of an institution dedicated to protecting the lives and liberties of its people.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, “we the people” should have learned early on that a government that repeatedly lies, cheats, steals, spies, kills, maims, enslaves, breaks the laws, overreaches its authority, and abuses its power at almost every turn can’t be trusted.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 23:40

• These Are America's Most (And Least) Trusted Professions
  These Are America’s Most (And Least) Trusted Professions

  Some occupations have a better reputation for honesty than others.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, Gallup examines the issue in a reoccurring poll showing that nurses are the most trusted professionals in the United States, followed by doctors and pharmacists.

  

  They have actually topped the ranking for two decades and were regarded as highly honest and ethical by 79 percent of respondents in 2022, down from a coronavirus high of 89 percent in 2020.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Other than the healthcare sector, trusted professionals in the eyes of Americans also come from the fields of teaching, the judiciary and law enforcement, despite long-standing criticism of police behavior that came to a boil in the country in 2020.

  Other professions that more people see positively than negatively are accountant, banker and real estate agent.

  Public opinion flips for labor union leaders, lawyers, journalists and business executives, with skepticism towards these occupations prevailing.

  Journalists were among the professions dropping the most in the ranking since the start of the coronavirus pandemic.

  At the very bottom of the list, members of Congress rub shoulders with those from professions traditionally considered untrustworthy, like car salespeople and telemarketers. 62 percent of respondents said Congresspeople had low standards of honesty and ethics.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 23:20

• Senator Questions CDC On Why It Claimed No 'Unexpected Safety Signals' For COVID Vaccines
  Senator Questions CDC On Why It Claimed No ‘Unexpected Safety Signals’ For COVID Vaccines

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A U.S. senator is questioning a top agency’s public statements over safety signals for the COVID-19 vaccines.

  Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), claimed in 2022 that safety monitoring revealed no “unexpected safety signals” for the vaccines.

  

  But the results to which she was referring showed hundreds of safety signals, or adverse events potentially linked to the shots.

  The Epoch Times obtained the results through a Freedom of Information Act after the CDC refused to release them.

  Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) is now wondering why the CDC expected so many signals after vaccination.

  In a Jan. 10 letter citing The Epoch Times article on the results, Johnson demanded the CDC explain how it determined what is and is not an “unexpected safety signal.”

  “The American people have a right to know the extent to which your agency was aware of and tracked COVID-19 vaccine adverse events. Your lack of transparency is unacceptable. Without immediately providing complete and reliable information about COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, you are obstructing Congressional oversight and leaving the public in the dark,” added Johnson, who was stonewalled when he requested the monitoring results.

  The CDC did not respond to a request for comment.

  False Statements

  The CDC has made multiple false statements on the outcomes found from a type of analysis called Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR). The analysis involves comparing the number of adverse events reported to a system co-managed by the CDC after COVID-19 vaccination to the number of adverse events reported after vaccination with other vaccines.

  The CDC initially said that performing PRRs was outside of its purview, contradicting a government document that stated the agency “will perform” the technique. Dr. John Su, a top CDC official, then claimed it started performing the analysis in February 2021 and continued to do so as of July 18, 2022.

  Both statements turned out to be wrong. After being pressed by Johnson, the CDC later said that it did not start the PRRs until March 25, 2022, and stopped performing them on July 31, 2022.

  Walensky, a Biden appointee, admitted the CDC provided false information in a September 2022 letter to the senator.

  The CDC “recently addressed a previous statement made to The Epoch Times to clarify PRR were not run between February 26, 2021, to September 30, 2021,” she said.

  Johnson noted that the missive did not explain why the CDC offered the false information. Martha Sharan, a CDC spokesperson who herself made a false claim, told The Epoch Times in an email that no CDC workers intentionally provided false information.

  

  Results

  The results of the PRRs, obtained by The Epoch Times and released to the public for the first time in January, shows CDC analysts found hundreds of adverse events met the threshold for a safety signal.

  That included severe conditions such as blood clotting and even death.

  PRRs analyze reports lodged with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which health officials describe as “the nation’s early warning system” for vaccine issues.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 23:00

• Rolls-Royce Sales Hit Record As Rich Splurged On Luxury While Everyone Else Crushed By Inflation
  Rolls-Royce Sales Hit Record As Rich Splurged On Luxury While Everyone Else Crushed By Inflation

  2022 was a terrible year for billionaires, many of which lost nearly $2 trillion combined. Despite stock, crypto, and bond market turmoil, as well as soaring interest rates, elevated inflation, and increased risk of economic uncertainty, the ultra-wealthy were increasingly purchasing luxury vehicles.

  Rolls-Royce Motor Cars published a press release stating it recorded its “highest-ever annual sales” in 2022, delivering 6,021 motor cars, up 8% versus 2021. 

  “This is the first time in the company’s 118-year history that its sales have exceeded 6,000 in a single 12-month period,” the British luxury carmaker said. 

  

  Rolls-Royce’s sales were led by the US, China, and European markets. The automaker said orders stretched well into this year and noted the high demand for its vehicles, many of which fetch $500k, which led to an expansion of the company’s Goodwood plant in the UK. 

  “2022 has been a momentous year for Rolls-Royce Motor Cars,” CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös wrote in a statement. 

  “Our order book stretches far into 2023 for all models,” Müller-Ötvös continued. “We haven’t seen any slowdown in orders.”

  Müller-Ötvös added the brand’s bespoke, customized approach to “ever more imaginative and technically demanding – a challenge we enthusiastically embrace.” 

  And it’s not just Rolls-Royce. Bentley and Lamborghini had record sales last year. 

  Lamborghini delivered 9,233 vehicles in 2022, a 10% increase from the year before. Bentley delivered 15,174 vehicles, a 4% increase over 2021, which was a record year. 

  The growth of luxury vehicle sales reflects high net wealth folks are doing just fine despite a vast amount of wealth vaporization due to central banks tightening monetary policy. As for everyone else, many folks can barely afford their $1,000 car payment, as an auto bust seems almost inevitable. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 22:30

• What's Behind The Global Erosion Of Civil Liberties, Privacy, & Property Rights?
  What’s Behind The Global Erosion Of Civil Liberties, Privacy, & Property Rights?

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  The second essential step is to recognize how the spectacles of “news” and entertainment distract our attention from this erosion of basic rights.

  

  Hierarchical power structures like city-states arose as problem-solving solutions, not just for the elites who benefited from the concentration of wealth and power but for the citizenry. This dynamic underpins the analysis presented in my recent book Global Crisis, National Renewal: when nation-states and global hierarchies no longer solve the key problems of their populaces, they dissolve and are replaced by some new arrangement.

  It’s easy to see how hierarchies benefit the leaders / elites at the top, but there’s always a trade-off to the populace ceding power/control to elites: we will cede control over our lives in exchange for benefits we cannot gain by ourselves, starting with security from invasion and starvation, i.e. the existential threats posed by Nature and other human organizations.

  

  Over time, as energy surpluses and knowledge increased, city-states aggregated into nation-states and empires. These larger organizations were able to solve problems on a larger scale than city-states.

  When these entities could no longer solve existential problems (surpluses diminished, elites failed to provide successful leadership, etc.), they eroded and then collapsed, and were replaced with some other more successful organizational arrangement.

  Over time, the citizenry of some regions began expanding the benefits nation-states and their elites were expected to provide in exchange for power: the state was expected to secure the rights to individuals’ property and various civil liberties relating to the free exchange of ideas and knowledge, freedom of worship, and having a say in national decisions.

  Globally, these basic human rights are being eroded by state-elite over-reach and consolidation of power beyond what the citizenry agreed upon. For example, the citizenry ceded power to the state to protect individuals’ privacy from the surveillance and information-gathering of both the state and private interests.

  As Richard Bonugli and I discuss in our podcast on Eroding Civil Liberties and Property Rights, these privacy statutes are still on the books but they are routinely disregarded by both state agencies and private-sector interests with little functional enforcement by state agencies tasked with protecting the citizens’ rights to privacy.

  Big Tech routinely harvests private data for profit with little oversight, state agencies collect private data beyond their mandated scope and mobile phones gather private information which others manage to collect or access.

  Property rights are also being eroded. Civil forfeiture enables local and national governments to expropriate individuals’ private property without due process, in effect declaring them guilty and effecting punishment (taking their money/property) and then forcing them to prove their innocence via a lengthy, costly, Kafkaesque process.

  War by other means now includes sanctions and expropriation of individuals’ assets, not just the assets of other states or state entities (central banks, state-owned corporations, etc.)

  What is driving this global erosion of the most basic civil liberties and property rights? As I describe in my book Resistance, Revolution, Liberation, all states share the same ontology, which is to respond to any threats or challenges by increasing their reach and control.

  In other words, all states share the same teleological Prime Directive: always expand the state’s control and power. No state has the institutional memory or means to reduce the state’s reach, control or power.

  

  The only limit on state expansion is the citizenry’s resistance to the loss of civil liberties, property rights and having a say in decisions which affect the entire citizenry. If the citizenry do nothing to protect their rights as individuals and communities, the state will nibble away at these until they exist only in name, not in the real world.

  The first essential step is to recognize the erosion as real and consequential. Richard and I do our best to further this in our podcast Charles Hugh Smith on Eroding Civil Liberties and Property Rights (31:35 min).

  The second essential step is to recognize how the spectacles of “news” and entertainment distract our attention from this erosion of basic rights. Before we know it, we’re in prisons without bars and grateful to get a questionnaire about how we like the torture (i.e. the “entertainment”).

  *  *  *

  My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century.  Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

  Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 22:20

• National Security Experts Criticize Media, Scientists Who Dismissed COVID-19 Lab Leak Theory In Open Letter
  National Security Experts Criticize Media, Scientists Who Dismissed COVID-19 Lab Leak Theory In Open Letter

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A group of 43 national security experts published an open letter on Jan. 11 criticizing news organizations and scientific publications that dismissed the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic might have been the result of a lab leak.

  

  The letter is addressed “To the editors, authors, and contributors to major scientific, medical, and journalistic publications worldwide.” The addressees include The Lancet, Nature Medicine, The New York Times, and TIME magazine.

  The letter was coordinated by the Vandenberg Coalition, and included signatures from House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas), former U.S. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien, Former U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger, and analysts from the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and other security and foreign policy analysts.

  “Leading scientific journals censored dissenting voices; many science writers at major news outlets promoted narratives or asserted conclusions unsubstantiated by evidence; reporters failed to make even cursory attempts at surfacing potential conflicts of interest of their sources,” the letter states.

  “This served to hamper national and international policy discussions about how to mitigate against future pandemics of any origin—natural, accidental, or deliberate.”

  The letter faults editors and reporters at news organizations and scientific publications for stifling debate on the origins of the virus.

  The letter references a Fox News article about a May 2021 tweet by a New York Times reporter who said, “Someday we will stop talking about the lab leak theory and maybe even admit its racist roots. But alas, that day is not yet here.”

  The New York Times reporter deleted the tweet the same day she wrote it.

  “Our security and prosperity depend on rigorous scientific debate, research, and scholarship, as well as an intrepid and independent news media,” the letter continues.

  “The responsibility of scientists and journalists alike is to ask hard questions and seek truth. By prematurely dismissing or stigmatizing certain questions—from the very outset of the pandemic—many prominent scientists and journalists failed in their duty.”

  The letter went on to list “notable failures” by the various news and scientific publications. A February 2020 statement by The Lancet “asserted without evidence that questioning the supposed natural origin of COVID-19 constituted ‘misinformation’ and a ‘conspiracy theory,” the letter states.

  Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, was listed as a co-author the February 2020 statement by The Lancet. EcoHealth Alliance worked directly with China’s Wuhan laboratories to research coronaviruses. The Lancet subsequently acknowledged questions if Daszak had a “competing interest” when he co-authored the 2020 statement.

  The letter authors also noted that a report by Nature Medicine, which “became one of the most-cited academic journal articles in history” had “effectively stigmatized anyone who questioned whether the outbreak may have originated in a laboratory.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 21:40

• DeSantis Eyes Ban On China-Based Entities From Purchasing Florida Property
  DeSantis Eyes Ban On China-Based Entities From Purchasing Florida Property

  Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is mulling a move to ban Chinese entities from purchasing property in the state due to the economic and security risks posed by  China’s communist regime.

  “If you look at the Chinese Communist Party, they’ve been very active throughout the Western Hemisphere in gobbling up land and investing in different things,” DeSantis said during a press conference on Jan. 10.

  “And, you know, when they have interests that are opposed to ours, and you’ve seen how they’ve wielded their authority… it is not in the best interests of Florida to have the Chinese Communist Party owning farmland, owning land close to military bases.”

  

  The remarks follow warnings from security experts and lawmakers that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which rules China as a single-party state, is seeking to purchase strategic parcels of land throughout the United States from which it can conduct espionage or otherwise sabotage U.S. national security interests.

  In recent years, Chinese land buys in Texas and North Dakota, which were both situated near U.S. military bases, have raised alarm among both locals and policymakers in state and federal governments.

  DeSantis said that the CCP had “taken a much more Marxist-Leninist turn” under current Party leader Xi Jinping and suggested that communist China was now a “hostile nation.”

  “We do not need to have CCP influence in Florida’s economy,” DeSantis said.

  

  China Spending Billions on US Land Every Year

  Chinese investors purchased more than $6 billion in U.S. real estate between March 2021 and March 2022, according to the National Association of Realtors, making it the largest foreign buyer in terms of dollars spent.

  Florida has been at the center of that purchasing craze, with 24 percent of all foreign property purchases in the nation happening there. The next state with the highest amount of foreign purchases was California, which accounted for 11 percent.

  DeSantis described the CCP’s influence in American society as “very insidious” and, to that end, said that he was not only concerned with the CCP seeking out farmland, but also wanted to terminate its access to residential properties.

  “Why would you want them buying residential developments and things like that?” DeSantis said. “I don’t want them owning subdivisions and things like that.”

  Though outrage over the issue has been widespread in recent months, there have been relatively few concrete actions taken to curb the flow of U.S. land to CCP-aligned organizations.

  Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) introduced legislation in November that would “prohibit the purchase of public or private agricultural land in the United States by foreign nationals associated with the Government of the People’s Republic of China.”

  Likewise, Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) introduced legislation to improve national security by “preventing foreign adversaries from taking any ownership or control of the United States agriculture industry.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 21:00

• 'Decision To Arm Ourselves Or Arm Ukraine': Navy Secretary Admits Crisis In US Defense Stockpiles
  ‘Decision To Arm Ourselves Or Arm Ukraine’: Navy Secretary Admits Crisis In US Defense Stockpiles

  The leader of the US Navy has admitted that the question of dwindling US arms stockpiles in the rush to arm Ukraine, which now stands at over $100 billion in defense aid and counting, is dire enough that some tough unprecedented decisions are coming, which shocked a group of reporters this week.

  Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro acknowledged before a naval warfare conference in Arlington, Virginia on Wednesday that the US within the next six months could face a decision of whether to arm itself or Ukraine, due to rapidly depleting stockpiles due to supplying Ukraine

  

  The comments were first revealed by Defense One editor Marcus Weisberger on Twitter, and subsequently reported in the publication, and in Newsweek and others. Earlier in the conference the US Navy’s Adm. Daryl Caudle put things in stark terms by saying the decision will eventually come down to ‘arm ourselves or arm Ukraine’. 

  Weisberger wrote of the comments: “An admiral alluded to the US needing to choose between itself and Ukraine during a panel at the conference.”

  Below are the rare, very revealing words of the exchange heard by reporters: 

  The secretary was asked to respond to comments made at the conference by Adm. Daryl Caudle, commander of U.S. Fleet Forces Command. Caudle, the reporter said, worried that “the Navy might get to the point where it has to make the decision whether it needs to arm itself or arm Ukraine, and has the Navy gotten to that point yet?”

  Del Toro replied, “With regards to deliveries of weapons systems for the fight in Ukraine…Yeah, that’s always a concern for us. And we monitor that very, very closely. I wouldn’t say we’re quite there yet, but if the conflict does go on for another six months, for another year, it certainly continues to stress the supply chain in ways that are challenging.”

  While most weapons going to Ukraine are from Army stockpiles, it remains that the US recently pledged Sea Sparrow missiles to Ukraine. Additionally US-made Harpoons have long been transferred to Kiev via Denmark. 

  Navy Secretary Del Toro went on to explain that Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks has been working “very closely with [the defense] industry, to motivate them to find out what their challenges or obstacles are to be able to increase their own production rates,” as quoted in the Defense One report.

  US defense officials are wringing their hand over the RAPID DEPLETION of US ammo stockpiles. Yes, the US has drained its munitions stockpiles to fight its proxy war with Russia. Now, it’ll have to cough up EVEN MORE $ to restock its own US arsenal. MADNESS.https://t.co/s53bVlpTgH

  — Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) January 5, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “It’s obvious that you know, these companies have a substantial pipeline for the future,” Del Toro added. “They now need to invest in their workforce, as well as the capital investments that they have to make within their own companies to get their production rates up.”

  Department of Defense stockpiles have been a concern in relation to steadily ramped up arms supplies to Ukraine from within the opening months of the Russian invasion. Additionally other NATO allies are facing this same problem and worry, especially ‘neutral’ Germany which due to the war dramatically shifted its historic stance on not sending weapons into foreign conflict zones. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock admitted as early as the summer that “Unfortunately, the situation here is such that we have an absolute deficit in our own stocks.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 20:45

• Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Executive Order Banning CRT In Arkansas
  Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Executive Order Banning CRT In Arkansas

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed an executive order banning indoctrination and critical race theory (CRT) in the state after being sworn in as governor.

  

  Schools must “educate, not indoctrinate” students and that the state’s education policies need to “protect children and prepare them to enter the workforce,” according to the executive order, obtained by the Daily Caller.

  CRT controversially teaches that America is fundamentally racist, promotes skin color as a person’s primary characteristic, and assigns moral fault to individuals—usually white people—solely based on their skin color.

  CRT has been a controversial ideology meeting resistance from parents and communities across America, who argue that it teaches a distorted definition of what racism has traditionally meant.

  Sanders’ executive order, signed Jan. 10, declares CRT “antithetical to the traditional American values of neutrality, equality, and fairness.”

  “It is the policy of this administration that CRT, discrimination, and indoctrination have no place in Arkansas classrooms,” the executive order reads.

  ‘Prohibited Indoctrination’

  The executive order directs Arkansas’ education secretary to ensure that “prohibited indoctrination” is not communicated to students by any public school employee, public school representative, or guest speaker.

  CRT is considered prohibited indoctrination because it encourages students to adopt, affirm, and profess ideas that white people are inherently racist, in violation of the Civil Rights Act.

  “This prohibited indoctrination would include anything that teaches that people of one color, creed, race, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, familial status, disability, religion, national origin, or any other characteristic protected by federal or state law are inherently superior or inferior to people of another color, creed, race, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, familial status, disability, religion, national origin, or any other characteristic protected by federal or state law,” the order states.

  The order bans any requirement for school employees or students to attend any training sessions or orientations that on prohibited indoctrination or CRT.

  Curriculum Transparency

  In signing the executive order as one of her first acts as governor, Sanders has taken the stance that government education policies must empower parental rights and foster curriculum transparency across the state.

  The order directs the secretary of the state’s education department to review the rules, policies, materials, and communications of the department to ensure they comply with Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

  “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” Title VI of the Civil Rights Act states.

  Arkansas’ state constitution and the U.S. Constitution provide equal protection under the law, regardless of color, creed, race, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, familial status, disability, religion, and national origin.

  Sanders’ executive order directs the state’s secretary of education to probe the department for any “items” that promote ideologies such as CRT that purposely encourage students to discriminate based on race and other protected attributes.

  Any “items” that are found to indoctrinate students with ideologies like CRT, such as rules, regulations, policies, materials, or communications, must be changed or annulled, according to the order.

  Sanders Signals ‘Turning Point’

  Sanders took the oath of office in the lower chamber of the state Legislature ahead of a joint session and was formally inaugurated on the state Capitol steps on Tuesday afternoon.

  Speaking for roughly 15 minutes at her inauguration, Sanders said her ascension to the office marks a “turning point in the history of Arkansas” that would usher in a new era of “good jobs, great schools, safer streets, and stronger families.”

  “The people of Arkansas, in their vast wisdom, have entrusted a new generation to lead. This is our moment. This is our opportunity,” she said.

  Sanders, whose father Mike Huckabee was Arkansas governor from 1996 to 2007, is the first woman to hold the governor’s office in Arkansas. Her election marks the first time a father and daughter have been elected to the role.

  During her campaign, Sanders, who served for nearly two years as White House press secretary under former President Donald Trump, focused mainly on national issues. She regularly promised to use the office to fight the policies of President Joe Biden and the “radical left.”

  She succeeded incumbent Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, who left office as he cannot seek re-election to a third term because he is term-limited. Hutchinson endorsed Sanders’s bid, along with Trump.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 20:20

• America Runs On… Bottled Water
  America Runs On… Bottled Water

  The most popular drink in America is sold at a 4000 percent markup and is responsible for tens of millions of discarded containers each day: bottled water.

  

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, despite U.S. tap water – with some notable exceptions – being safe to drink, around one third of Americans don’t consume it at all, while another third is most likely to drink their tap water filtered.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Plastic bottles and plastic bottle caps are among the most common items to pollute oceans. Yet, the U.S. has introduced few regulations to reign it their use.

  The Statista Global Consumer Survey shows that 63 percent of Americans consume bottled water regularly, placing the drink ahead of coffee, which only 57 percent said they drank somewhat frequently.

  Almost as many people – 56 percent – said they regularly grabbed a soft drink.

  Alcoholic drinks – among those 21 years and older – proved less popular. Beer still beat wine at 25 percent vs. 24 percent popularity.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 20:00

• "This Is Election Interference": House Oversight Veteran On Biden Classified Documents
  “This Is Election Interference”: House Oversight Veteran On Biden Classified Documents

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A House Oversight Committee veteran said the delay in publicizing President Joe Biden’s retention of classified documents from his time as vice president amounts to election interference.

  “The documents were allegedly discovered on Nov. 2. The midterms are on Nov. 8. To me, this is election interference by omission,” Mike Howell said in a Jan. 11 interview with The Epoch Times.

  “Does anyone think if this had been President Trump or any other Republican, the news wouldn’t have been leaked immediately for political gain? We needn’t wonder—just look at all the affirmative updates, releases, and leaks in the Trump case,” he said in a Jan. 10 statement.

  

  Howell was an attorney for the Department of Homeland Security under President Donald Trump. He previously worked as a lawyer on the House Oversight Committee as well as the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

  

  He now leads the Oversight Project at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

  Heritage Oversight is, in Howell’s words, “suing the Biden administration aggressively” over Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

  “We’re gathering as much as we can and hoping that Congress makes use of it,” he said, noting that FOIA lawsuits are just one of the organization’s tactics.

  Notably, Heritage Oversight obtained an email to Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas that shows that he knew Haitian migrants weren’t whipped by Border Patrol agents at Del Rio, Texas, by Sept. 24, 2021.

  Yet during a press conference that same day, Mayorkas offered no clarification on the whipping allegations, instead saying that the images “painfully conjured up the worst elements of our nation’s ongoing battle against systemic racism.”

  FOIA Requests Filed

  “He [Mayorkas] chose to ignore the information to preserve the far-left narrative on this whole incident,” Howell said in a 2022 Heritage Foundation interview.

  Heritage Oversight filed FOIA requests with the Department of Justice and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) regarding the classified materials found at the Penn Biden Center.

  “Why was this information not made public prior [to] the election? It likely would have had substantial electoral salience,” Howell wrote in his FOIA request to the Department of Justice.

  Democrats have frequently accused Republicans of election interference, citing everything from voter I.D. laws to state-level election integrity legislation.

  Now, Republicans are zeroing in on the apparently coordinated suppression of stories prior to national elections in an election interference narrative of their own.

  The Penn Biden Center incident, which could have broken before the 2022 midterm election, comes just two years after the Hunter Biden laptop story was shut down in the run-up to the 2020 election.

  “People need to be aware that our elections, when things like this happen, are not free and fair,” Howell said.

  Comes Alongside House Oversight Requests

  Heritage Oversight’s FOIA requests come as the House Oversight Committee, now under Republican control, launches its own investigation into the Biden documents.

  In a Jan. 10 letter to White House counsel Stuart Delery, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) wrote that the committee he now leads is “concerned that President Biden has compromised sources and methods with his own mishandling of classified documents.”

  “The committee expects President Biden will receive equal treatment under the law given that he maintained classified documents in his unsecured office for several years with access to an unknown number of people,” the letter reads.

  

  Howell thinks Heritage Oversight’s FOIA requests will complement the House Oversight Committee’s accommodation process.

  “The accommodation process” refers to constitutionally sound negotiations between different branches of government, particularly when the legislative branch seeks information from the executive branch.

  The House Judiciary Committee has described the accommodation process as “the bedrock of congressional investigative activity.”

  “Now, the Biden administration is forced to deal with document requests from two different angles in two different legal proceedings,” Howell said.

  He foresees a long, tough fight to get answers.

  “This is going to be the most obstructive administration in history,” Howell said.

  He expects obstructionism from NARA, recently in the headlines over its referral to the Justice Department regarding documents at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago—the basis for a subsequent search warrant served by the FBI.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 19:40

• Delayed Flights – The New Post-Pandemic Normal?
  Delayed Flights – The New Post-Pandemic Normal?

  The outage of a Federal Aviation Administration system grounding thousands of U.S. flights Wednesday is just the latest in a string of events that have led to delays and cancellations in air travel lately.

  

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, looking at the share of major North American airline flights arriving late at their destination over the past years, a post-pandemic dip in punctuality becomes visible. 

  Reports by Cirium show that while some airlines have kept it together more, others’ on-time performance has virtually imploded.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Among the latter is Southwest Airlines, the biggest carrier with a majorly decreased punctuality score. While in 2019, only 18.6 percent of the airline’s flights were delayed, 2021 and 2022 saw the airline be late around 26-29 percent of the time. Interestingly, the complete meltdown of Southwest’s computer systems at the end of December – leading to droves of stranded customers and fliers separated from their luggage – did not create a worse score in 2022 than in 2021.

  Other airlines where tardiness skyrocketed were low(er)-cost carriers JetBlue, Frontier and Allegiant Air, the latter hitting 35.4 percent delayed flights in 2021 and 34.1 percent in 2022.

  Among the largest U.S. airlines, delays increased, but on a lower level. Delta Air Lines continued to be the most punctual carrier throughout the survey period, even though delays were somewhat up in 2022. Alaska Airlines and American Airlines also saw the share of delayed flights rise slightly, while United Airlines – only the seventh most punctual carrier in 2019 – improved its performance, landing in rank 2 of the most on-time airlines in 2022.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 19:20

• China's $7 Trillion "Hidden Debt" Is Back In Focus
  China’s $7 Trillion “Hidden Debt” Is Back In Focus

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

  While optimism toward China has been growing amid the economic reopening, the recent loan restructuring of a local government financing vehicle shined a light on this $7 trillion in “hidden” debt. While this group of borrowers has never defaulted, markets are starting to get worried, shunning some weaker borrowers.

  With Beijing pivoting on key policies, a cyclical recovery appears to be underway. But structural issues – such as the heavy debt load of local governments — haven’t gone away. On Dec. 30, Zunyi Road & Bridge Construction Group from Guizhou province, one of the poorest regions, extended its bank loans for two decades. It pledged to honor payments on its bonds.

  The restructuring caused a splash among market participants. Local government financing vehicles, or LGFVs, are mostly tasked with building infrastructure projects. They allow local authorities to raise money without having the debt appear on the government’s balance sheet. This “hidden” debts and contingent liabilities have risen to 47 trillion yuan ($7 trillion and 39% of GDP) in September, up from 20 trillion yuan at the end of 2016, according to Adam Wolfe, an economist at Absolute Strategy Research.

  

  So far, these risky state borrowers – with the perception of an implicit guarantee from local governments — have avoided default in public bond markets. But slumping land sales and massive Covid-induced expenditures weaken local governments’ finances and raise questions about their ability to pay, as shown by Zhunyi’s restructuring.

  Investors have already showed some concerns about the sector, shunning weaker LGFV and muni bonds. Exhibit 2: Guizhou has been squeezed out of muni market, with its share of issuances falling.

  

  Exhibit 3: The spread differential between AA-rated and AAA-rated five-year LGFV bonds has widened to the highest since 2018.

  

  The spread widening, in part, reflects offloading by wealth-management products to meet redemptions，but also signals “the tail risk concerns on weaker LGFVs,” according to Goldman Sachs analysts Kenneth Ho and Chakki Ting. The Zunyi restructuring “reinforces our view that an element of caution is warranted for China LGFVs, as we believe further credit differentiation is likely amongst LGFVs, exacerbated by uneven fiscal stress in local governments,” they wrote.

  LGFV bonds — known as “chengtou zhai” or “city investment debt” – are enormous, accounting for about a third of total issuance. The stress there could easily spread to the rest of the credit market.

  Moreover, their inability to borrow may reduce local governments’ spending. Losses at LGFVs could also increase non-performing loans at banks that lend to them.

  Few expect a full-blown crisis. As Bloomberg economist David Qu noted, many LGFVs have diversified away from real estate and government-related businesses, and the ones that still rely on local governments financially would probably get official aid in some form in a crunch.

  Still, this hidden debt remains what’s known as a “grey rhino” — a high-risk threat that is often ignored until it’s too late. In the words of Wolfe, Guizhou’s debt restructuring is just “a tip of the iceberg.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 19:00

• White House Argues That Sudden Disappearance Of Migrants During Biden Border Visit Coincidental
  White House Argues That Sudden Disappearance Of Migrants During Biden Border Visit Coincidental

  As we noted during Joe Biden’s recent lighting speed tour of southern border, El Paso was an epicenter of the illegal immigration crisis up until just two weeks ago, when suddenly and magically there was a mass exodus or removal of thousands of migrants from the streets of the city. 

  El Paso went from over 2500 migrants crossing the border per day to essentially zero after a quiet cleanup effort, increased border patrol and national guard as well as the building of a makeshift border wall using cargo containers and barbed wire.  

  When confronted with the fact that this purging of migrants from El Paso was rather opportune for Joe Biden, allowing him to tour the border and facilities without having to deal with the presence of hordes of illegal immigrants, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre clumsily insinuated that the lack of migrants in the city at the time was purely “coincidental.”

  Simultaneously, Pierre asserts that there was a cleanup and that this is a good thing. Of course, the removal of migrants from El Paso was not undertaken until the past two weeks because of optics.  It was done to ensure that no images of Joe Biden surrounded by illegal immigrants laying in garbage strewn streets see the light of day.  In other words, the cleanup was enacted to hide the extent of the migrant crisis, not fix it.

  Not only that, but it proves that the White House does have the means to stop the invasion at the border using the same measures they used in El Paso, they just don’t want to.

  The Biden Administration has ignored the increasingly dire state of affairs on the border ever since he took office.  His amnesty policies and attempts to shut down Title 42 have led to larger caravans of illegals each month.  With the recent tactics to obscure the situation in El Paso it would appear that Biden has no intention if changing his open border plans anytime soon.   

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 18:40

• American Ponzi
  American Ponzi

  Authored by Hardscrabble Farmer via The Burning Platform blog,

  The first question that came to mind as the closing credits rolled on the Netflix documentary Madoff The Monster of Wall Street was why?

  Why would they make a movie like this that connects as many dots?

  The film lays out so many of the obvious truths of how America and the economic systems we have come to depend upon are nothing more than a colossal fiction, a fraud operating at every level and throughout every aspect of our Government, and the institutions we have come to think of as our culture.

  And then it hit me.

  The purpose of this revelation is to serve as cover for the even larger Ponzi scheme that is SBF about to unravel, and eventually, if I suspect correctly, the death blow that will be discovered when BlackRock is finally shown to be the exact same kind of Ponzi scheme as all the others. When the final downturn in our economic collapse goes into full Krakatoa and wipes out every last vestige of economic stability in the Western World.

  The central underlying explanation for what transpired is based upon the rickety tripod of incompetence, misplaced altruism, and bad luck. Had it not been for the crisis of 2008, Madoff’s scheme would have continued to be as successful as it was up to 2007. Had it not been Madoff’s central concern to please people, he never would have made the kinds of promises he did. Had it not been for a couple of low level SEC examiners who weren’t properly trained, it would have been caught sooner. None of these explanations pass the sniff test of course.

  From the beginning the SEC with their bloated multi-billion dollar annual budget do little if any work on anything other than drawing paychecks and providing cover for large scale institutional level white collar criminals to operate without fear of accountability. Without the greed of the people helping to run the operation anyone with two eyeballs and a heart beat would have been able to discern what was going on inside the offices of Madoff’s criminal empire in a week or less.

  Had it not been for the gullibility and rank stupidity of the American people the common denominator between all of these parties, save for a few, low-level associates, would be readily discernible. The producers do not want anyone to notice these obvious signs of just how the global banking and economic systems really operate because if they were made clear there’d be a revolution tomorrow.

  Our entire system is a Ponzi scheme. Everyone is in on it. The government is a Potemkin village, populated by a criminal syndicate that is raping the American people and stealing every last thing of value right before our eyes, with impunity. On occasion when it becomes so obvious that nothing can conceal the crimes, they’ll toss one of their associates overboard to placate the roiling masses before quickly moving their shop to another 17th floor.

  This documentary is an absolute must see for anyone with even the slightest interest in how things are going to, in the not too distant future, play out in the last days of the dying Empire that was once America. The only requirement is to watch it unfold without listening to the rhetorical assurances of the ones trying to pull this polished wool over your eyes, but as you would a true con man with his hand on your wallet. In the final analysis the greatest con of all is in how this story is told by Netflix rather than the shoddily constructed grift that was Madoff Investments.

  *  *  *

  From Jim Quinn: It is my sincere desire to provide readers of The Burning Platform with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can’t do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 18:20

• Is It Payback Time For Democratic Zealots?
  Is It Payback Time For Democratic Zealots?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  The Left has gone mad over former President Donald J. Trump — past, present, and future.

  The current Democratic Party and NeverTrump “conservatives” assumed that Trump was and remains so obviously toxic that they do not have to define exactly what his evil entails.

  Accordingly, they believe that any means necessary are justified to stop him.

  And furthermore, these zealots, when out of power, insist such extraordinary measures should not be emulated and institutionalized by their opponents, much less ever boomeranged back upon their creators.

  In this context, the Republicans retaking control of the House of Representatives once again raises the question of whether they should reply in kind.

  

  Given the current investigation following the Mar-a-Lago raid, should there also be a mirror-image special prosecutor to examine President Joe Biden’s lost stash of classified documents in his insecure office following his vice presidency?

  Can House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., ever be considered too inflammatory, given that his predecessor, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tore up the president’s State of the Union address on national television?

  How many Democratic House members should be denied committee assignments to remind the Congress that Pelosi’s rejection of Republican nominees was a terrible precedent?

  How many congressional subpoenas with threats of criminal prosecution and performance-art arrests should be issued to Democratic politicos to stop the criminalization of political differences?

  In our current age, will all former president’s private homes, closets, and drawers now be subject to FBI raids to ensure that “classified” documents were not wrongly stored there?

  Are Biden’s current homes also a logical target, given his sloppy handling of classified foreign policy papers — eerily reminiscent of an abandoned laptop belonging to son Hunter Biden and daughter Ashley Biden’s lost diary?

  Was it ever a good idea to impeach a first-term president the moment he lost his party’s majority in the House — but without any hope of a conviction in the Senate? Would such a similar impeachment send a warning to Biden to honor his oath of office and start enforcing U.S. immigration law?

  Does a phone call now an impeachment make, on the grounds that Trump mixed domestic politics with foreign policy?

  But was Trump’s Ukrainian call that much different from former President Barack Obama’s 2012 quid pro quo in Seoul, South Korea, where he asked the Russian president to convey a deal to Vladmir Putin: Stay calm and give Obama space during his reelection bid while Obama in turn would be flexible on missile defense.

  Putin did just that and put off invading Ukraine until Obama was reelected. And Obama made sure there was no joint missile defense projects in Eastern Europe. Was that deal in America’s interest, or Obama’s own and thus similarly impeachable?

  Or consider Biden mixing foreign policy and politics on the eve of the midterm elections. For example, he kept draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to dangerously low levels while begging hostile foreign dictators to pump more oil.

  Thereby Biden sought to win votes from angry commuters buffeted by high fuel prices. And he also appeased the Left by not ordering more drilling for gas and oil. Was that gambit in the nation’s — or Biden’s — best interest?

  What is wrong with the House investigating whether the FBI infiltrated and contracted social media companies to warp news coverage and suppress free expression of American citizens?

  The Left certainly thought it was necessary in 1975 for the Church Committee to investigate the CIA. That committee found the agency was contracting new organizations to front for its covert operations, while partnering with telecommunications corporations to monitor the data of citizens on CIA watch lists. Sound familiar to today’s FBI?

  Was it a good idea for the Democratic House to release Trump’s tax returns?

  If the Republican House were to do the same with the Biden consortium’s tax records, would the result be far more incriminating?

  There was much talk once in Congress of evoking the 25th Amendment to remove a supposedly mentally impaired Trump. A Yale psychiatrist was even paraded before Congress to attest the president was dangerously unbalanced. Calls for aptitude testing resulted in Trump acing the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

  Should the House now follow the Democrats’ precedent? Should medical professionals review all of Biden’s incoherent utterances, his fantasy biographic tales, and his often physical fragility and determine whether he is non compos mentis? Is that a precedent we wish to follow?

  When a defeated first-term president leaves office and vows to return in four years, is it wise to impeach and try him as a private citizen?

  Did not the House impeach Trump in part because he warned the Ukrainians that Biden, a possible opponent in 2020, was likely corrupt?

  Do the endless Democratic efforts to go after Trump, a possible Biden opponent in 2024, constitute far more than a Trump single phone call to the president of Ukraine?

  Somehow supposedly worldly and sophisticated partisans in their self-righteousness ignored ancient laws of what goes around comes around, of Karma, of Nemesis, of payback’s a bit—h, and all that stuff.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 17:40

• PC Bust Cycle Will Last Until 2024
  PC Bust Cycle Will Last Until 2024

  The PC bust cycle will extend well into 2023 and might not see a turnaround until 2024. The pandemic-era demand has mostly evaporated as consumers and companies delay purchases. 

  The hangover for the PC market has been well underway for the last two quarters. A note from Gartner Inc. shows worldwide shipments of PCs fell 29% in the fourth quarter from a year ago. Another report from International Data Corp. confirmed the pandemic-era computer boom is over for now. 

  

  Mikako Kitagawa, the director analyst at Gartner, said the first cracks of the PC bust cycle materialized in the third quarter of last year when corporate buyers began to pull back on purchases. 

  “Enterprise buyers are extending PC life cycles and delaying purchases, meaning the business market will likely not return to growth until 2024,” Kitagawa said, who was quoted by WSJ. 

  Gartner’s report showed that PC makers shipped 65.3 to 67.3 million PCs in the fourth quarter. For the full year, shipments totaled about 286.2 million units, a 16% increase versus the year before. 

  IDC said Dell Technologies recorded the most significant decline in PC shipments for the year. Other PC brands that recorded shipment declines were Lenovo, HP, Apple, and Asus. 

  Despite all the gloom, Lenovo, a Chinese tech company, had the largest market share of all PC sales in the quarter at around 23%. 

  Entirely separate but worth noting is the computer-equipment maker Logitech that saw shares crash as much as 19% today, the most since April 2011. The company slashed guidance due to a slowdown in the PC space. 

  Recall that we have outlined how graphics cards, memory chips, and monitor prices have plunged in the last two quarters. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 17:20

• Roads Are Racist
  Roads Are Racist

  Authored by Eric Peters via EricPetersAutos.com,

  Everything is racist – even roads.

  

  It is why roads must be dug up and converted to foot/bicycle paths, which are more “equitable”-  since you do not need to own a car to be able to use those.

  Of course, without a car, you can only walk – or pedal – so far. You are kept in your place, as it were. But that’s not racist – because it keeps everyone in their place. Well, everyone except the you-know-who’s. Who come in all colors but are all the same in that they want everyone else  . . . kept in their place.

  Irony of ironies, they intend to use our taken-for-granted but slipping-away freedom of movement – by car – as the vehicle to put us back in our place, as they see it.

  By framing the car – and roads – as “racist.”

  

  The car, which freed everyone who owns one from being stuck where they are. Expanded their options – for work, employment, education and recreation. That made it – per James Brown – easy to get anywhere.

  For anyone.

  But not so, according to the Roads Are Racist narrative, which argues that the Interstate Highway System in particular was not meant to make it “easy to get anywhere” – but rather to make it easy for whites to get away from blacks. And – in the process – leave blacks “behind” in the bypassed ghettoes of the inner cities. This is like blaming the “unvaccinated” – that is, the un-drugged – for the serial sickness of the “vaccinated” (the people who took the drugs that neither prevent the getting nor the spreading of sickness).

  The downtown areas of big cities such as Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore have become blighted wastelands, it’s true. Full of boarded-up homes interspersed with liquor stores here and there – and derelicts everywhere. But this did not happen because the roads were built. It happened because the cities became shitholes. Many were burnt down by peaceful protestors back in the late ’60s – and were never rebuilt. People who wanted to live as far away as possible from the shit – literally, as in dumps on the sidewalk – and peaceful protests, too – left.

  Which they could, because there were roads for them to leave on.

  No one was kept from leaving.

  

  But it is evidence of “racism” that those who chose to stay did just that. As opposed to evidence of lack of initiative. Just saying that latter being extremely “racist” – because it isn’t racist to imply that black people lack initiative. Are not capable of apprehending that the neighborhood is turning to shit and leaving it.

  Which of course many did. Barack Obama, for instance.

  Never mind that. Black folks are too indolent to use the roads to escape to a better place, far away from the shit, the peaceful protestors and the high cost of living in cities controlled by Leftists who make it shitty and expensive to live in cities. Whose policies cause the population that remains to bifurcate into two classes – the very rich and the very poor.

  Who come in all colors.

  The tent cities one sees in cities such as LA and San Francisco are in fact very diverse. Except in one way. It is that everyone living in those tents is poor.

  

  Leftists see this and offer their analysis – and solution. Things must be made more equitable – by keeping everyone in his place. By making everyone equally poor.

  Themselves excepted, of course.

  Get rid of the roads. Get rid of cars, too. Make it harder for anyone to get anywhere, excepting the very affluent – who will as always be able to get anywhere they like. Viz, the Davos Crowd, private-jetting to their private conferences where the “racism” of freedom of movement is bruited about.

  

  Roads “increase access to resources like jobs, healthcare and education,” says one of these – a Young Leader-in-the-making by the name of Raaj Kumar.

  All of which is true and also the point. Why build – why travel upon – roads that don’t take you somewhere better than where you happen to be right now? But then he says “racist road planning and the proliferation of cars in white households, mega-highways  . . . directly contributed to the city’s serious segregation problem.”

  Italics added.

  He refers to Atlanta, a city notorious for its traffic. Which he synonymizes with “segregation.”

  This being akin to defining a drug that does not prevent the getting or spreading of sickness as a “vaccine.”

  No person – of any color – is being thwarted by law from going anywhere they please. Which they are able to do, courtesy of all those roads – which everyone is free to use. The fact that some choose not to use them is just that, a choice. The Leftist says it is a false choice, because some lack the means to make use of roads. But this isn’t a color barrier – the defining attribute of segregation. As in, no – you cannot go there. You must remain here.

  That is segregation.

  Anyone can buy a car. Assuming it’s not an electric car. (Is this pushing of electric cars on people who cannot afford them also “racist”?)

  And roads? They opened up America – all of it – to everyone.

  

  Digging them up and replacing them with foot and bike paths will close off most of America to almost everyone. This is the “15 minute city” vision of the Davos-set, who deploy useful idiots such as Raaj Kumar to foment resentment by crying “racism” at literally everything.

  Including the thing that has benefitted everyone.

  That being the roads – which have made it easy for all of us to be anywhere we like.

  *  *  *

  If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.  We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!  Our donate button is here.

  PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!). My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 17:00

• Seattle's "Dangerous" Homeless Camps Keep Catching On Fire
  Seattle’s “Dangerous” Homeless Camps Keep Catching On Fire

  The Seattle Fire Department has responded to over 1,500 incidents at local homeless encampments over the past two years, with some experts blaming drug use for some of the blazes – an 80% increase over 2020, according to data obtained by the Daily Caller.

  

  Some of the fires start because of intoxicated homeless people either cooking drugs, warming themselves or cooking food, former SFD firefighter Steve Collins, whose career spanned more than 25 years, told the DCNF.

  “What happens is, let’s just say they’re trying to heat up a can of spam or whatever they’re making for dinner, and they create a fire, and while they have a fire heating up their dinner they pass out because of excessive drug use and lack of sleep,” said Collins. “Well, they’re not gonna wake up. So then these fires get started, whether it’s in a building or it’s in a tent or a group of tents, and it’s off to the races.”

  Collins was one of 60 firefighters who were fired for not taking the COVID-19 vaccine. He’s one of nearly two dozen who are suing the City of Seattle for wrongful termination (good luck with that).

  “Pinpointing the cause of every encampment fire is difficult due to multiple possible ignition sources,” said SFD Communications Specialist David Cuerpo, adding “Many encampment fires are ruled as ‘accidental’ and are caused by warming or cooking fires getting out of control. Yes, some are also caused by drug use.”

  The Democratic stronghold is home to over 13,000 homeless people in 2022, more than every similarly sized area nationwide with the exception of Los Angeles County and New York City’s five-boroughs, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

  City statistics showed police responded to 113 calls about gunfire at or near encampments in 2021, up from 51 such calls in 2020, King 5 reported.

  Seattle had a 17% increase in medical responses to homeless people between 2020 and 2022, according to the SFD statistics. Homeless Persons’ Memorial Day vigil organizers said a 20-year record number of homeless people died in King County in 2022, KOUW reported.

  Washington Policy Center Vice President Paul Guppy argued the homeless encampment fire increase is part of a general public safety decline due to Seattle City Council policies that he called “the ongoing legacy of BLM riots and the defund the police movement, when arson and property destruction were widespread.” -Daily Caller

  What’s more, it’s dangerous for firefighters to respond to homeless encampments, as one might imagine.

  “Those places are always dangerous to firemen,” said Collins. “They have weapons, they don’t want you there, whether you’re gonna put out a fire or not, they have needles, they have all sorts of other stuff. The long-term danger is they have lots of bad things that when they burn and you inhale them, it harms you.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/12/2023 – 16:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Massive Protests Erupt In China's Megacity Chongqing Over Abrupt Layoffs
  Massive Protests Erupt In China’s Megacity Chongqing Over Abrupt Layoffs

  Authored by Sophia Lam via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Large groups of workers staged protests on Jan. 7 at a pharmaceutical manufacturing company in Chongqing, a megacity in the southwest of China. The protests erupted after thousands of workers were abruptly laid off by Zybio, Inc., a manufacturer of COVID-19 test kits.

  

  Videos posted online show angry workers demolishing boxes of COVID-19 test kits, vandalizing the company’s offices, and clashing with police in riot gear. Protesters threw plastic boxes, water bottles, and cones at police, who ran from protesters—a rare occurrence in China.

  The unrest began when Zybio suddenly laid off nearly 8,000 employees, according to workers interviewed by the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times. The employees were notified that they could leave for the Chinese New Year, which is still two weeks away, effectively ending their employment.

  Zybio is a leading manufacturer of in vitro diagnostic reagents and equipment based in the Dadukou District of Chongqing, according to the company’s website. Many of those laid off had been recruited by Zybio last year to meet an urgent demand for tests under China’s zero-COVID policies.

  That demand did not materialize, as China abandoned the three-year-long measures abruptly in early December, ending massive mandatory PCR testing.  The halting of mandatory testing hit the pharmaceutical manufacturer hard.

  Layoffs Were the Last Straw

  Xiaodong (pseudonym), a Zybio worker, confirmed to the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times that the protests were sparked by the company’s abrupt layoffs.

  The last three years have seen Chongqing—which has a population of over 30 million—battered by lockdowns, November’s massive protests, and December’s COVID-19 surge. Coming shortly before the Chinese New Year, the sudden layoffs were the last straw for many workers.

  Speaking with The Epoch Times on Jan. 7, Xiaodong accused Zybio of not keeping its promises.

  “The company told us to leave, but it didn’t tell us when to come back and if it would pay us our wages,” Xiaodong said.

  According to Xiaodong, in addition to higher wages, Zybio had promised a 3,000 yuan (about $438) bonus to workers who would work for the company before and after the Chinese New Year.

  Xiaodong, who began working for the company in June, believed that it had a large order at the beginning of December and recruited 6,000 to 7,000 workers at that time.

  “[Zybio] recruited more workers at the beginning of December,” Xiaodong said, “They said that they would pay the bonus in three installments: the first installment of 1,000 yuan (about $146) would be paid if we worked until Jan. 21 and other installments would be paid if we worked until Feb. 15.”

  “I was assigned to make nucleic acid extractors in July. We earned pretty good income in November, about 8,000 yuan to 9,000 yuan ($1,170 to $1,316) for the month,” Xiaodong said. That was the month with the highest income, he said. In October, he earned over 6,000 yuan (roughly $877).

  However, the company’s income fell when the Chinese regime announced the lifting of lockdowns and the halting of mandatory PCR testing. The massive layoffs this month involved about 80 percent of the company’s total workforce, according to Xiaodong.

  From PCR to Antigen Testing

  China’s sudden relaxation of pandemic restrictions left the country in chaos. Chinese citizens complained of a shortage of medicines, hospitals were overwhelmed with patients, and crematories operated around the clock as bodies piled up.

  As the recent spike of COVID-19 swept across the country, residents and doctors in rural areas and remote townships in China complained of a shortage of medicines and antigen testing kits, according to interviews with the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times.

  Zybio pivoted from PCR tests to antigen tests, which offer less accurate, but more rapid results. However, it was not enough to save the Chongqing factory, which a Radio Free Asia report described as “now-defunct.”

  “Some provinces no longer imposed PCR testing in November, so the company [Zybio] began to manufacture antigen testing kits. The problem now is that it gets no more orders for these products,” said Xiaodong.

  ‘Don’t Create Any Trouble’

  The layoffs were handled in a perfunctory manner, infuriating workers, according to Xiaodong.

  “No management showed up or explained to us what was happening. Only a person from the recruitment company came and shouted at us, using a loudspeaker, and told us just to leave. He said: ‘You just go as you’re told to do so! Don’t create any trouble!’”

  Riot police and the head of the Dadukou District government were present during the protests on Jan. 7, according to Xiaodong.

  The protestors dispersed after Zybio agreed to pay workers.

  “The factory said that it would pay us our wages for December on Jan. 7 and our January income on Jan. 8,” Xiaodong said. He said that Zybio offered 1,000 yuan ($146) as a bonus to workers who still wanted to stay with the company.

  At the end of the video footage, police can be heard saying that the protesters are suspected of “disrupting public order” and that organizers will be arrested if they don’t leave immediately.

  The Epoch Times’ multiple calls to Zybio were not answered.

  Ning Haizhong and Gu Xiaohua contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 23:40

• Taliban Unveils Afghanistan's First 'Supercar'
  Taliban Unveils Afghanistan’s First ‘Supercar’

  Afghanistan is the last place anyone would expect a supercar to be built, but a team of 30 engineers at manufacturer ENTOP and Kabul’s Afghanistan Technical Vocational Institute unveiled a black-colored sports car.

  

  The first supercar from Afghanistan is called the “Mada 9” and looks similar to a McLaren or even Bugatti (from a distance). 

  

  Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid posted images of the Mada 9 on social media and said its beauty is an ‘honor’ for the entire country. 

  

  Beyond the pictures, the question remains what’s under the hood? Several tweets reveal the engine is comparable to a Toyota Corolla hatchback. 

  “The designers have used different parts of other vehicles, mostly Toyota parts, to build the first model,” Afghan press Khaama Press said. 

  A video on ENTOP’s Twitter shows the mechanics of the car. Any car enthusiast would compare it to a kit car. 

  Woman Gives Life pic.twitter.com/UOBV31TyxG

  — Entop (@entopco) December 31, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Khaama said ENTOP envisions Mada 9 featured at the 2023 Qatar Exhibition in Doha. Well, they better beef up the motor before that… 

  Does anyone want to guess the 0-60 mph? 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 23:20

• California's Emission Reduction Plan Lacks Clear Strategy: Report
  California’s Emission Reduction Plan Lacks Clear Strategy: Report

  Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

  California’s aggressive climate plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions “lacks a clear strategy,” the Legislative Analyst’s Office reported on Jan. 4.

  “Despite the significant reductions needed to meet these goals, CARB’s plan does not identify which specific policies it will implement,” the report stated.

  The California Air Resources Board (CARB) in December 2022 adopted an “equity-focused” 300-page climate action plan, or roadmap, to meet the state’s goal of drastically reducing emissions and reaching carbon neutrality by 2045.

  

  The agency also adopted a more ambitious goal for 2030, seeking to reduce emissions by 48 percent—instead of the statutory mandate’s 40 percent—below the 1990 level.

  The analyst’s office said that without a clear roadmap, state departments will be forced to identify and adopt necessary policy changes in a short time, which could make the process “costlier and/or disruptive for private businesses and households.”

  According to the report, CARB’s plan is unclear about how much the state will rely on financial incentives, regulatory programs, or cap-and-trade—a government program that puts a cap on emissions and requires companies to pay for extra allowances—to achieve these goals.

  The plan also didn’t provide the state Legislature with enough information on potential financial and environmental impacts, among other concerns, according to the report.

  “Failing to develop a credible plan … could adversely affect California’s ability to serve as an effective model for other jurisdictions or demonstrate global leadership,” the report stated.

  The office has recommended the Legislature direct CARB to submit a report by July 31 to clarify its plan.

  

  California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, speaks to reporters during a visit the Antioch Water Treatment Plant in Antioch, Calif., on Aug. 11, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

  In November 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom applauded the plan, calling it “the most ambitious set of climate goals of any jurisdiction in the world” that will “spur an economic transformation akin to the industrial revolution.”

  The plan reflected the governor’s call for more aggressive climate measures and a faster transition to clean energy. It aims to cut air pollution by 71 percent and reduce the consumption and demand of fossil fuel by 86 percent and 94 percent, respectively, by 2045.

  The state has reduced emissions by about 1 percent annually over the past decade. To meet CARB’s goals, the state would need to speed up to about 4 percent, the analyst’s office said.

  Most of the transformation would come from reducing the presence of fossil fuels as much as possible, including phasing out the use of natural gas for heating homes and buildings. It also means clamping down on chemicals and refrigerants and encouraging residents to walk, bike, and use public transit instead of driving.

  The plan also introduced four potential scenarios of how the state might become carbon neutral between 2035 and 2045, each with different levels of restrictions on residents and businesses.

  The first path, also the most restrictive, includes phasing out all fossil fuel refining in the state; reducing vehicle miles traveled by 30 percent; and allowing only electric vehicles on the road—all by 2035. It also calls for reducing heating, air conditioning, and water heaters in buildings and replacing them with electric appliances by the same year. Cutting dairy methane emissions—or cow manure emissions—by 50 to 75 percent by reducing the state’s dairy cow population is also mandated in this case.

  Other assumed scenarios allow longer transition time, with fewer restrictions but accelerated removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 23:00

• Former US Capitol Police Commander Reveals Failures In January 6 Evacuation Response
  Former US Capitol Police Commander Reveals Failures In January 6 Evacuation Response

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A top U.S. Capitol Police commander – recently retired Assistant Chief Yogananda Pittman – failed to respond to repeated urgent radio calls to evacuate the U.S. Congress on Jan. 6, 2021, causing the loss of precious time that might have prevented the shooting death of protester Ashli Babbitt, a former USCP commander said.

  

  The delay caused by the radio silence from the Capitol Police Command Center was so urgent that the 22-year veteran lieutenant located near the U.S. Senate chamber forged ahead with the evacuation anyway. He said he feared lawmakers would be injured or killed if he didn’t lead them to safety before the chamber doors were breached by protesters.

  In a series of exclusive interviews with The Epoch Times, former Lt. Tarik K. Johnson, 47, detailed allegations that Pittman failed to respond to multiple urgent calls for help.

  “I begged for help all day on Jan. 6, 2021, and I feel I was largely ignored,” Johnson told The Epoch Times. “I beg again on Jan. 6, 2023—exactly two years later—for the proper investigative entities to uncover what really occurred on J6 and I pray that the country hears my cry.”

  Johnson said the crucial delay in the evacuations should never have happened.

  “There was no response from anybody at the Command Center,” Johnson said. “I say even before I initiated evacuation, I say specifically, ‘We’ve got to start thinking about getting the people out before we don’t have a chance to.’ I heard no response. Then I asked for permission to evacuate. I heard no response.”

  Pittman, 49, who will begin a new job as chief of police at the University of California-Berkeley on Feb. 1, did not reply to messages seeking comment. She announced her retirement from USCP in November 2022.

  The USCP Command Center, located on the seventh floor of the headquarters building on D Street in Washington, is a 40-by-30-foot room staffed by Capitol Police and officials from partner agencies, including the DC Metropolitan Police Department, the FBI, U.S. Park Police, and others.

  In his new book, “Courage Under Fire,” published on Jan. 3, former USCP Chief Steven Sund, 57, said an area of the Command Center nicknamed “the pit” is used for monitoring “all the camera systems, radios, alarms, and a computer-aided dispatch terminal to monitor USCP and MPD calls for service.”

  Founded by an act of Congress in 1828, the U.S. Capitol Police has more than 1,800 sworn officers, more than 500 civilian employees, and an annual budget of $602.5 million.

  According to the book, Sund was in the Command Center the afternoon of Jan. 6, but was occupied making dozens of calls to the House and Senate sergeants at arms and the Pentagon, trying to get National Guard troops sent to the Capitol. He also made and took numerous calls to arrange for mutual aid from surrounding police agencies, the book said.

  There is no indication in the book that Sund was aware of the unanswered calls for help. Johnson does not fault him for the troubles. Sund did describe watching some of the Capitol violence unfold from the Command Center.

  “As I sit in my Command Center watching the video screens,” Sund wrote, “my frustration at the repeated delays from the sergeants at arms, along with my concern for my officers’ safety, is redlining. To be more precise, I am [expletive] livid.”

  Johnson became known to much of America as the Capitol Police lieutenant who wore a bright red Make America Great Again ball cap when he worked with a pair of Oath Keepers to rescue 16 USCP officers trapped in the foyer inside the massive Columbus Doors.

  Johnson was suspended by USCP and later accused of rules violations, including conduct unbecoming, for wearing the Trump hat and working with the Oath Keepers on the officer rescue. He said he believes those charges were actually brought because the evacuations and other split-second leadership decisions he made embarrassed Pittman.

  

  After about 17 months of suspension, Johnson got his job back, but chose to resign. Johnson said wearing the MAGA cap made the crowds more receptive to him, provided a level of safety that he likened to a tactical helmet, and served as a de-escalation tool.

  Johnson had been with USCP for 22 years at the time of the Jan. 6 events, serving as a police officer, dignitary special agent, sergeant, and lieutenant. For two years prior to his USCP service, he worked for the Senate Sergeant at Arms.

  One of the Oath Keepers, retired New York police Sgt. Michael Nichols, said Johnson’s actions during the officer rescue were heroic.

  “He adapted to the environment, put the officers’ and people’s safety before his own, and succeeded in defusing a tense situation that could have resulted in a mass-casualty incident,” Nichols said.

  Johnson’s actions throughout the day on Jan. 6 reminded Nichols of a character in the television miniseries “Band of Brothers.”

  “It’s not like he just helped these officers out, this man was like the lieutenant in Band of Brothers who just keeps running back and forth across the battlefield to get everyone in position and on task, with no regard for self—only for what needs to be done,” Nichols told The Epoch Times. “He really saw the big picture that day.”

  Rico La Starza, who documented the rescue operation on video, agreed. “He’s the leader people pray for,” La Starza said. “Quick on the feet and willing to go through flames for his team.”

  Radio Dispatch Recordings Confirm Events

  Johnson’s assertions about the Senate and House evacuations were corroborated by USCP radio dispatch recordings and transcripts obtained by The Epoch Times.

  The unanswered plea for authorization to evacuate was among at least four instances when Johnson or the USCP dispatcher asked in vain for help or direction from the Command Center, where Pittman sat at the center console near Chief Sund.

  Babbitt was shot and killed by USCP Lt. Michael Byrd at 2:44 p.m. as she attempted to climb through a broken window pane leading into the Speaker’s Lobby. Shortly before that, Babbitt shouted at rioters who were vandalizing the doors and windows and chastised three Capitol Police officers for doing nothing to stop the violence.

  

  Johnson said if the evacuation of Congress started when he first asked for help, Byrd would not have been near the Speaker’s Lobby entrance, and the House chamber would have been empty if the violent crowd had somehow breached the barricaded double doors.

  “I made the evacuation order at approximately 2:28 for the Senate, and then I did it maybe six to eight minutes later for the House,” Johnson said.

  “[Byrd] should not have been put in that situation. Had the evacuation occurred earlier, Lt. Michael Byrd would not have been there and Ashli Babbitt would have met a vacated lobby.”

  Senate Evacuation

  Audio from the main USCP radio channel provides dramatic testimony on the efforts to evacuate hundreds of lawmakers and staff.

  At about 2:23 p.m., Johnson asked for authorization to have one of the Senate doors unlocked so he could get Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger into the chamber. Thomas Lloyd, USCP inspector, crackled across the radio, “Approved.”

  Johnson shortly made his biggest and most urgent plea of the day.

  “405J-John with a message. I want to advise that we evacuate the Senate floor before [we] won’t have a chance to,” Johnson said over the radio just after 2:25 p.m. “We have a clear directional sight to get out of the Senate door from the second floor. I need permission to go ahead and initiate that, copy.”

  The dispatcher repeated Johnson’s plea. “…He has a clear sight to get everyone out,” the dispatcher said.

  For a second time, the dispatcher relayed the request. “405J-John requesting to clear the Senate floor,” he said. “He has a clear path. Clear ahead a path to get everyone out.”

  

  There was no reply from the command staff on the ground or in the Command Center. Johnson said Pittman, then the No. 2 official at U.S. Capitol Police, was the person who should have made that call.

  Johnson said his fear grew as the seconds and minutes ticked away.

  “405J-John disregard,” Johnson broadcast. “I’m going to go ahead and do it anyway. I’ll take the 550 or 534. We’re evacuating now on the north side, send everybody out the Senate door, copy.”

  The numbers 550 and 534 refer to officer disciplinary codes, Johnson said.

  The dispatcher responded: “I copy that. Evacuations being executed at this time, 1429 hours [2:29 p.m.].”

  The official USCP Jan. 6 timeline of events states that at 2:28 p.m., “remaining members evacuated from Senate floor.”

  Dispatch acknowledged the evacuation order at 2:29 p.m. At 2:32 p.m., Deputy Chief Eric Waldow broadcast, “Senate floor is continued to be evacuated. I’m moving with the members now.”

  The Senate was declared clear at 2:33 p.m.

  House Evacuation

  The House went into recess at 2:29 p.m. At about that time, a group of 75–100 protesters—including Babbitt—began filling up the hallway outside of the Speaker’s Lobby adjacent to the House chamber. Some members of the crowd turned violent and began rioting. Agitators smashed the glass in the doors with a helmet and flag poles.

  After leading the senators through the subway tunnel to safety, Johnson turned his attention to the evacuation of the House, coordinating over the radio with Sgt. Nelson Vargas, 49.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 22:20

• Visualizing $65 Trillion In Hidden Dollar Debt
  Visualizing $65 Trillion In Hidden Dollar Debt

  The scale of hidden dollar debt around the world is huge.

  As Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld details below, no less than $65 trillion in unrecorded dollar debt circulates across the global financial system in non-U.S. banks and shadow banks. To put in perspective, global GDP sits at $104 trillion.

  This dollar debt is in the form of foreign-exchange swaps, which have exploded over the last decade due to years of monetary easing and ultra-low interest rates, as investors searched for higher yields. Today, unrecorded debt from these foreign-exchange swaps is worth more than double the dollar debt officially recorded on balance sheets across these institutions.

  

  Based on analysis from the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the above infographic charts the rise in hidden dollar debt across non-U.S. financial institutions and examines the wider implications of its growth.

  Dollar Debt: A Beginners Guide

  To start, we will briefly look at the role of foreign-exchange (forex) swaps in the global economy. The forex market is the largest in the world by a long stretch, with trillions traded daily.

  Some of the key players that use foreign-exchange swaps are:

  • Corporations

  • Financial institutions

  • Central banks

  To understand forex swaps is to look at the role of currency risk. As we have seen in 2022, the U.S. dollar has been on a tear. When this happens, it hurts company earnings that generate revenue across borders. That’s because they earn revenue in foreign currencies (which have likely declined in value against the dollar) but end up converting earnings to U.S. dollars.

  In order to reduce currency risk, market participants will buy forex swaps. Here, two parties agree to exchange one currency for another. In short, this helps protect the company from unfavorable foreign exchange rates.

  What’s more, due to accounting rules, forex swaps are often unrecorded on balance sheets, and as a result are quite opaque.

  A Mountain of Debt

  Since 2008, the value of this opaque, unrecorded dollar debt has nearly doubled.

  

  *As of June 30, 2022

  Driving its rise in part was an era of rock-bottom interest rates globally. As investors sought out higher returns, they took on greater leverage—and forex swaps are one example of this.

  Now, as interest rates have been rising, forex swaps have increased amid higher market volatility as investors look to hedge currency risk. This appears in both non-U.S. banks and non-U.S. shadow banks, which are unregulated financial intermediaries.

  Overall, the value of unrecorded debt is staggering. An estimated $39 trillion is held by non-U.S. banks along with $26 trillion in overseas shadow banks around the world.

  Past Case Studies

  Why does the massive growth in dollar debt present risks?

  During the market crashes of 2008 and 2020, forex swaps faced a funding squeeze. To borrow U.S. dollars, market participants had to pay high rates. A lot of this hinged on the impact of extreme volatility on these swaps, putting pressure on funding rates.

  Here are two examples of how volatility can heighten risk in the forex market:

  • Exchange-rate volatility: Sharp swings in USD can spur a liquidity crunch

  • U.S. interest-rate volatility: Sudden rate fluctuations can mean much higher costs for these trades

  In both cases, the U.S. central bank had to step in to provide liquidity in the market and prevent dollar shortages. This was done through pumping cash into the system and creating swap lines with other non-U.S. banks such as the Bank of Canada or the Bank of Japan. These were designed to protect from declining currency values and a liquidity crunch.

  Dollar Debt: The Wider Implications

  The risk from growing dollar debt and these swap lines arises when a non-U.S. bank or shadow bank may not be able to hold up their end of the agreement. In fact, on a daily basis, there is an estimated $2.2 trillion in forex swaps exposed to settlement risk.

  Given its vast scale, this dollar debt could have greater systemic spillover effects. If participants fail to pay it could undermine financial market stability. Because demand for U.S. dollars increases during market uncertainty, a worsening economic climate could potentially expose the forex market to more vulnerabilities.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 22:00

• Experts Question Why Biden And Trump Treated Differently In Classified Document Cases
  Experts Question Why Biden And Trump Treated Differently In Classified Document Cases

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As Republican lawmakers such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) express concern that President Joe Biden’s retention of classified materials from his vice presidency may be “[swept] under the rug,” legal experts told The Epoch Times why Biden and former President Donald Trump appear to have been treated very differently in two strikingly parallel cases.

  

  FBI agents executed a search warrant on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida, in August 2022. The warrant said there was probable cause to believe there were “additional documents that contain classified NDI [national defense information]” or “presidential records subject to record retention requirements” at Mar-a-Lago.

  By contrast, neither the Penn Biden Center nor any other address associated with Biden has been raided after classified materials were reportedly found at the center’s Washington office, which is located in a nondescript building about a mile from the White House.

  “What’s the difference in what President Trump did versus what we now know President Biden did?” asked House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), as reported by CBS.

  Biden’s attorneys have said that the materials were identified on Nov. 2, just days before an underwhelming midterm election performance by Republicans. Yet, the public wasn’t told of the existence of those materials until Jan. 9, two months after those elections took place.

  That delay is indicative of “a political cover-up,” says Mike Davis, former chief counsel for nominations to then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and the founder of the Article III Project.

  He sees it as part of a pattern under the Biden administration.

  “There’s a clear political double standard at the Biden Justice Department, which has been politicized and weaponized against Republicans,” Davis told The Epoch Times on Jan. 10.

  An expert on administrative law had a similar perspective.

  “The fact that this has happened really creates a rule of law: if you’re a Republican, you have to meet certain exacting standards when it comes to records, and if you’re a Democrat, you don’t,” according to the expert, who requested anonymity because company policy doesn’t allow employees to speak to the media.

  “A Republican president must operate in a fishbowl. If you’re a Republican president, the presumption is you have to preserve everything. And you just have to be extra careful. If you’re a Democrat, rest assured, you’re going to have different procedures applied.”

  Under a more consistent system, he added, the standard set by Trump’s case would also have applied to Biden’s case.

  “The Justice Department shouldn’t have said, ‘Let’s negotiate. You guys review and tell us what you find.’ The Justice Department should have immediately had the FBI raid the offices. Why? How do we know, without documenting and creating an inventory, whether the documents were classified or top secret?”

  Davis contrasted the case of Trump’s records with the developing story of Biden’s handling of classified materials.

  “President Trump had the absolute constitutional and statutory power under the Presidential Records Act to declassify and take presidential records when he left office. Former Vice President Joe Biden absolutely did not,” he said.

  Citing an appeals court decision, an analysis of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant from the Congressional Research Service suggested that Trump’s broad authority to declassify information could be hemmed in if he failed to “‘follow established procedures.’”

  “It’s the process that’s the punishment. In other words, the bureaucrats make the rules, whether or not they’re in law or not. And if you violate those rules, there are consequences,” the anonymous legal expert said.

  For Davis, the more recent revelations about Biden’s vice presidential materials raise key questions pertinent to established procedures and also United States national security–questions he believes Republicans in the House must pursue through their oversight authority on a range of committees.

  

  “Did Hunter Biden have access to this office? Did James Biden have access to this office? What were these classified documents? Have they done an intel assessment? Are they planning to do an FBI raid? Are they planning to question Hunter Biden, James Biden, and Joe Biden [and] anyone else who [may have] had access to that office?” he asked.

  Archives Had ‘No Power’ in Trump Case: Expert

  The legal expert said the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) didn’t have the authority to refer the Trump records case to the Department of Justice, as occurred prior to the Mar-a-Lago raid.

  While Title 44 does specify that NARA can refer cases involving federal agency records to the Department of Justice, there’s no parallel language in that title pertaining to presidential records.

  “There is no power for the archivist in those cases to make referrals to the Justice Department,” the expert said.

  In the expert’s opinion, the former president’s legal team should have made a challenge on that basis.

  “Trump’s lawyers were asleep at the wheel,” the expert said, contrasting those lawyers with Biden’s “top-quality” legal representation.

  CBS has reported that Attorney General Merrick Garland assigned the U.S. attorney in Chicago, John R. Lausch Jr., to investigate why the Penn Biden Center came to hold classified material.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 21:40

• Iran's Navy To Sail Fleet To Panama Canal In Challenge To US
  Iran’s Navy To Sail Fleet To Panama Canal In Challenge To US

  Via The Cradle,

  According to a report by Tasnim News Agency, during a conference on maritime civilization in Tehran, Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral Shahram Irani announced on Wednesday that plans are in progress to dispatch the Iranian naval forces to the Panama Canal.

  “The Iranian Navy units are getting closer to the coasts of the Americas,” he stated. The navy commander elaborated that Iranian naval forces had already been deployed to all of the strategic straits across the world – with the exception of just two.

  

  “The Iranian Navy forces will sail into one of those two remaining straits this year while plans are being made for the presence of the Iranian naval forces in the Panama Canal.”

  Irani went on to add that the Iranian Navy has established three ocean commands supervising missions to the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean, and the Atlantic Ocean. “The equipment that will join the Navy in the future is in line with the missions of these three commands,” he explained.

  He highlighted the naval forces’ previous achievement of sailing across the Pacific Ocean and revealed that at the time, Australia and France both posed threats to Iran by breaking the regulations involving sailing past their coasts – regulations that they themselves had issued. In the face of these threats, however, Iran stood its ground and responded to them in accordance with the law.

  The Australian Department of Defense announced on January 2nd that two Iranian warships had been detected passing through the South Pacific.

  

  In August of 2022, the Iranian navy commander made clear that the “Iranian Navy Forces are present in any ocean if needed” and that they are “ready to counter any foreign danger powerfully.”

  That said, Iran is not seeking to engage in conflict and would only retaliate in the event that its security is endangered.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 21:00

• Computer Monitor Prices Slide As PC Bust Worsens
  Computer Monitor Prices Slide As PC Bust Worsens

  Readers have been well-informed about the pandemic-fueled personal computer boom that ended last year. 

  We have pointed out that graphics cards to memory chips have been deeply discounted in the last several months due to lackluster demand and rising supply. Another critical piece of the PC that is being discounted due to waning demand is the monitor. 

  Bloomberg Intelligence’s Steven Tseng and Sean Chen said a PC bust had added downward pressure on computer monitor shipments. 

  LCD monitor-panel shipments could continue to fall by double-digit percentages vs. a year ago in the coming months due to lackluster demand for PCs. Waning remote-working tailwinds and the transition to laptops from desktop PCs could weigh on monitor sales. Corporate IT spending might also become cautious this year due to escalating geopolitical tensions and risk of a recession. As panel makers convert some TV production lines for IT applications, the oversupply situation could linger and continue to pressure panel prices. 

  LCD monitor-panel shipments by area fell 29% in November vs. a year ago, according to IDC. Prices of 1080p monitor panels decreased 1.2% sequentially in December.

  

  Take a look at computer monitors on Amazon — many are heavily discounted, a sign demand has weakened. 

  

  The analyst said while the computer panel price downturn might continue, the bust in TV panel prices could recover from a trough. 

  Perhaps it’s time to upgrade the trading and/or research desk monitors with new monitors. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 20:40

• The US Consumer Product Safety Commission Denies Gas Stove Ban
  The US Consumer Product Safety Commission Denies Gas Stove Ban

  By Julianne Geiger of Oilprice.com,

  The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has no plans to ban gas stoves, the agency said, according to Bloomberg.

  

  A commissioner from the same agency, Richard Trumka Jr., earlier this week said that the CPSC had been considering a ban on gas stoves for months, with Trumka recommending in October that the agency seek public comment on the hazards of gas stoves.

  But the head of the CPSC, Alexander Hoehn-Saric, said on Wednesday that the agency had no such plans.

  “I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so,” Hoehn-Saric said in a statement to Bloomberg on Wednesday, just a day after discussions of a ban set off a flurry of reactions on both sides.

  Hoehn-Saric added that the Commission—made up of just four members—was researching emissions from gas stoves.

  Back in August of last year, the Committee on Oversight and Reform—the principal oversight committee of the House of Representatives, asked the Commission to turn over documents and information “about the CPSC’s failure to establish safety standards and provide adequate warnings to consumers addressing the significant health risks posed by indoor air pollution from gas stoves.” The Committee document was retrieved in Cached form, as the document can no longer be found at its original web location.

  The push against gas stoves has resulted in GOP backlash, with Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) also speaking out against the idea of a ban on the cooking appliance preferred by most chefs.

  “This is a recipe for disaster. The federal government has no business telling American families how to cook their dinner,” Manchin said, adding that if this was the CPSC’s greatest concern, “I think we need to reevaluate the commission.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 20:20

• Largest US Grid Saw Nearly 25% Of Power Generation Fail During Christmas Cold Blast
  Largest US Grid Saw Nearly 25% Of Power Generation Fail During Christmas Cold Blast

  PJM Interconnection, a regional power grid that stretches from Illinois to New Jersey, declared an emergency during Christmas and was on the brink of implementing rolling blackouts for millions of customers due to a partial power-generation fleet shutdown. 

  The regional power grid operator has over 65 million customers in 13 states and the District of Columbia. It published its first analysis explaining the grid strain when temperatures dove well below freezing due to 23% of its power-generation fleet shuttering on Dec. 24. 

  About 70% of the 46 gigawatts of outages were due to NatGas-fired power generation going offline, which left the grid operator in dire straits as temperatures continued to plunge and electricity demand soared as customers turned up their thermostats. 

  Here’s PJM’s report explaining how the cold blast last month nearly sparked an energy crisis. 

  PJM shows the cold shot lasted between Dec. 23-25. 

  

  Temperatures recorded one of the most dramatic drops in a decade.

  

  The grid saw a record-high load versus the previous ten years over the holiday weekend. 

  

  Power demand was elevated for days as the grid struggled to keep up. 

  

  Then came power generation outages. Here’s a timeline of what happened:

  

  Most of the power generation that was lost was natural gas and coal. 

  

  Even though the winter has been mild, there has been increasing chatter on Twitter about a possible cold snap at the end of January or next month. But remember, no forecast is locked yet. 

  Keeping an eye on differences in the extended range…

  🧐EPS would be a moderation with some cooler air behind storms.

  🥶GEFS taps into the Arctic a bit more and dumps colder air in at the end of the run.

  Our favored idea in this AM’s #energy report at https://t.co/UQhaRd1MOF pic.twitter.com/N2Bzu4gSvb

  — BAM Weather (BAMWX) (@bamwxcom) January 11, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  #Natgas demand will be volatile over the next 2 weeks. Withdrawals will dip to -7 BCF/d tomorrow before jumping close to the 5-yr avg this weekend, only to drop back into single digits next week. By Jan 23 or 24, a more sustained shot of cooler temperatures may *finally* arrive. pic.twitter.com/b8TEH1A1V4

  — Celsius Energy (@CelsiusEnergyFM) January 11, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  #natgas
  By Jan 27 the center of polar air is right over North America with -40C, an historic cold air mass. I am accumulating natgas derivatives for March. It is an outstanding opportunity, yet everybody has to decide on its own what to do with it. pic.twitter.com/VANIYpvXkd

  — Heinrich Leopold (@LeopoldHeinrich) January 11, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And what about the next cold blast? Is PJM ready? 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 20:00

• Chances Of Reenlistment Unclear For Discharged Troops After Pentagon Rescinds COVID Vaccine Mandate
  Chances Of Reenlistment Unclear For Discharged Troops After Pentagon Rescinds COVID Vaccine Mandate

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,

  The Department of Defense is formally ending the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for the U.S. military and the National Guard, but did not provide any signal as to whether those discharged over having refused the vaccine would have any chance of being reenlisted.

  

  Meanwhile, for those who are currently serving in the armed forces, none “shall be separated solely on the basis of their refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccination if they sought an accommodation on religious, administrative, or medical grounds,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin wrote in a memorandum (pdf) on Jan. 10.

  “The Military Departments will update the records of such individuals to remove any adverse actions solely associated with denials of such requests, including letters of reprimand,” Austin said in the memo.

  “The Secretaries of the Military Departments will further cease any ongoing reviews of current Service member religious, administrative, or medical accommodation requests solely for exemption from the COVID-19 vaccine or appeals of denials of such requests.”

  The directive comes after a Pentagon official announced on Jan. 5 the department had rescinded the mandate and was in the process of developing “further guidance” on vaccines for the force.

  All actions related to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, which Austin had imposed in August 2021, had been halted by the Pentagon in late December 2022.

  Austin said in the Jan. 10 memo that COVID-19 vaccines have been given to over 2 million service members and that 96 percent of the active and reserve forces are fully vaccinated against COVID-19. He said he is “deeply proud” of the Pentagon’s efforts to combat COVID-19.

  More than 8,000 service members have been discharged for refusing the vaccine.

  The Pentagon “will continue to promote and encourage COVID-19 vaccination for all Service members,” Austin said.

  For the service members who were administratively discharged “on the sole basis that the Service member failed to obey a lawful order” to take the vaccine, Austin said the Pentagon is prevented by law from giving anything less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. A general discharge is a step down from an honorable discharge and is generally given to troops who had satisfactory service but had minor misconduct.

  Those who received a general discharge may petition their military department’s discharge review boards for “correction of military or naval records” to request a correction to the characterization of their discharge, he said.

  Reenlistment Unclear After Thousands Discharged

  President Joe Biden, on Dec. 23, 2022, signed into law the $858 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year 2023, which had passed via bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate. The legislation stipulated that Austin must rescind the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for members of the armed forces within 30 days of Biden’s signature.

  Austin cited the legislation in repealing the mandates issued in August 2021 for U.S. military members and in November 2021 for the National Guard.

  Republican lawmakers, who comprised the minority in both chambers last year, had pushed for the removal of the vaccine mandate and celebrated the provision in the NDAA upon its passing in the House and Senate.

  The Pentagon discharged a total of “3,300 Marines, 1,800 soldiers, 1,800 sailors, and 900 airmen simply based on their personal decision to not take the COVID vaccine,” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a statement on Dec. 6, 2022.

  “These heroes deserve justice now that the mandate is no more,” he said.

  “The Biden administration must correct service records and not stand in the way of reenlisting any service member discharged simply for not taking the COVID vaccine.”

  The Pentagon has not immediately responded to a request for comment from The Epoch Times on whether it has any plans to reenlist those who had been discharged for the sole reason of refusing the COVID-19 vaccine.

  

  A member of the U.S. military receives the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine at Camp Foster in Ginowan, Japan, on April 28, 2021. (Carl Court/Getty Images)

  Opposition to Mandates

  Until the passing of the NDAA, the military COVID-19 mandates had been kept in place—even amid plummeting efficacy of the vaccine against infection and severe illness since the spread of the Omicron variant in late 2021, and research suggesting that natural immunity could be more effective than vaccination.

  The mandates saw resistance among troops and Americans at large, including lawmakers in Congress, who argued in favor of bodily autonomy free from coercion.

  Even before the mandates, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) in July 2021 shared that military members said they would quit instead of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.

  By October 2022, just two months before Congress passed the NDAA, The Epoch Times reported that military officers who became injured after their COVID-19 vaccinations called for the mandate to be scrapped.

  The military has notoriously issued mass rejections for religious requests for exemptions to the mandate, triggering multiple court challenges. Judges had blocked three of the four branches from discharging most members seeking religious exemptions over the treatment, which the judges said violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

  Just 0.5 percent of the religious accommodation requests have been approved by the Marines, followed by 1 percent for the Navy, 2.3 percent for the Air Force, and 6 percent for the Army. Thousands of requests were still not adjudicated before the mandate was withdrawn.

  

  Soldiers file paperwork before being administered COVID-19 vaccines in Fort Knox, Ky., on Sept. 9, 2021. (Jon Cherry/Getty Images)

  Troop Retention Concerns

  McCarthy said at the time the Army and Navy “missed their 2022 recruitment goals by thousands of service members.” Meanwhile, noting the thousands discharged, McCarthy said the COVID-19 vaccine mandate “was detrimental to the ranks, and there is no doubt it put our national security at risk.”

  McCarthy’s concerns over military retention were reflected in a projection by the Army National Guard in October 2022 of a loss of as many as 14,000 soldiers across the country over the next two years. This was attributed to refusals to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate. A loss of 9,000 soldiers was projected for the fiscal year 2023, and another 5,000 soldiers was projected for fiscal 2024, if the mandate persisted.

  Austin, also on Dec. 6, 2022, drew public attention to recruitment and said there’s no “hard data that directly links the COVID mandate to an affect on our recruiting.” A day later, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh said in a statement that the mandate “appears to have very minimal impact on recruiting.” The two did not comment on retention.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 19:40

• Putin Again Replaces Commander Overseeing Russian Forces In Ukraine
  Putin Again Replaces Commander Overseeing Russian Forces In Ukraine

  It was only three months ago that the Kremlin named General Sergei Surovikin to head up Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine, which President Putin has since admitted is in fact a “war”. 

  He’s already been sacked, as on Wednesday the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced that Valery Gerasimov, who is head of the general staff of the Russian Armed Forces, is taking over the reigns of the operation.

  

  Surovikin will now serve as one of Gerasimov’s deputies, effectively a demotion. A MoD statement cited the “need to organize closer interaction between the branches and arms of the Armed Forces” in his appointment, and to improve the support and effectiveness of “command and control of groupings of troops,” as cited in Axios.

  According to a brief summary of Gerasimov’s bio (already a familiar face among top Kremlin leadership, and as Putin’s longtime military right-hand) in Sky News:

  Valery Gerasimov currently holds the job of Russia’s highest-ranking uniformed officer, as Chief of the General Staff.

  Sitting at the right hand of Vladimir Putin, he was one of only three people – including the president himself and the defence minister – who were in charge of plotting the invasion of Ukraine. 

  Back in May, he reportedly visited the frontline in the eastern Donbas region – as troops were apparently suffering from low morale and heavy losses. 

  Interestingly, Surovikin’s October appointment was intended to reverse a tide of setbacks for Russian forces in the east and south of Ukraine, as it struggled to control territory that Moscow is seeking to annex politically, especially after it held ‘popular referendums’ in late September.

  Many of the latest major setbacks, particularly the Russian forces’ withdrawal from Kherson, took place under Surovikin’s leadership.

  However, one prominent military analyst and commentator noted it could be more of a reshuffling for political reasons and not because Surovikin is fundamentally being viewed as a failure…

  I don’t think this is because Surovikin is viewed as a failure. Certainly possible that this was driven by political reasons. As the unified commander in Ukraine, Surovikin was becoming very powerful and was likely bypassing Shoigu/Gerasimov when talking to Putin.

  — Rob Lee (@RALee85) January 11, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  At the same time, the private military firm Wagner Group, which has ties to Putin, has touted some of its own successes, sparking distrust and friction with the official military command structure.

  Gerasimov’s tenure was marked by an uptick in Russian air power targeting Ukraine’s national energy grid, in what’s now become an openly stated strategy to degrade and destroy the war-ravaged country’s power grid and resources. Ukraine has meanwhile been claiming that Moscow is readying a massive new mobilization of some 500,000 additional troops.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 19:20

• Emory Law Professor Denounces The Late Antonin Scalia As "Basically A Klansman"
  Emory Law Professor Denounces The Late Antonin Scalia As “Basically A Klansman”

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  In the age of rage, it often seems that the most rageful reign supreme. That appears to be the case of Emory law professor, Darren Hutchinson, who has claimed that the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was “basically a Klansman.”  The disgraceful attack was met by silence from most law professors despite the fact that Hutchinson’s support for the claim is breathtakingly off-base and would mean that a majority of the Court in 1986 were basically KKK members.

  There are many who disagree with the judicial philosophy of Scalia or particularly rulings that he wrote in his storied career. That is all fair game and Scalia loved such debates.

  

  However, Professor Hutchinson preferred character assassination rather than reasoned criticism of Scalia.

  Scalia is, of course, not alive to defend himself so it should fall to the rest of us to step forward. (Indeed, the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg would have likely been one of those who would have defended her close friend, if she were alive).

  Yet, the sad fact is that this type of ad hominem attack thrills many in academia while others are reluctant to speak out.

  Hutchinson recounted on Twitter how he taught a difficult lesson at Emory Law School on how “Justice Scalia was basically a Klansman.”

  The reason cited is his opinion he wrote in the 1987 case of McCleskey v. Kemp.

  That opinion was joined by four other justices (Powell, Rehnquist, White, O’Connor), who are also presumably klansmen under the logic of Professor Hutchinson.

  Indeed, Scalia did not write the majority opinion, which was penned by Justice Lewis Powell. Additionally, the appellate judges would also be de facto KKK members since they also rejected the argument.

  The case involved an African-American defendant, Warren McCleskey, who was convicted of two counts of armed robbery and one count of murder in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia. His victim was  white Atlanta Police Officer Frank Schlatt and the jury found that both the felony murder and the killing of a police officer were “aggravating circumstances” that justified the death penalty. In his habeas appeal, Hutchinson alleged that the capital sentencing process was administered in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. He based those arguments on a study of David C. Baldus, Charles Pulaski, and statistician George Woodworth known as the “Baldus study.”

  The issue on appeal was whether a general finding of racism in the system was sufficient or whether a defendant must show evidence of racism in his actual case. Both felony murder and the killing of an officer are commonly used as aggravating circumstances in capital cases.

  The United States for the Eleventh Circuit rejected this use of a statistical study without evidence that racism played a role in the specific case under review.  The court actually assumed the accuracy of the report for the purposes of the appeal but found that statistics are

  “insufficient to demonstrate discriminatory intent or unconstitutional discrimination in the Fourteenth Amendment context, [and] insufficient to show irrationality, arbitrariness and capriciousness under any kind of Eighth Amendment analysis.”

  Id. at 891. The Eleventh Circuit added:

  “The Baldus approach . . . would take the cases with different results on what are contended to be duplicate facts, where the differences could not be otherwise explained, and conclude that the different result was based on race alone. . . . This approach ignores the realities. . . . There are, in fact, no exact duplicates in capital crimes and capital defendants. The type of research submitted here tends to show which of the directed factors were effective, but is of restricted use in showing what undirected factors control the exercise of constitutionally required discretion.”

  The Supreme Court agreed. Powell wrote:

  To evaluate McCleskey’s challenge, we must examine exactly what the Baldus study may show. Even Professor Baldus does not contend that his statistics prove that race enters into any capital sentencing decisions, or that race was a factor in McCleskey’s particular case. [Footnote 29] Statistics, at most, may show only a likelihood that a particular factor entered into some decisions. There is, of course, some risk of racial prejudice influencing a jury’s decision in a criminal case. There are similar risks that other kinds of prejudice will influence other criminal trials. See infra at 481 U. S. 315-318. The question “is at what point that risk becomes constitutionally unacceptable,” Turner v. Murray, 476 U. S. 28, 476 U. S. 36, n. 8 (1986). McCleskey asks us to accept the likelihood allegedly shown by the Baldus study as the constitutional measure of an unacceptable risk of racial prejudice influencing capital sentencing decisions. This we decline to do.

  In dissent, Justice William Brennan maintained as did Justice Marshall in his dissent that “the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment forbidden by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.” Justice Stevens offered a more limited dissent in calling for a remand to consider the study further. Blackmun also supported the use of the study as the basis for a reversal.

  The case has long generated debate with many law professors disagreeing with the Court’s holding. However, one can disagree with the Eleventh Circuit and the Supreme Court without labeling such jurists as white robbed racists.

  It is also concerning that this is a reference to Hutchinson’s class. If the professor maintains that anyone supporting the decision is effectively a klansman, it is hard to see how students in his class would feel comfortable in voicing such a view. Indeed, such pedagogical positions may explain why 60 percent of students reportedly fear sharing their views in classes.

  Hutchinson’s bio states that he “is the Emory University School of Law inaugural John Lewis Chair for Civil Rights and Social Justice. He joined the faculty on July 1, 2021. At Emory Law, Hutchinson serves as the faculty director of the Emory University Center for Civil Rights and Social Justice. He was also appointed to the role of director of community and inclusion and chief diversity officer for the law school in fall 2022.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 19:00

• 21 Year Old Air Force Football Player 'Dies Suddenly' After Collapsing Walking To Class
  21 Year Old Air Force Football Player ‘Dies Suddenly’ After Collapsing Walking To Class

  Whether or not it is a ‘coincidence’ remains to be seen – but it is getting hard to ignore all of the recent stories about athletes, collegiate and professional, unexpectedly either collapsing or passing away.

  The nation’s attention was captured back on January 3, 2022 when NFL player Demar Hamlin collapsed on the field due to cardiac arrest after making what appeared to be a routine tackle and then standing up and clapping his hands. 

  Days after the incident, we highlighted Old Dominion basketball player Imo Essien collapsing on the court during the middle of a game against Georgia Southern. Video from the incident appeared to show Essien clutching his chest while on the ground. 

  And hours ago, the MMA world was shocked at the unexpected death of 18 year old Victoria Lee, a rising star on the the ONE Championship MMA promotion. “She has gone too soon and our family has been completely devastated since then,” her sister wrote on Instagram last weekend. 

  Now, yet another athlete has unexpectedly passed away at the tender age of 21. Air Force football player Hunter Brown suffered a “medical emergency” while walking to class on Monday of this week and passed away, according to Fox News. 

  With heavy hearts we share the loss of a cadet.
  C3C Hunter Brown died Monday after suffering a medical emergency while on his way to class.
  Our thoughts are with his family, friends, teammates and fellow cadets.#NeverForgotten pic.twitter.com/amPlznZqTC

  — U.S. Air Force Academy (@AF_Academy) January 10, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The report says that he “was on his way to class from his dorm room when he collapsed”, and that EMTs were unable to revive him with life-saving measures. 

  The two sport athlete at Barbe High School in Louisiana, who played football for Air Force and formerly played baseball and football in high school, was described by his coach as “a pure joy to coach and have as a teammate”. 

  Lt. Gen. Richard M. Clark, U.S. Air Force Academy Superintendent commented: “Hunter was a standout offensive lineman on the Falcon football team and was well-respected in his squadron, The entire U.S. Air Force Academy mourns his loss, and our hearts and condolences are with his family, his squadron, and all who were touched by this incredible young man.”

  Air Force Office of Special Investigations officials and the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office are both investigating the incident. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 18:40

• The Senator Who Didn't Know (But Thought She Did)
  The Senator Who Didn’t Know (But Thought She Did)

  Authored by Joakim Book via The Mises Institute,

  Legislators have a strange relationship with magic. To achieve that which physically cannot be done, they like to wave magic wands and pretend that it can. Reality puts a limit on political power, a realization that always sits poorly with those in charge of our trillion-dollar bureaucratic machinery.

  

  Senator Elizabeth Warren is a stunning case in point, and she’s had her aim at the magic-seeming world of digital assets like bitcoin for a while. Last month she cosponsored The Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2022 with Roger Marshall which attempts to put those assets under rules that echo the regulatory system that cryptocurrencies were created to escape.

  The bill’s purpose is “closing loopholes and bringing the digital asset ecosystem into greater compliance with the anti–money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) frameworks governing the greater financial system.”

  This turns tens of thousands of node runners, wallet users, or bitcoin holders into licensed money service businesses for running software on their computers. The bill’s text especially rallies against “unhosted” wallets, which are just assets that are not under the custody of a regulated exchange or bank-like entity—that are owned outright instead of being counterparty to a censorable banking contract. There can be no financial privacy in the senator’s world.

  Money transmitter entities would be required to perform the sort of identification and counterparty checks that banks submit to, but the bill takes things one step further:

  Prohibit financial institutions from using or transacting with digital asset mixers and other anonymity-enhancing technologies and from handling, using, or transacting with digital assets that have been anonymized using these technologies.

  An old-world analogy of the absurdity of this is physical cash, where using an ATM and then making a bank deposit is the most rudimentary form of “anonymity enhancing technologies.” If the senators get their way, the kind of privacy that cash permits would be ruled out in the new world of bitcoin: we must see what you’re up to and make sure you’re not spending any funds we disapprove of.    

  Reality Reasserts Itself

  Never before was a piece of proposed legislation so resolutely defeated by reality.

  Reality doesn’t go away simply because you label it “money laundering” or tangentially connect it to criminal behavior by the rogue states that ostensibly motived the bill.  

  Warren cannot do this for three reasons:

  1. Bitcoin doesn’t work the way she thinks.

  2. Congress is constitutionally barred from doing it.

  3. And because the bitcoin protocol doesn’t care about her magic-wand waving. 

  While bitcoin attempts to be money, it doesn’t conform to the physical properties of pieces of paper (or regulated banking institutions) that Warren pretends to understand. Paper dollars are handed over in trade, and bank transfers clear between banks or on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet; something that has monetary value moves, and we therefore get money transmitter laws to keep tabs on who is moving funds to whom.

  On the surface it seems that bitcoin operates in the same way: I have satoshis in a mobile app or a hardware wallet, I press send, and then you have sats in your wallet. Something money-like moved, right?

  Wrong. What shifts are the open sesame–like secret words that allow a transaction to be accepted by the tens of thousands of nodes running bitcoin, recognizing that now someone else is in command of the protocol address existing all over the world at the same time. It’s like passing secret notes to the entire world, enciphered by a secret code.

  There’s no bank for Warren to lean on for regulatory purposes. What shifts is the protocol-level recognition that someone else now has access to the funds, whereas the funds themselves never move. L0la L33tz writes in Bitcoin Magazine that “non-custodial wallets transmit Bitcoin the currency as much as the key to one’s door moves the house around.”

  And words are speech which Congress has long been forbidden from interfering with. The counterintuitive notion of a monetary system that operates without money moving has yet to reach the offices of America’s legislators. Money transmission laws are as unfit to regulate bitcoin as they are regulating the janitors in the Capitol.

  Bitcoin doesn’t move, so how can the software that manages one’s balance be subject to money transmitter laws? Warren faces problems on three levels:

  1. You can’t achieve it. Bitcoin was made for attacks like these, attempts to regulate or control it. It is resilient; its ledger and block confirmations are completely unresponsive to any magician’s waving. Last spring, China tried to ban bitcoin mining—a physical process more difficult and obvious than just holding, transacting, or validating bitcoin—in a state much more authoritarian than the US, and they couldn’t do it. A year and a half later, plenty of covert mining operations exist in China, not to mention the exodus of machinery that set up in the US, Canada, Kazakhstan, and Russia. A huge authoritarian crackdown with zero impact on bitcoin.

  Good luck subduing the mere transactions and privacy-enhancing methods that people run on their phones and computers.

  2. You’re not allowed to. The First Amendment says that government cannot abridge the freedom of speech, and since Bernstein v. United States in the 1990s, the Supreme Court has said that code is speech. Every aspect of bitcoin is code: The validators running bitcoin is code. The “unhosted” wallets and the mixers the bill laments are code.

  The mobile apps that allow spending is code. At no point does anything related to bitcoin cease being code. End of discussion.

  3. You’re not supposed to. Money is a neutral entity, a system that exists entirely to facilitate trade between humans. If it performs its role well, some unsavory types are going to use it (cue criminals and cash). When you meddle with it, it performs that function less well, and you harm the rest of society. Senators in a galaxy far, far away have no business interfering with it.

  You cannot make words illegal—primarily because they’re nonrivalrous and exist in the human mind, available for anyone to use. When Harry Potter’s enemies in J.K. Rowling’s fantastic world enforce the “Taboo”—an enchantment that lets the Death Eaters punish anyone who utters Voldemort’s name—they do so via the use of magic, a realm that Congress thankfully has not yet uncovered.

  Not for lack of trying, as we learned a few weeks ago when Senator Warren tried to regulate the code that people run when they use bitcoin. Central planners always try to plan that which is beyond their understanding—and frequently beyond their capacity.

  Good news is that it won’t pass; it’s the sort of Hail Mary marketing tool for which Warren has become quite known. Bad news is that it reflects the mistaken view held by many a legislator and plenty more everyday people.

  You can be in favor of bitcoin, oppose it, or be lukewarm or uninterested. What you can’t do is straw man its operation and then try to use government power to magically make it behave the way you want. Ignorance is not a good reason to mistakenly overstep one’s authority.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 18:20

• Humpday Humor: Coincidence Theorists
  Humpday Humor: Coincidence Theorists

  Presented with no comment…

  Coincidence Theorists pic.twitter.com/ZSK9nics5X

  — David Wolfe (@DavidWolfe) January 11, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 18:00

• Kash Patel Says Jan. 6 Committee Buried Key Evidence From His Testimony
  Kash Patel Says Jan. 6 Committee Buried Key Evidence From His Testimony

  Authored by Samantha Flom and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As the former chief of staff to the Defense Department under the Trump administration, Kash Patel was one of the first people the now-shuttered House Jan. 6 Committee sought testimony from in its investigation of the Capitol breach.

  

  Despite this, the transcript of his deposition was one of the last to be released as the committee concluded its work, and the reason, according to Patel, was simple.

  “I gave them the hard truths that they didn’t want the answers to because it didn’t fit their political narrative,” he told The Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek on the Jan. 6 episode of his Kash’s Corner podcast.

  Burying the Evidence

  Revisiting the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and the aftermath, Patel held that the committee failed to abide by its own rules when it excluded the exhibits he and his legal team entered into the record during his deposition.

  Among those exhibits, of which Patel said there were roughly nine, was a key report (pdf) released in November 2021 by the Biden Defense Department (DoD), which concluded that the actions the department took under the Trump administration to prepare for the Jan. 6 protests were “appropriate” and “complied with laws, regulations, and other applicable guidance.”

  

  That report, Patel said, along with his testimony that former President Donald Trump’s authorization of the deployment of 20,000 National Guardsmen to protect the Capitol, contradicted the committee’s conclusions that Trump was responsible for the violence that occurred that day.

  Patel also noted that, when they were offered additional assistance from federal law enforcement, both Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Capitol Police (USCP) declined.

  In fact, on Jan. 5, 2021, Bowser announced publicly that she would not be requesting additional federal law enforcement, sharing a letter she had written that stated as much to her Twitter account.

  “To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel, and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to, and consultation with, MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] if such plans are underway,” Bowser wrote in the letter to Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller, Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, and Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy.

  Likewise, according to the Capitol Police’s official Jan. 6 timeline, the Pentagon contacted USCP to confirm if a request for National Guardsmen was being considered. The next day, USCP Deputy Chief Gallagher replied that “a request for National Guard support is not forthcoming at this time after consultation with COP [chief of police] Sund.”

  According to Patel, both Bowser’s letter and USCP’s timeline were also submitted as exhibits but were not released along with the transcript of his deposition.

  Under the House’s rules (pdf) for deposition procedure, “the transcript and any exhibits shall be filed, as shall any video recording, with the clerk of the Committee.”

  While the committee released exhibits from other interviews with the supporting materials for its final report, none of the exhibits listed as being on file with the committee include those produced by Patel.

  “No surprise, the Jan. 6 Unselect Committee broke its rules, broke the House rules, broke its commitment—and not just orally, but in writing to my legal team—by saying the exhibits would be included,” he said. “They excluded every single exhibit.”

  Unanswered Questions

  Patel also slammed the committee for failing to investigate significant questions and concerns that remain largely unexplained.

  The majority of his deposition, he noted, was not even about Jan. 6 but other, unrelated matters the committee simply wanted information on.

  “That just showed me that all they cared about, this committee, was setting up perjury traps and looking for political ammunition, not the facts,” he said.

  

  One question Patel said he is still seeking an answer to is why a “no-climb” fence was not constructed around the Capitol prior to Jan. 6.

  Patel recounted how he showed up at the scene on Jan. 6, after the protests had broken out, to find no fence had been erected to help secure a perimeter.

  Noting that he had to buy the fence himself and have the National Guardsmen put it up later that day, he wondered: “If we could do it that fast, why wasn’t it done before? What are they going to say, optics? They didn’t have the intelligence? This committee never bothered to examine that question.”

  Further, according to Patel, he and other DoD officials offered to remove the fence after the protests had subsided, but their offers were rejected by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the incoming Biden administration.

  The fence would remain up for half a year, serving as a reminder of the events of Jan. 6 to all who passed by.

  “That’s what I believe that this partisan political charade was about,” Patel said. “They wanted the optics before Jan. 6 with no security, and they wanted the optics after Jan. 6 with heavy security to show that their political narrative was the one that was right. But when you look at the underlying facts, their narrative is defeated.”

  Another unexplained mystery Patel pointed to was the role played by Ray Epps, a former Arizona Oath Keepers leader who was filmed encouraging protesters to enter the Capitol on Jan. 6.

  While Epps maintains that he was at the Capitol that day to support Trump, many have come to believe that he was there as a provocateur, potentially on the orders of the FBI.

  Noting that the FBI has repeatedly failed to give a straight answer on whether Epps is an operative of theirs or not, Patel said: “Look, as a former federal prosecutor who ran sources and informants, if the answer is, ‘This guy is not on our payroll, and we don’t know him, and he did absolutely nothing for the United States government,’ you come out hard and fast out of your press office and say those things. And those things have never been said by this DOJ or FBI about Ray Epps.”

  Patel also pointed to the recent revelation that Pelosi’s office played a key role in planning security for the event and the fact that the FBI withheld a crucial report indicating thousands of protesters could show up at the Capitol as additional mysteries that should be investigated by the Republican-controlled House.

  “Look, if the FBI and DOJ are willing to subpoena my records from five years ago, maybe we can get this Congress to actually subpoena some records of consequence to answer some of these questions.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 17:40

• US To Hit Debt Ceiling One Week From Today, Starting Countdown To Epic Chaos
  US To Hit Debt Ceiling One Week From Today, Starting Countdown To Epic Chaos

  In the final days of 2022, Goldman’s economists predicted that “the biggest political risk” of 2023 will be the Congressional showdown over America’s favorite periodic drama: the debt limit.

  This is what the bank’s chief economist Jan Hatzius said then: “The debt limit likely poses the greatest political risk next year, and we expect it to rival the 2011 episode in its disruption to financial markets and the economy. That said, we do not expect Congress to enact major fiscal changes. Republicans might press for spending cuts in a debt limit deal, but we do not expect substantial cuts next year. The White House might press for increased fiscal support, but this also looks unlikely as we believe a soft landing is more likely and a divided Congress would have difficulty responding to a recession even if one occurs.”

  

  And while the US has about 9 months to go until the mid-September D-Day, or the moment when various emergency measures meant to provide breathing room under the debt ceiling, the existing US cash balance and new tax payments are all exhausted, a new analysis by Wrightson ICAP has calculated that the recent surge in Treasury bill supplies will likely push the outstanding amount of public debt about $10 billion above the debt ceiling after the close of business on Jan. 19, absent the implementation of measures to extend the government’s borrowing authority. Currently, the government is roughly $64 billion away from reaching its $31.4 trillion statutory borrowing limit, a level it will breach in about a week.

  

  More than half of that $64 billion buffer will be chewed up by a swath of benchmark bill, note and bond auctions taking place this week. The net increase to the debt pile from those, after the last of them is settled next Tuesday, will be around $36.6 billion, leaving a little under $27.7 billion of clearance, according to ICAP and Bloomberg.

  And that doesn’t even account for the new cash-management bill which settles two days later on Jan. 19. To accommodate that $60 billion security, it’s likely the Treasury will need to implement its extraordinary measures before then. The Treasury plans to sell $36 billion of four-month bills Wednesday, which is $3 billion larger than the previous week’s auction.

  Of course, all that hitting the debt threshold level – which is always just a formality for a country that is debt-funded like the US means, is that the Treasury will notify Congress it’s invoking extraordinary accounting measures in the next few days.

  “Even if our projections of nonmarketable debt are too high, the Treasury would probably be too close to the ceiling for day- to-day operational comfort,” Wrightson ICAP economist Lou Crandall writes in a note.

  Once the Treasury invokes its extraordinary measures, that will give it “ample borrowing capacity” for at least the next few weeks so it could continue increasing the size of the three- and six-month bill sales for the next couple of weeks. Still, Wrightson expects Treasury to keep the sizes steady when it announces the next round Thursday.

  Also, the fact that Treasury’s cash management bill offering is only 35 days suggests the department wants to “retain some flexibility” under the debt cap, which argues for relying on boosts to shorter maturities.

  And while the debt ceiling will likely be breached in about a week, as the Goldman chart below shows, analysts doubt the government is actually at risk of defaulting until the second half of 2023 because of the extraordinary measures the Treasury usually uses to avoid exceeding the cap, including using up the existing Treasury cash balance and funding from tax payments.

  
  And so, the question is not if and when the US will breach the debt ceiling and cross the infamous D-Day, but how will broken Congress reach a solution. As we explained one week ago in “Investors Are Already Dreading The Debt Ceiling Chaos In 2023”, not even the always cheerful Wall Street expects a smooth and drama-free resolution to a process that will be nothing short of absolutely chaotic and expose the full Congressional dysfunction for the entire world to see.

  For those who missed it, here are our thoughts from last week:

  With the House paralyzed indefinitely after Kevin McCarthy just lost his 10th House Speaker vote (the longest such stretch since before the civil war) as a group of Republican holdouts refuses to side the GOP establishment, Bloomberg rates strategist Alexandra Harris writes that the debt ceiling is already top of mind for investors even though the US isn’t likely to face the threat of a technical default until the second half of 2023 and Treasury bills aren’t yet pricing such concerns. That’s because the Republican standstill surrounding the House speak vote foreshadows the chaos that could unfold when must-pass bills, like government funding legislation and an increase or suspension of the debt ceiling, have to be addressed.

  clip and save for fights over government funding and the debt ceiling https://t.co/HQaF98JcRs

  — Grace Segers (@Grace_Segers) January 5, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “Although the markets did not react on Tuesday to the political chaos in the House, the dysfunction is a clear signal that House Republicans will struggle to raise the debt ceiling when the time comes in 3Q23,” Stifel Financial’s chief Washington policy strategist Brian Gardner says in a note.

  “Investors should be on guard as the summer approaches as to the possibility that the brinksmanship over the debt ceiling could lead to market volatility and a risk-off trade.” Well at least the Fed will be happy.

  The good news is that the debt ceiling crisis isn’t due for a while: the government is roughly $102 billion away from reaching the $31.4 trillion statutory limit, although analysts doubt the government is actually at risk of defaulting until the second half of 2023 because of the extraordinary measures it usually uses to avoid exceeding the cap.

  

  Treasury has been reducing its cache of bills in order to give itself more breathing room under the cap before invoking their accounting tricks. And speaking of tricks, California Democrat Brad Sherman floated a potential deal that would trade Democratic votes to make McCarthy the speaker of the House in return for rules aimed at preventing a US government shutdown or a debt limit crisis.

  According to Harris, from a money-market standpoint, a dragged-out fight over the debt ceiling will likely result in less T-bill supply at a time when there’s still a glut of cash in the overnight funding, pushing rates even lower and motivating eligible counterparties to keep parking cash at the Fed. Yes: that means the Overnight Reverse Repo balance will balloon even more.

  This comes at a time when Federal Reserve policy makers are expecting balances at the overnight reverse repo facility to drop from its current levels above $2 trillion. It rose by another $41 billion on Wednesday to $2.23 trillion. In the minutes of the December gathering, Patricia Zobel, manager pro tem of the New York Fed’s system open market account, noted that greater competition among banks for funding could contribute to drawdowns in the RRP, but clearly that has not been the case since most banks still refuse to raise rates on their deposits.

  All of which brings us to what Goldman predicted in its “10 questions for 2023“, would be the biggest political risk of this year. Not surprisingly, it was another debt ceiling crisis. For those who missed it, here is what Goldman said:

  Will the debt limit have as negative an impact on financial markets in 2023 as it in 2011?

  Yes. The political and fiscal conditions next year will be similar to the last two extremely disruptive debt limit increases, in 1995 and 2011. Like next year, in those periods a Democratic President in his third year faced a Republican House after losing the majority in the midterm election. Those episodes also followed a run-up in public debt as a share of GDP and/or a rise in federal interest expense, similar to the experience over the last few years. However, midterm gains of 54 seats in 1994 and 63 in 2010 gave Republicans a clearer political mandate and the votes to carry it out, at least in the House. By contrast, Republicans netted only 9 seats in the 2022 midterms and enter 2023 with a very thin House majority. Public focus on the public debt is also much lower compared to those prior periods, and Republicans have not emphasized fiscal restraint nearly as much recently as they had in the mid-1990s or early part of the Obama Administration.

  Prior disruptive debt limit standoffs led to increased market volatility and a sell-off in Treasury securities maturing around the debt limit deadline, and we would expect this to occur next year. In 2023, we would expect yields on bills maturing around the deadline to rise by at least as much as they did in 2011 and 2013, and for volatility in financial markets to rise similar to those periods (Exhibit 14).

  

  There is also a real chance that Congress fails to raise the debt limit in time next year, forcing Treasury to reduce daily payments to the level of receipts (i.e., immediately eliminating the budget deficit), resulting in a spending cut of around 10% of GDP at an annualized rate. While we think it is more likely that Congress manages to avoid this and raise the debt limit before it constrains Treasury’s ability to pay its obligations, the risk appears higher than at any point since 2011.

  The deadline for Congress to raise the debt limit before Treasury must cut back net borrowing will likely be sometime in August but could be as late as October depending on Treasury cash flows. An early signal of the risk the debt limit poses will come at the start of 2023, when the new House of Representatives is seated. If Republicans reinstate the “motion to vacate” that allows any member of the House to call for a vote for a new speaker of the House—several Republican House members have recently called for this in return for their vote for speaker—it could be difficult for the next speaker to put a clean debt limit increase to a vote until forced by financial markets.

  For more detailed on these, and other questions and predictions, read the full note available to pro subs.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 17:20

• It's "Silly" To Pretend Kiev Won't Become A NATO Member: Ukrainian Ambassador
  It’s “Silly” To Pretend Kiev Won’t Become A NATO Member: Ukrainian Ambassador

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute, 

  A Ukrainian official said it was logical for Kiev to become a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union. The country’s Ambassador to the UK, Vadym Prystaiko, claimed it was “silly” to exclude Kiev from the Brussels-based alliance because Ukraine will be “full” of weapons manufactured in NATO member states. 

  In an interview with Newsweek, Prystaiko called for Kiev to gain immediate ascension into the North Atlantic alliance. The Ambassador said, “NATO is just logical. Ukraine will be full of NATO weaponry, and the people will be prepared. So what is the difference? Just place a seat at the table.” He continued, “So we’re becoming interoperable because we’re doing it on the ground. And that’s why I’m sure that whether the political decision is here or not now, we will be a part of NATO.”

  

  Ukraine was put on the path to NATO membership, along with Georgia, in 2008. Giving Ukraine the status as a potential member crossed key redlines set out by the Kremlin.

  While Ukraine has been on the path to membership in the North Atlantic alliance for nearly 15 years, Kiev falls short of meeting several requirements to formally join the defense pact. 

  During that period, Washington has repeatedly told Kiev it does not qualify to join the alliance. At the same time, it refused to take membership off the table, violating a core Russian security concern. 

  Under President Joe Biden, Washington took several steps to make Kiev a member of the alliance, including; signing agreements, providing billions in military aid, and conducting NATO war games in Ukrainian territory.

  Ukraine’s growing military ties with NATO was a key factor in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade his neighbor. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed his country was already a “de facto” member of the alliance. 

  Prystaiko claimed that eventual membership in NATO and the EU was a guarantee for Kiev, and it was “silly” to pretend otherwise. “Our conversation with the rest of the world—at least the Western world—should be very easy. Ukraine wins, becomes a member of the European Union and NATO. And that’s it,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/11/2023 – 17:00