Today’s News 10th May 2022

• United Ireland On The Horizon? Sinn Féin Takes Control For First Time
  United Ireland On The Horizon? Sinn Féin Takes Control For First Time

  For the first time since the first election of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 1998, the Irish nationalist party Sinn Féin has won more seats than any other party after the vote held on May 5.

  Sinn Féin aims to reunify Northern Ireland with the Republic of Ireland and is now close to installing party vice-president Michelle O’Neill as first minister.

  As Statista’s Martin Armstrong shows in the infographic below, Sinn Féin were just the fourth most-popular party in 1998, taking 18 seats compared to the winning Ulster Unionist Party’s 28. Having established itself as the second largest party in the years since, 2022 represents the first time it has gained control of the most seats, and the first time a nationalist party has won since Northern Ireland was founded in 1921.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  So does this mean we are now a significant step closer to a united Ireland?

  O’Neill avoided focusing on this issue during campaigning, instead choosing to prioritize the cost of living crisis. Before we see what her focus is while in office though, the parties have to form an Executive – something which the opposition unionist party the DUP has indicated it may not do with a nationalist first minister such as O’Neill. If no government is formed within six months, new elections will have to take place.

  What this election does signify however, is a shift towards nationalist politics in Northern Ireland.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 05/10/2022 – 02:45

• Is An EU Army On The Horizon?
  Is An EU Army On The Horizon?

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  The building blocks of supra-national military already exist…they’re just waiting for a reason.

  

  The special “Future of the EU” Conference came to a conclusion a few days ago.

  There may have been a familiar veneer of “public consultation”, but the aim of the conference was simple: Tell the EU to do what they’ve already been planning to do for years.

  If that wasn’t clear from the outset, it became unavoidably obvious a couple of days ago when the conference’s list of 49 “recommendations” was published on April 27th.

  You can read the whole list here, if you are so inclined.

  We have picked out some of the more troubling ones to discuss.

  There’s number 21, for example, which suggests:

  that the EU improve its capacity to take speedy and effective decisions, notably in Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), speaking with one voice and acting as a truly global player, projecting a positive role in the world and making a difference in response to any crisis

  This sentiment is repeated in Number 39, where the conference claims there is a need to…

  Improve the EU’s decision-making process in order to ensure the EU’s capability to act, while taking into account the interests of all Member States and guaranteeing a transparent and understandable process for the citizens

  And they intend to do that by changing the voting system…

  All issues decided by way of unanimity should be decided by way of a qualified majority

  Taken together these measures would pretty much eradicate the national veto, and see member states potentially subject to legislation imposed against their will. A huge knock to national sovereignty.

  They also want to:

  strengthen the role of the High Representative to ensure that the EU speaks with one voice

  Which is a roundabout way of saying “centralising power”.

  Most concerning, though, is recommendation 23:

  We propose that the EU continue to act to promote dialogue and guarantee peace and a rules-based international order,36 strengthening multilateralism and building on long-standing EU peace initiatives which contributed to its award of the Nobel Prize in 2012, while strengthening its common security

  Which sounds harmless enough (apart from the shameless self-congratulatory reference to the Nobel Peace Prize), except they intend to achieve these ends using a new EU Army…

  [The EU’s] joint armed forces that shall be used for self-defence purposes and preclude aggressive military action of any kind, with a capacity to provide support in times of crises including natural catastrophes. Outside European borders it could be deployed in exceptional circumstances preferably under a legal mandate from the UN Security Council and thus in compliance with international law38, and without competing with or duplicating NATO and respecting different national relationships with NATO and undertaking an assessment of EU relations with NATO in the context of the debate on the EU’s strategic autonomy.

  A potential EU Army has been a talking point for years, but most often simply dismissed as Euro-sceptics scaremongering. In fact, further down in point 21, the conference adds:

  [The EU should] reflect on how to counter disinformation and propaganda in an objective and factual way

  Somewhat ironic, because as recently 2 or 3 years ago, the “EU Army” itself was described as “misinformation”. A “lie” spread by “Brexiteers” according to the Guardian, or “as true as saying Elvis lives” according to Emily Thornberry.

  Following the Brexit vote, everyone from Politico to the Atlantic Council was attempting to dispel the “myth” of the EU Army.

  The EU itself published an article on their official site debunking the “EU Army myth” in June of 2019.

  …Then, just last month, the EU voted to create a “rapid reaction military force” of 5000 troops.

  Funny how things change.

  Now, all the outlets which had previously “fact-checked” the idea of an EU Army, or dismissed it as a “conspiracy theory” are discussing its existence as more or less inevitable.

  Foreign Policy asks “Is an EU Army coming?”, while This Week is weighing the pros and cons, and the New European suggests “Maybe we need an EU Army after all”.

  This might seem like a sudden volte-face, but to anyone paying attention it is anything but surprising.

  Despite the waves of propaganda calling the plan a myth, the fact of the matter is that prominent political voices from Macron to Merkel to Juncker have been calling for an EU Army for years.

  The years-old agenda was given new life by the US’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The carefully-engineered shambles was said to “highlight the need for an autonomous European military”.

  The story was that the US had withdrawn in chaos and abandoned their native allies, and an EU military – filled with happy-clappy European empathy, not heartless American pragmatism – would have stayed longer and air-lifted more people to safety.

  These rumblings grew louder after Russia launched its “special operation” in Ukraine, with Foreign Policy claiming the “war in Ukraine has turned the EU into a serious military player”, and Investigate Europe pointing out that “Putin is doing more to bolster European military unity than decades of EU initiatives”.

  Outside of the propaganda narratives, though, the pure and simple truth is that the EU Army is already a semi-reality.

  As this article in the Defense Post points out, “the framework of a unified European military is already in place”.

  EuroCorps has existed since 1992, and is described as “a force for the EU and NATO”. Essentially it’s a link between the NATO command structure and the EU. It’s a token force, and barely used, but sits there waiting to be adapted and expanded.

  The Berlin Plus Agreement, signed between NATO and the EU in 2002, permits the EU to draw on NATO resources (Vehicles, weapons etc) to participate in conflicts in which NATO chose not to participate.

  In 2018 the EU launched the European Intervention Initiative,

  Only last March, the EU launched their new “Strategic Compass” initiative, alongside creating the “European Peace Facility”, a 5 BILLION Euro “off-budget” project designed to “enhance the EU’s ability to act as a global security provider”.

  You can see how these documents allow for a smooth segue from “NATO-backed US Imperialism” to “EU Peacekeeping” in the geopolitical narrative.

  The EU Army will be sold to the US as “European partners stepping up to the plate” and taking some of the burden of “policing the world”, while in the EU/UK it will be billed as the EU “asserting its independence from US foreign policy”. Neither will be true.

  It might signal a genuine change in the paradigm, a relocation of the seat of power further East as the crumbling US is abandoned and the heart of global hegemony shifts towards the EU. Maybe.

  Either way, the end result will be the same people spending our money on the same weapons, pursuing the same policies, telling the same lies…just with a new name over the door.

  That was always the plan.

  The pieces of the EU Army already exist, they just needed a reason to be assembled.

  And thanks the US’s “chaotic” withdrawal from Afghanistan, and Russia’s “Special Operation” in Ukraine, it looks like they’ve got one.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 05/10/2022 – 02:00

• China's Xi Urges Europe To Promote Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks, Resisting US Pressure
  China’s Xi Urges Europe To Promote Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks, Resisting US Pressure

  During a Monday virtual meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Xi stressed that Europe must play an active role in promoting peace talks, and in “building a balanced, effective and sustainable European security framework,” according to China’s state media.

  Xi said “all efforts must be made to avoid the intensification and expansion of the Ukraine conflict, and China welcomes all efforts that are conducive to promoting peace talks,” according to a translation. “China welcomes all efforts of the international community that facilitate the ceasefire and negotiations, the relevant parties should support Russia and Ukraine in reaching peace through negotiations,” the Chinese leader said further.

  

  Since nearly the start of the conflict, Washington has charged that Beijing is providing behind-the-scenes support for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, something which Chinese officials have consistently denied. China has also come under fire for appearing to provide political cover in its criticisms of NATO which echo the Russian position.

  Cui Heng, an assistant research fellow from the Center for Russian Studies of East China Normal University, was featured in China’s state-run English daily Global Times as describing Beijing’s perspective that time is running out on Washington’s muscular efforts at arming and propping up Ukrainian forces amid the Russian onslaught. This is why new pressure has been put on America’s European allies to step up and do more, even as China argues they must get serious about negotiations and compromise.

  “Cui said the growing pressure and sanctions by the US and its allies showed that the West was anxious to defeat Russia, especially as the Biden administration is facing huge pressure over a weakening domestic economy and hefty financial aid for Ukraine, knowing that getting deeper into the mire of the Russia-Ukraine conflict would harm its domestic midterm election prospects,” GT states.

  “On the other hand, Wang said with its support for Ukraine stretched to the limit, the US was in urgent need of its allies to demonstrate their commitment to the cause, and help its military sector continue making money from sending weapons to Ukraine,” the report adds.

  Meanwhile China’s ambassador to Russia Zhang Hanhui in fresh remarks Monday announced China will boost ties with Moscow in the areas of military technology, energy, as well as in space. The South China Morning Post quotes him in the following:

  In an interview with Russian state news agency Tass, Zhang Hanhui said energy had been the “most important, fruitful and extensive area of pragmatic cooperation between Russia and China”. He said such cooperation would be strengthened but – as Europe tries to reduce its dependence on Russian fuel – Zhang stopped short of promising to buy more oil and gas from Russia.

  Zhang said there were difficulties in bilateral trade with Russia but the two sides would enhance settlements in their national currencies to ensure stable trade that they hoped would reach US$200 billion by 2024.

  As for the prospect of a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire, by all appearances Washington doesn’t seem interested in pushing for robust talks or diplomatic engagement with Moscow. Instead it is openly on record as saying it wants to see a “weakened” Russia, according to the recent words of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

  Below: Beijing has consistently sided with Kremlin condemnations of NATO expansion, saying this is a key part of Russia’s legitimate security concerns…

  Russian President #VladimirPutin “calmly but firmly” stated that #NATO created “absolutely unacceptable threat” in restrained V-Day speech, which Chinese analysts said sent a signal to West… https://t.co/pdL8ESwxBk

  — Global Times (@globaltimesnews) May 9, 2022

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

  Official communications are even to the point of Russia’s ambassador to D.C. Anatoly Antonov saying he’s had zero contact with Biden administration officials, describing it as a situation of being “blockaded”.

  “Frankly, we are in a blockade,” Antonov said late last month. “When I came to Washington, my idea was to use the word ‘improvement’ to describe his goals for the relationship. Now I prefer to use the word ‘stabilization.’”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 23:50

• Nonprofit Watchdog Uncovers $350 Million In Secret Payments To Fauci, Collins, Others At NIH
  Nonprofit Watchdog Uncovers $350 Million In Secret Payments To Fauci, Collins, Others At NIH

  Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times,

  An estimated $350 million in undisclosed royalties were paid to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and hundreds of its scientists, including the agency’s recently departed director, Dr. Francis Collins, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, according to a nonprofit government watchdog.

  “We estimate that up to $350 million in royalties from third parties were paid to NIH scientists during the fiscal years between 2010 and 2020,” Open the Books CEO Adam Andrzejewski told reporters in a telephone news conference on May 9.

  “We draw that conclusion because, in the first five years, there has been $134 million that we have been able to quantify of top-line numbers that flowed from third-party payers, meaning pharmaceutical companies or other payers, to NIH scientists.”

  The first five years, from 2010 to 2014, constitute 40 percent of the total, he said.

  “We now know that there are 1,675 scientists that received payments during that period, at least one payment. In fiscal year 2014, for instance, $36 million was paid out and that is on average $21,100 per scientist,” Andrzejewski said.

  “We also find that during this period, leadership at NIH was involved in receiving third-party payments. For instance, Francis Collins, the immediate past director of NIH, received 14 payments. Dr. Anthony Fauci received 23 payments and his deputy, Clifford Lane, received eight payments.”

  Collins resigned as NIH director in December 2021 after 12 years of leading the world’s largest public health agency. Fauci is the longtime head of NIH’s National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), as well as chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden. Lane is the deputy director of NIAID, under Fauci.

  

  NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins holds up a model of the coronavirus as he testifies before a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee looking into the budget estimates for the National Institute of Health (NIH) and the state of medical research, on Capitol Hill on May 26, 2021. (Sarah Silbiger/Pool via AP)

  The top five NIH employees measured in terms of the number of royalty payments that they received while on the government payroll, according to a fact sheet published by Open the Books, include Robert Gallo, National Cancer Institute, 271 payments; Ira Pastan, National Cancer Institute, 250 payments; Mikulas Popovic, National Cancer Institute, 191 payments; Flossie Wong-Staal, National Cancer Institute, 190 payments; and Mangalasseril Sarngadharan, National Cancer Institute, 188 payments.

  Only Pastan continues to be employed by NIH, according to Open the Books.

  “When an NIH employee makes a discovery in their official capacity, the NIH owns the rights to any resulting patent. These patents are then licensed for commercial use to companies that could use them to bring products to market,” the fact sheet reads.

  “Employees are listed as inventors on the patents and receive a share of the royalties obtained through any licensing, or ‘technology transfer,’ of their inventions. Essentially, taxpayer money funding NIH research benefits researchers employed by NIH because they are listed as patent inventors and therefore receive royalty payments from licensees.”

  An NIH spokesman didn’t respond by press time to a request for comment.

  Andrzejewski told reporters that the Associated Press reported extensively on the NIH royalty payments in 2005, including specific details about who got how much from which payers for what work, that the agency is denying to Open the Books in 2022.

  “At that time, we knew there were 918 scientists, and each year, they were receiving approximately $9 million, on average with each scientist receiving $9,700. But today, the numbers are a lot larger with the United States still in a declared national health emergency. It’s quite obvious the stakes in health care are a lot larger,” Andrzejewski said.

  He said the files Open the Books is receiving—300 pages of line-by-line data—are “heavily redacted.”

  “These are not the files the AP received in 2005 where everything was disclosed—the scientist’s name, the name of the third-party payer, the amount of the royalty paid by the payer to the scientist,” Andrzejewski said. “Today, NIH is producing a heavily redacted database; we don’t know the payment amount to the scientist, and we don’t know the name of the third-party payer, all of that is being redacted.”

  Federal officials are allowed to redact information from responses to FOIA requests if the release of the data would harm a firm’s commercial privilege.

  The undisclosed royalty payments are inherent conflicts of interest, Andrzejewski said.

  “We believe there is an unholy conflict of interest inherent at NIH,” he said. “Consider the fact that each year, NIH doles out $32 billion in grants to approximately 56,000 grantees. Now we know that over an 11-year period, there is going to be approximately $350 million flowing the other way from third-party payers, many of which receive NIH grants, and those payments are flowing back to NIH scientists and leadership.”

  Fauci and Lane told AP that they agreed there was an appearance of a conflict of interest in getting the royalties, with Fauci saying that he contributed his royalties to charity. Lane didn’t do that, according to Andrzejewski.

  The governing ethics financial disclosure form in the past defined the royalty payments as income recipients received from NIH, which meant the recipients weren’t required to list their payments on the form.

  But Andrzejewski said NIH has refused to respond to his request for clarification on the disclosure issue.

  “If they are not, none of these payments are receiving any scrutiny whatsoever and to the extent that a company making payments to either leadership or scientists, while also receiving grants … then that just on its face is a conflict of interest,” he said.

  Open the Books is a Chicago-based nonprofit government watchdog that uses the federal and state freedom of information laws to obtain and then post on the internet trillions of dollars in spending at all levels of government.

  The nonprofit filed a federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit seeking documentation of all payments by outside firms to NIH and/or current and former NIH employees.

  NIH declined to respond to the FOIA, so Open the Books is taking the agency to court, suing it for noncompliance with the FOIA. Open the Books is represented in federal court in the case by another nonprofit government watchdog, Judicial Watch.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 23:30

• Tesla Reportedly Halts Shanghai Production Again, This Time Due To "Issues With Supplies"
  Tesla Reportedly Halts Shanghai Production Again, This Time Due To “Issues With Supplies”

  No sooner did it seem Tesla got back up and running in Shanghai than its plant is apparently halting production yet again, according to an exclusive from Reuters late Monday night. The halt is due to “issues with supplies,” according to the report.

  It comes just three weeks after the plant resumed production after shutting down due to Covid lockdowns. The plant was closed for a total of 22 days, Reuters noted. 

  Shanghai is in its sixth week of lockdowns, the report notes, and as of now it is “unclear when the supply issues can be resolved and when Tesla can resume production”.

  Wire harness maker Aptiv is one supplier who is currently facing issues due to “infections found among its employees”. 

  Tesla had just started to eye resuming double shifts at its plant, we noted last Friday. The plant was making plans to “resume double shifts” at its Shanghai factory as soon as mid-May after starting back up in mid April. 

  

  Upon the April restart, workers were living on site to reduce Covid risk. Workers returned to work under this system were working 12 hour shifts, six days a week, we wrote. 

  Management had been “canvassing the willingness of staff to leave their residential compounds” and “looking at daily door-to-door shuttle buses that would allow some workers to return home after their shift rather than sleep at the factory”. 

  We’re guessing that plans for the double shifts have likely been shelved for the time being…

  We also wrote on Friday that the plant had “remained challenged” by parts shortages, pushing back waits for new Model 3 Teslas to 20 to 24 weeks, instead of their normal wait time of 4 to 6 weeks. 

  Recall, back on April 19, we wrote that Shanghai had re-opened. Additionally, we noted days ago that Elon Musk was eerily quiet about China’s lockdowns, after in 2020, Musk slammed stay-at-home orders in the U.S., labeling them “fascist”. Musk called shelter-in-place orders “forcibly imprisoning people in their homes against all their constitutional rights,” CNBC reported at the time.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 23:10

• Did The Biggest Recent Buyer Of Bitcoin Just Become A Forced-Seller?
  Did The Biggest Recent Buyer Of Bitcoin Just Become A Forced-Seller?

  Authored by Sam Rule via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  As the Terra stablecoin becomes depegged from the U.S. dollar, the biggest buyer of bitcoin in recent months could become its biggest forced seller.

  

  UST DOLLAR PEG COLLAPSES

  What’s been developing over the weekend and has been amplified today is the depegging of the Terra stablecoin (UST) to the U.S. dollar now with Terra currently trading at $0.85. Many of these market dynamics have been playing out in near real time today as the situation worsens and will likely change again over the next 24 hours.

  It started with billions of dollars in UST leaving the high-yielding Anchor Protocol over the weekend and turned into a full-on digital bank run.

  YIKES

  Terra’s #UST stablecoin has rapidly fallen to $0.98.

  Further decline would lead to partial/full liquidation of LFG’s 40k BTC to support the peg. pic.twitter.com/yehn588vTr

  — Dylan LeClair 🟠 (@DylanLeClair_) May 9, 2022

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

  UST relies on the LUNA token to maintain its price through algorithmic minting and burning mechanics. Through this method, an arbitrage opportunity is created when UST is off its $1 peg. Traders can burn LUNA and create new UST when UST is priced over $1 and profit. When UST is below $1, UST gets burned and LUNA is minted to help stabilize the peg. Yet, as UST has suffered a blow to demand and liquidity, LUNA has fallen nearly 26% in just one day while BTC is down nearly 8%.

  

  As UST has suffered a blow to demand and liquidity, LUNA has fallen nearly 26% in just one day while BTC is down nearly 8%.

  Why this matters for bitcoin is because the centralized Luna Foundation Guard (LFG) has accumulated 42,530 bitcoin ($1.275 billion at a $30,000 price) as reserves to be used in these exact situations, to defend the UST peg when it sustains below the $1. And currently, that is exactly what they are attempting to do.

  

  Luna Foundation Guard is attempting to leverage its BTC reserves to defend its UST peg.

  As a response, the LFG voted earlier today to loan out $750 million of bitcoin and $750 million of UST to OTC trading firms in efforts to help sustain the UST peg. Later in the day, the LFG announced a withdrawal of nearly 37,000 BTC to loan out to market makers highlighting that it is currently being used to buy UST. 

  Below is the new LFG $BTC wallet address: https://t.co/9t0NX3VEMI

  Last clip withdrawn by the LFG was ~37K BTC. Similar to the last deployment, it has been loaned to MMs.

  Very little of the recent clip has been spent but is currently being used to buy $UST.

  Updates coming.

  — LFG | Luna Foundation Guard (@LFG_org) May 9, 2022

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

  Now the main risk to the market is that the biggest buyer of bitcoin over the last couple months will now become the market’s biggest forced seller.

  

  The market expectations and potential selling have certainly played a role in bitcoin’s historic selloff today, but it comes at the same time that broader equity markets have been selling off in tandem.

  

  Bitcoin’s correlation to broader equity indexes and tech stocks is at historic highs and is following the same market dynamics since November 2021.

  *  *  *

  This is an excerpt from a recent edition of Bitcoin Magazine Pro, Bitcoin Magazine’s premium markets newsletter. To be among the first to receive these insights and other on-chain bitcoin market analysis straight to your inbox, subscribe now.

  Ty
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 23:00

• Dems Ditch COVID Funds To Rush $40 Billion To Ukraine
  Dems Ditch COVID Funds To Rush $40 Billion To Ukraine

  Congressional Democrats are rushing forward to whip up $39.8 billion in additional Ukraine aid, after agreeing to drop a a proposal for additional COVID-19 related funding they planned to combine.

  

  The package, which tops President Joe Biden’s $33 billion request in April, could receive a House vote as soon as Tuesday, with Senate Democrats indicating that they are prepared to move swiftly according to Reuters.

  Biden on April 28 asked Congress for $33 billion to support Ukraine, including more than $20 billion in military assistance. That proposal was a dramatic escalation of U.S. funding for the war with Russia. read more

  The new proposal includes an additional $3.4 billion for military aid and $3.4 billion in humanitarian aid, the sources said. -Reuters

  While emergency aid for Ukraine has had bipartisan support for weeks, disputes over domestic funds for pandemic relief, or whether stiffer immigration controls should be included, have delayed the process.

  “We cannot allow our shipments of assistance to stop while we await further congressional action,” read a statement from President Biden, who called on lawmakers to expedite the funding so he could sign it within the next few days.

  The urgency comes after Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and top House Republican Kevin McCarthy begging for the funds, which they said would run out in two weeks.

  “We need your help” wrote Austin and Blinken, who said there was ‘only’ $100 million left from a presidential authorization of weapons (which required no congressional approval).

  “We expect to exhaust that authority no later than May 19, 2022,” the letter continues.

  Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters he was pleased the Ukraine assistance was decoupled from COVID-19 aid. He had advocated for a “clean” Ukraine bill repeatedly in speeches in the Senate. -Reuters

  Some Democrats, such as #2 Senator Dick Durban, weren’t happy with the decision.

  “It would have been so much better for us to protect the United States as well as worked to protect Ukraine,” said Durban, adding that separating Ukraine aid from COVID-19 aid “doesn’t help. Putting those two together would have been a positive.”

  Biden owned stripping the COVID relief from the bill, saying on Monday that he was advised it would slow down action “on the urgently needed Ukrainian aid.”

  B) Biden: However, I have been informed by Congressional leaders in both parties that such an addition would slow down action on the urgently needed Ukrainian aid – a view expressed strongly by several Congressional Republicans. We cannot afford delay in this vital war effort.

  — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) May 9, 2022

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

  D) Biden: So I call on Congress to pass the Ukrainian Supplemental funding bill immediately, and get it to my desk in the next few days. And then, I urge Congress to move promptly on the COVID funding bill. This virus knows no borders

  — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) May 9, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 22:30

• 25% Of San Francisco's EV Charging Stations Don't Work 
  25% Of San Francisco’s EV Charging Stations Don’t Work 

  California’s bold move toward an EV revolution and eliminating the sale of gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles by 2035 have hit a snag in the liberal utopian city of San Francisco. 

  A recent report by David Rempel of the University of California at Berkeley found a quarter of all EV charging stations in the Bay Area were out of order, suggesting current infrastructure isn’t ready for the giant leap toward an electrified world. 

  Here’s a section of the study describing the poor infrastructure for EVs across the Bay Area: 

  In order to achieve a rapid transition to electric vehicle driving, a highly reliable and easy to use charging infrastructure is critical to building confidence as consumers shift from using familiar gas vehicles to unfamiliar electric vehicles … This study evaluated the functionality of the charging system for 657 EVSE (electric vehicle service equipment) CCS connectors (combined charging system) on all 181 open, public DCFC (direct current fast chargers) charging stations in the Greater Bay Area. An EVSE was evaluated as functional if it charged an EV for 2 minutes or was charging an EV at the time the station was evaluated. Overall, 72.5% of the 657 EVSEs were functional. The cable was too short to reach the EV inlet for 4.9% of the EVSEs. Causes of 22.7% of EVSEs that were non-functioning were unresponsive or unavailable screens, payment system failures, charge initiation failures, network failures, or broken connectors.

  The study notes that the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area region (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma) were included. It excluded private EV charging stations in paid parking lots, private workplaces, or business sites with restricted access hours. Also, all Tesla Superchargers were excluded since those stations weren’t accessible to all EVs. 

  

  California is the largest auto market in the US and the 10th largest globally. Its aggressive transition to EVs, all in the name of climate change, is hitting road bumps as infrastructure support cracks in at leader one major metro area, and the state’s power grid is unreliable as fossil fuel power plants have been retired too quickly in the transition to unsustainable solar and wind power generations. This has caused a jump in electricity rates for customers who use Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co., and San Diego Gas & Electric. Rates are so expensive that charging some EVs in certain parts of the state is almost as much as filling up a vehicle at the gas station. 

  The incentives for owning an EV in California are diminishing, from faulty infrastructure in San Francisco to extremely high electricity rates in some parts of the state. Not exactly what is needed to instill confidence in increasing EV ownership.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 22:10

• Sen. Graham Pushes To Designate Russia A 'State Sponsor Of Terror'
  Sen. Graham Pushes To Designate Russia A ‘State Sponsor Of Terror’

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com,

  Senator Lindsey Graham said the US must pursue an even more aggressive strategy against Russia. While appearing on Fox News Sunday with Brett Baier, the hawkish Senator advocated for a barrage of actions targeting Moscow.

  Graham promoted a new piece of legislation he co-authored with Senator Richard Blumenthal that calls on the White House to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. Senator Graham published an op-ed Friday, arguing the designation will allow the US to conduct more legal and economic warfare against Russia.

  

  However, Graham does not link Russia to a terrorist group. Rather, he compares the invasion of Ukraine to the Nazi military campaign during World War Two and claims Vladimir Putin is a “megalomaniac wanting to rewrite the map of Europe and recreate the former Russian Empire.”

  The Senator also urges the passing of the $33 billion aid bill for Ukraine, prosecuting Putin for war crimes through the International Criminal Court, and putting “more weapons in theater that can target the Russian military offensively.”

  On Saturday, the Speaker of the Russian State Duma claimed the Western intervention in Ukraine amounted to direct attacks on Russia. “Washington essentially coordinates and develops military operations, thereby directly participating in the hostilities against our country,” Vyacheslav Volodin said.

  Lindsey Graham declares, “let’s take out Putin” and says there is “no off-ramp in this war” — also continues to suggest a No Fly Zone. “We can win this war on behalf of Ukraine,” he adds. No compunction whatsoever about announcing that the goal is US-imposed regime change pic.twitter.com/xNY3aejddE

  — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) May 9, 2022

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

  Baier posed two questions to Graham, asking if he was concerned that increasing military involvement in Ukraine could lead to direct confrontation with Russia.

  The Senator was dismissive of the potential conflict between nuclear powers saying, “we can’t let him [Putin] win in Ukraine.”

  People in America think we can arm Ukraine to the teeth without incurring serious nuclear war risk. People are wrong. Just the accidental risk alone is becoming outrageous. #peace pic.twitter.com/r0EgRk97yG

  — Ian Wilkie (@Wilkmaster) May 7, 2022

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

  Graham boldly called on the US to “take out Putin” and said the Russian leader no longer had an “off-ramp.” He predicted that the lack of an off-ramp would provoke Putin to use chemical or nuclear weapons, causing the US to enter the conflict directly.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 21:50

• Pro-Life Organization Fire-Bombed With Molotov Cocktail
  Pro-Life Organization Fire-Bombed With Molotov Cocktail

  Following a Supreme Court draft leak that could overturn Roe v. Wade, the nation has become even more divided and riled up by the actions (or potential actions) of ‘the other’.

  There were incidents of pro-abortion activists gathering outside the homes of at least two conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justices on Saturday night. Then on Sunday morning, pro-life organization Wisconsin Family Action’s headquarters in Madison, Wisconsin, was firebombed, according to local news Madison.com.

  Police have called the fire an “arson.” The building is located near the Dane County Regional Airport, or about 6 miles northeast of downtown Madison, the capital of Wisconsin. 

  

  Julaine Appling, the president of the anti-abortion lobbying group, was notified by a staffer around 0600 local time Sunday of the arson attack. 

  When firefighters arrived, flames were shooting out of a window. It wasn’t immediately clear who or possibly which pro-abortion group was responsible for the fire. Investigators said there were signs a Molotov cocktail was used. 

  The arsonist left behind a frightening message, spray-painted in black on the side of the building that read: “If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either.”

  

  Madison Police Chief Shon Barnes said the attack was “targeted.” 

  Appling said this is a “direct threat against” our organization: 

  “We will repair our offices, remain on the job, and build an even stronger grassroots effort … We will not back down. We will not stop doing what we are doing. Too much is at stake.”

  On Sunday afternoon, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers condemned the arson attack in a tweet: 

  “We condemn violence and hatred in all forms, including the actions at Wisconsin Family Action in Madison last night. 

  “We reject violence against any person for disagreeing with another’s view … We will work against overturning Roe and attacks on reproductive rights by leading with empathy and compassion. We will defend what we believe in with our words and our voices — in the streets, in halls of government, and at the ballot box. In Wisconsin, we must lead by example.”

  Republican Sen. Ron Johnson said the attack shouldn’t be tolerated. 

  “This attack is abhorrent and should be condemned by all,” Johnson said.

  There are fears that social instability might erupt in metro areas upon the Supreme Court announcement if Roe v. Wade is overturned. The Biden administration has yet to denounce the disgraceful leak and targeted protests of justices. One justice had to go in hiding on Monday… 

  Justice Alito and his family have now reportedly been moved to an undisclosed location. The image of a justice and his family in hiding captures the collapse of our values as a nation. https://t.co/lX05LUkyMp

  — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 9, 2022

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

  As Jonathan Turley concluded earlier, all three branches, having to be protected from enraged citizens on the left or the right. Schumer’s 2020 pledge that justices would “pay the price” has been realized as they and their families are now bunkered in their homes. Despite the shocking image of a court system under attack, President Biden has not mustered the courage to dissuade these protesters. He appears to be following the lead of French revolutionary Abbe Sieyes, who watched as his 1789-99 revolution spun out of control; asked what he had done during “the Terror,” he replied: “I survived.” President Biden is now in survival mode, too. It seems he does not lack decency, just the courage to defend it.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 21:30

• Michigan Police Seize Voting Machine During Investigation Into Possible Election Breaches
  Michigan Police Seize Voting Machine During Investigation Into Possible Election Breaches

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

  Police officers in Michigan took custody of a voting machine as the state expands its investigation into what it’s described as possible unauthorized access to election equipment.

  

  Michigan State Police and officials with Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office seized an Irving Township voting tabulator on April 29, township supervisor Jamie Knight told The Epoch Times in an email.

  The seizure was done pursuant to a search warrant, she said.

  “The Township intends to fully cooperate with law enforcement, and the Township attorneys have been in contact with the Michigan State Police regarding this matter. The Township has no further comment at this time,” Knight added.

  An investigation was launched earlier this year at the request of Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who said her office received reports that an unnamed third party “was allowed to access vote tabulator components and technology in Roscommon County.”

  “Michigan law is clear about the security threats that emerge when anyone gains unauthorized access to our election machines or technology, and I will have no tolerance for those who seek to illegally tamper with our voting equipment,” Benson, a Democrat, said at the time.

  Michigan State Police Lieutenant Derrick Carroll confirmed that the probe has expanded beyond Roscommon County, which declined to comment.

  “As we found out more information we’ve expanded our area to see if any other places were compromised,” Carroll told Reuters. “We have gone to other regions.”

  Carroll told The Epoch Times in an email that the probe has expanded but declined to share any details.

  Nessel’s office declined to comment.

  Carroll previously told news outlets that the probe will continue “until we have exhausted all leads,” adding that the possible unauthorized access “did not, in any way, affect the 2020 election.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 21:10

• COVID Cases Explode After White House Media Dinner Becomes Superspreader Event
  COVID Cases Explode After White House Media Dinner Becomes Superspreader Event

  Cases of Covid-19 among attendees to the White House correspondents’ dinner two weekends ago continue to mount, as the fully vaccinated and boosted ‘elites’ who condescended to non-compliant Americans participated in a superspreader event.

  

  As The Hill notes, “High-profile cases following the dinner include ABC reporter Jonathan Karl, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and reporters from The Washington Post, Voice of America and other outlets.”

  There is no exact count, and it is not clear which dinner attendees contracted the virus at the dinner itself or at one of the many parties last weekend surrounding it.  

  But the string of reported cases does emphasize the point that even as the country seeks to move on from the virus, large indoor gatherings do carry some risk.  

  The cases have also played into an ongoing debate, with some arguing that the current era of COVID-19 allows vaccinated and boosted people to decide to attend large gatherings even if it means a small risk, while others are more cautious, pointing to the downstream effects on other people of increased transmission. –The Hill

  No – it’s not a debate over whether large gatherings are a good idea since the dominant strain of Covid is only slightly more deadly than the common cold and the vast majority of people will make it through Covid-19 without issue. The point is that those who refused to play the lockdown game were chastised by the very people at this superspreader event.

  “I’m yet another [White House Correspondents’ Association] weekend casualty,” tweeted Puck News correspondent Julia Ioffe. “I knew I was taking a risk and, well, here we are!”

  And yes, I’m yet another #WHCA weekend casualty. I knew I was taking a risk and, well, here we are!

  — Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) May 4, 2022

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

  WaPo journalist Jada Yuan tweeted that she had tested positive, then felt obligated to condescend over how people should conduct themselves to avoid her mistake.

  “Hindsight and all that, but wear a mask or leave or tell your employer you can’t go if you’re in a situation where you feel uncomfortable,” she tweeted, adding “Those consequences are usually better than the ones you’ll face if you get sick.”

  According to White House Correspondents’ Association President Steven Portnoy, “We worked hard to publicize our protocols and encouraged those eligible to get booster shots in the weeks leading up to the dinner,” adding “Our event implemented protocols that went beyond any guidance or regulation issued by the CDC or the DC health department. We wish anyone who may not be feeling well a speedy recovery.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 20:50

• With World Gripped By Fertilizer Crisis, Biden Admin Clings To "Climate-Inspired Utopian Food-Production Fantasies"
  With World Gripped By Fertilizer Crisis, Biden Admin Clings To “Climate-Inspired Utopian Food-Production Fantasies”

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times,

  Samantha Power: ‘Never let a crisis go to waste.’ Do the World Economic Forum and China agree?

  

  “Fertilizer shortages are real now.”

  Uttered by USAID’s Samantha Power in a May 1 ABC interview with former Democratic advisor George Stephanopoulos, the words briefly drowned out the din of the news cycle.

  They were not unexpected to some.

  Power, who served as U.N. ambassador under Obama, mentioned fertilizer shortages after weeks of hints from the Biden administration.

  White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki repeatedly alluded to challenges obtaining fertilizer in recent press briefings. So did President Joe Biden himself in a joint statement with EU President Ursula von der Leyen.

  “We are deeply concerned by how Putin’s war in Ukraine has caused major disruptions to international food and agriculture supply chains, and the threat it poses to global food security. We recognize that many countries around the world have relied on imported food staples and fertilizer inputs from Ukraine and Russia, with Putin’s aggression disrupting that trade,” the leaders stated.

  In an April report titled, “The Ukraine Conflict and Other Factors Contributing to High Commodity Prices and Food Insecurity,” the USDA’s Foreign Agriculture Service acknowledged that “for agricultural producers around the world, high fertilizer and fuel prices are a major concern.”

  While political rhetoric has often focused on Russia, the rise in fertilizer prices did not begin with its invasion of Ukraine.

  An analysis from the Peterson Institute of International Economics shows that fertilizer prices have rapidly climbed since mid-2021, spiking first in late 2021 and again around the time of the invasion.

  Industry observers have pointed out that commodity prices are not solely affected by Vladimir Putin.

  Max Gagliardi, an Oklahoma City oil and gas industry commentator who cofounded the energy marketing firm Ancova Energy, told The Epoch Times that the war and sanctions have helped drive the upward climb of natural gas prices in Europe.

  

  A worker walks at the Yara ammonia plant in Porsgrunn, Norway, on Aug. 9, 2017. (Lefteris Karagiannopoulos/Reuters)

  Natural gas is used in the Haber-Bosch process, which generates the ammonia in nitrogen fertilizers. Those fertilizers feed half the planet.

  Gagliardi thinks the picture is more complicated at home, where environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) has become a controversial tool of stakeholder capitalism, often used to force divestment from fossil fuels or other industries disfavored by the left.

  “It’s a combination of record demand domestically and from LNG [liquid natural gas] exports combined with less than expected supply, in part due to the starving of capital for the O&G industry due to the ESG/green movement pressures on capital providers, plus pressure from Wall Street to spend less capital and return value to shareholders,” he said.

  Language from Power Echoes Green Activists, EU, WEF

  In the case of increasing costs for oil, natural gas, and coal, some politicians and green activists have argued that those fast-rising prices mark an opportunity to accelerate a move from hydrocarbons to wind, solar, and electrification.

  “Big Oil is price gouging American drivers. These liars do nothing to make the United States energy independent or stabilize gas prices. It’s time we break up with Big Oil and ignite a clean energy revolution,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said on Twitter in March.

  “I say we take this opportunity to double down on our renewable energy investments and wean ourselves off of planet-destroying fossil fuels[.] Never let a crisis go to waste,” said former Joe Biden delegate and political commentator Lindy Li in a Twitter post about ExxonMobil’s exit from Russia’s Far East.

  Meanwhile, Mandy Gunasekara, an environmental lawyer who served as the Environmental Protection Agency’s chief of staff under President Trump, said in an interview with The Epoch Times, “It’s always been part of their plan to make the price of traditional energy sources go up, so then wind and solar could actually compete with them.”

  Describing how fertilizer shortages could actually help advance a particular agenda, Power sounded much like Li.

  She even used an identical phrase: “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

  Intentionally or not, this echoed a line from another high-profile Obama alum, Rahm Emanuel: “Never let a serious crisis go to waste.” Emanuel was talking about the 2008-2009 financial meltdown.

  “Less fertilizer is coming out of Russia. As a result, we’re working with countries to think about natural solutions, like manure and compost. And this may hasten transitions that would have been in the interest of farmers to make anyway. So, never let a crisis go to waste,” Power told Stephanopoulos.

  Power’s language of setting crisis as opportunity parallels similar statements from environmental groups.

  Writing to EU President von der Leyen and other EU bureaucrats, a group of European and international environmental organizations urged the union to stay the course on environmental policy.

  “The crisis in Ukraine is yet another reminder of how essential it is to implement the Green Deal and its Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies,” the letter states.

  The Farm to Fork Strategy confidently asserts that its actions to curb the overuse of chemical fertilizers “will reduce the use of [fertilizers] by at least 20 percent by 2030.”

  “Ploughing more farmland, as is currently being put forward, to grow crops for biofuels and intensive animal farming by using even more synthetic pesticides and [fertilizers] would be absurd and dangerously increase ecosystem collapses, the most severe threat to social-ecological stability and food security,” the activists’ letter argues.

  “The European Union must tackle the current challenges by accelerating the implementation of its strategies to reduce the use of synthetic pesticides and [fertilizers], to preserve its natural environment and the health of its citizens.”

  Numerous publications from the World Economic Forum (WEF), known for its role in orchestrating the global response to COVID-19, have made similar arguments.

  A 2020 white paper from WEF and the consulting firm McKinsey and Company warns of greenhouse gas emissions and potential runoff from fertilizers, advocating for an end to fertilizer subsidies in developing countries and praising China for its efforts to reduce fertilizer use.

  A 2018 WEF white paper, co-authored with the consulting firm Accenture, claims that “a 21st century approach to organic farming” should strive to close the gap in yields between organic and conventional farming.

  WEF’s vision of 21st century agriculture comes into greater focus in another 2018 report titled, “Bio-Innovation in the Food System.”

  It advocates for the bioengineering of new microbes to fix nitrogen more efficiently in plants.

  “This offers the prospect of lowering and more optimally applying nitrogen fertilizer,” WEF’s report states.

  WEF has also pushed the use of “biosolids”—in other words sewage sludge—as fertilizer.

  Urine, it notes, “makes an excellent agricultural fertilizer.”

  Gunasekara, formerly of the EPA, said that fertilizer overuse and runoff presents serious risks, giving rise to toxic algal blooms in the Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico.

  However, “generally speaking, the farmers are very, very efficient with their fertilizer use. They have a built-in incentive not to waste something that is a high input cost,” she told The Epoch Times, adding that in her experience, industry and communities could work out positive solutions with regulators.

  Heavy-handed restrictions, she argued, are not the solution.

  The UK Absolute Zero report, produced by academics at top British universities, goes even further than some other reports in its opposition to nitrogen-based fertilizers and conventional agriculture more generally.

  

  This photo shows sheep feeding on lush grass on the property of Australian farmer Kevin Tongue near the rural city of Tamworth in New South Wales, Australia, on May 4, 2020. (Peter Parks/AFP via Getty Images)

  It anticipates a phaseout of beef and lamb production, with “fertilizer use greatly reduced,” in order to meet net-zero emissions targets by 2050.

  “There are substantial opportunities to reduce energy use by reducing demand for [fertilizers],” the report states.

  It also envisions cuts to energy in the food sector of 60 percent before 2050.

  That imagined energy austerity, with its many unforeseeable consequences for human life, apparently will not last forever.

  The report claims that after 2050, energy for fertilizer and other aspects of food production will “[increase] with zero-emissions electricity.”

  “A food crisis/famine advances the long-term goal of more centralized control of energy, food, transportation, etc., as advanced by the Davos crowd of the WEF. Governments must expand their powers to ‘handle’ crises, and that is what progressives love more than anything,” Marc Morano, proprietor of the website Climate Depot, told The Epoch Times.

  Sri Lanka’s Organic Experiment a Stark Warning

  Though Power’s remarks were consistent with talking points from Democrats, WEF, the EU, and similar factions, they came at a particularly inconvenient moment for advocates of organic fertilizer—Sri Lanka’s recent experiment with abandoning chemical fertilizer has plunged the island nation into chaos that shows no signs of letting up.

  According to a 2021 report from the USDA Foreign Agriculture service,  Sri Lankan agricultural economists warned that a rapid shift from chemical to organic fertilizers “will result in significant drops in crop yields.”

  The country has since had to compensate one million of its farmers to the tune of $200 million, as reported by Al Jazeera.

  With food shortages now a reality, anti-government protests prompted Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to declare a state of emergency on May 6—the second in two months.

  “[Sri Lanka is] now literally on the verge of famine, because they’ve had massive crop failures,” Gunasekara said.

  

  A farmer prepares a paddy field for sowing in Biyagama on the outskirts of Colombo on October 21, 2020. (Ishara S. Kodikara/AFP via Getty Images)

  “This administration wants to use this as an opportunity to push their Green New Deal-style farming tactics, which we’ve seen implemented elsewhere, that cause significant problems beyond what we’re currently facing from our farmers’ perspective and what consumers are going to be facing,” she added.

  “Manure cannot compete with modern chemical agriculture for high yield farming that the world depends on,” Morano of Climate Depot said.

  Rufus Chaney, a retired USDA scientist known for his research on sewage sludge-based fertilizers, echoed Morano’s skepticism about making up for missing chemical fertilizers with organic alternatives.

  “There are not enough useful (and not already being used) organic fertilizers to change the balance of any chemical fertilizer shortages,” Rufus told The Epoch Times via email.

  “Nearly all organic fertilizers are built on livestock manure and can only be shipped short distances before it becomes cost-prohibitive,” he added.

  These realities underscore another apparent contradiction in green policy—even as climate activists push for cuts to chemical fertilizer use and greater reliance on organic alternatives, they are working assiduously to cull the livestock populations that provide manure for those fertilizers.

  In Northern Ireland, for example, a newly passed climate Act will require the region to lose a million sheep and cattle.

  The EU’s Farm to Fork Strategy even states that work on fertilizers will be focused “in hotspot areas of intensive livestock farming and of recycling of organic waste into renewable fertilizers.”

  “For years we were warned that ‘climate change’ would cause food shortages, but now it appears that climate policy will be one of the biggest factors in causing food shortages,” Morano told The Epoch Times.

  

  Bails of hay sit in a paddock containing a failed wheat crop on farmer Trevor Knapman’s property in Gunnedah, NSW, Australia, on Oct. 4, 2019. (David Gray/Getty Images)

  He cited research suggesting that a move to organic farming in the United Kingdom could actually raise carbon dioxide emissions, as the decrease in domestic yields can be expected to boost carbon-intensive imports.

  “What the Biden admin is doing is seizing on ‘crises’ to advance their agenda. Greta [Thunberg] famously said, ‘I want you to panic.’ Because when you panic, you don’t think rationally and calmly, and you make poor choices. The only way they can sell these climate-inspired utopian energy and food production fantasies is during times of COVID crisis or wartime crisis,” he added.

  China’s Role Scrutinized

  Still, others see the focus on Russia as a distraction from China’s maneuvering on the world stage.

  In 2021, China limited exports of both phosphate and urea fertilizers. The country has also stepped up its fertilizer imports.

  China’s export restrictions came after it rapidly emerged as “the most important and most influential country in the fertilizer business,” according to an outlook document from the Gulf Chemicals & Petrochemicals Association.

  The Peterson Institute’s analysis shows that as global fertilizer prices shot upward in 2021 and 2022, China’s fertilizer prices mostly leveled off.

  Although the USDA’s April report did note the impact of China’s fertilizer export restrictions and heavy fertilizer imports, its executive summary drew greater attention to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

  That summary did not mention China by name among the “countries imposing export bans and restrictions.”

  Stanford University’s Gordon Chang, a China expert, warned on Twitter on May 6 that China has been “buying chemical companies whose products are needed for fertilizer and, more generally, food production,” citing comments from onshoring advocate Jonathan Bass.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Chang and Bass for additional details.

  We must, as a national priority, protect our farmland, ranches, processing facilities, distribution channels, and all the other elements that support agriculture and the food chain. #China’s regime is seeking control. Its intentions are undoubtedly malign. #CCP

  — Gordon G. Chang (@GordonGChang) May 7, 2022

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

  China has also been buying up American farmland as well as ports around the world, including ports in the now-food insecure Sri Lanka.

  Physicist Michael Sekora, a former project director in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), told The Epoch Times that worldwide fertilizer shortages could reflect China’s long-range technology strategy.

  A key element of that strategy, he argued, is undercutting the United States whenever and wherever possible.

  “Our ability to produce food is very much under attack right now. Some people say, ‘Oh, it’s just a coincidence.’ It’s China,” Sekora said.

  “China has been very strategic in making sure they shore up what they have and restricting access throughout the rest of the world,” Gunasekara said.

  “When you have people come in that are very anti-development and anti-growth, China can put its finger on the global market, making it that much harder, and then try to use that as an example to exert more authority and have access to greater power.”

  Pain Felt Around the World

  “It’s been hectic,” said South African tobacco farmer Herman J. Roos.

  Roos told The Epoch Times that fertilizer prices near him have jumped since the invasion of Ukraine, on the heels of steep increases over the previous year.

  He was able to buy all the fertilizer he needs for this year before the latest price shock. Yet, he expects shortages of urea, monoammonium phosphate (MAP), and other fertilizers to strain a population of farmers already under significant stress.

  Copper theft, lack of government support, and the ever-present threat of physical violence are all pushing Roos and producers like him to the brink.

  Yet, for all the challenges in South Africa, Roos anticipates the fallout will be worse elsewhere in the continent.

  “The economy will be hit harder in countries like Mozambique, Zambia, and Zimbabwe—countries where your agricultural system is more focused on subsistence farming,” Roos added.

  They and other sub-Saharan African countries are heavily dependent on South Africa for their food supply.

  Roos prays food riots won’t come to South Africa. The country is still recovering from a wave of riots in summer 2021, prompted by the arrest of former South African President Jacob Zuma.

  He does predict that some farmers in the country will go bankrupt.

  

  Let the master gardeners foot the bill and do all the work, then show up to get in on the harvest. (StockMediaSeller/Shutterstock)

  Back in the United States, Connecticut landscaper Adam Geriak does not yet face such stark choices.

  He told The Epoch Times that fertilizer prices near him are up, in line with estimates a Connecticut garden store provided to The Epoch Times.

  “I do primary garden work and use organic fertilizers, which primarily come from poultry manure,” Geriak said, adding that the price of poultry manure fertilizer may have risen too.

  He does not think fertilizer price increases will have much of an effect on him. Yet, other facets of the current economic picture are worrisome to him as tries to manage his small business most effectively.

  “I’m having a hard time planning for the future because of the uncertainty, and I think other owners are feeling this too. In the previous two years, clients seemed to have open coffers. They wanted more projects done and there seemed to be a lot of money going around. Clients seem to be a bit tighter now, asking how they can save money on certain projects and such,” Geriak said.

  “Being on the verge of a recession, and retirement accounts down may be leading to these issues,” he added.

  The USDA report on Sri Lanka’s organic experiment states that the country’s government made impossible promises to different parties.

  It informed farmers it would handle the cost of moving away from chemical fertilizers while telling consumers that rice on their shelves would not become pricier, all while attempting to realize environmental and public health benefits through a breakneck transition to organic fertilizers.

  “If you put too much emphasis on environmental issues, and you ignore the very real impact that can have to people’s daily lives, it can have dire consequences,” Gunasekara told The Epoch Times.

  “Unfortunately, we’re seeing it in the most dire of circumstances, which is a suppressed food supply. I think that situation is only going to get worse because of the rise in prices for fertilizers and diesel and everything else that’s going to make it harder for farmers in the U.S. to produce, then also globally.”

  Josh, a farmer in Texas who raises small livestock, also believes things will get worse before they get better. He did not want to share his last name.

  “I personally think that we haven’t even begun to feel the effects of inflation in our grocery store bills, because last year, the costs to produce were 1/3 to 1/2 the cost farmers and ranchers are having to pay this year. That cost has to be absorbed by the buyer to make it feasible for them to even continue,” he said in a message to The Epoch Times.

  “My family is preparing now and stocking up our freezers and pantry because we are really concerned how bad it can get this next year.”

  He estimates that fertilizer prices near him have increased 200 or even 300 percent, “dependent on what program you are running.”

  The rise in diesel prices has hurt him the most. “Farm equipment runs on diesel,” he pointed out.

  According to AAA’s gas price website, diesel in Texas is running at an average of $5.231, up from $2.820 a year ago.

  “I can’t imagine how anyone would profit or sustain raising crops or cattle with all these price increases that effect your overhead,” Josh said, saying he has heard about other ranchers and farmers culling their herds to avoid losses.

  “Food shortages are a great way to collapse the current system and install a Great Reset,” Morano, of Climate Depot, told The Epoch Times.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 20:30

• Goldman, Citi, & BofA Are All Quietly Backing Out Of The SPAC Business
  Goldman, Citi, & BofA Are All Quietly Backing Out Of The SPAC Business

  Better late than never…

  

  It looks like the SEC’s recent crackdown on SPAC rules is finally hitting its intended mark. And there’s no better sign that increased regulation has spoiled the party than Goldman Sachs backing out of most SPACs it has already taken public.

  The bank is apparently “spooked by new liability guidelines from regulators and throwing into doubt the fate of billions raised for those blank-check vehicles,” Bloomberg reported on Monday morning. Prior to pulling out, Goldman had been the second largest underwriter of SPACs last year. 

  Now, it “has been telling sponsors of the vehicles it will be ending its involvement”. Additionally, it is also halting all new SPAC issuances, the report says. It also says the bank may “elect to continue the advisory work with a small number of SPAC clients in rare cases”.

  

  Maeve DuVally, a spokeswoman for New York-based Goldman Sachs, commented: “We are reducing our involvement in the SPAC business in response to the changed regulatory environment.”

  Recall, we just wrote days ago that the SEC was seeking to enact new SPAC rules. 

  As we noted, the agency is threatening SPAC sponsors who “embellish projections about the companies they plan to take public”, according to another Bloomberg report late last month. The regulator’s targeted enforcement that would appear to hit at the heart of the SPAC business model: namely, coming up with bullshit overly-optimistic projections for pre-profit (and sometimes pre-revenue) companies, and hoping that analysts and the investing public buy into their validity because they’re formatted nicely on a PowerPoint slide. 

  

  Now the SEC is going to propose “curbing the legal protections that some blank-check companies have relied on to make bullish forward-looking statements about the firms they plan to merge with”, the report said. 

  The rules will also allow investors to sue over inaccurate forecasts and the notion of removing SPACs’ safe harbor from legal liability would raise listing via SPAC to the same legal standards as traditional IPOs, effectively taking out one of the major points of appeal to going public via SPAC. 

  Sidley Austin LLP recently told clients: “Investment banks involved with de-SPAC transactions do not typically conduct the same level of due diligence as they would for a traditional IPO.”

  Later in the day, Bloomberg reported that both BofA and Citi had also ‘scaled back’ their work with some SPACs.

  At Bank of America, the situation is reportedly fluid and policies could change – with the potential for further pullback – depending on the outcome of the regulatory proposals, according to people familiar with the matter.

  Citigroup paused initial public offerings of new U.S. SPACs last month, until it gets more clarity on the potential legal risks posed by the guidelines.

  Together, Bank of America, Citigroup and Goldman accounted for more than 27% of U.S. SPAC deals since the start of last year, overseeing about $47 billion of the transactions, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

  This pullback by the three majors comes just as gay-dating app Grindr announced plans to go public through a merger with a SPAC, in a deal that it said would give the business an implied valuation of $2.1bn.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 20:10

• Biden Orders Officials To Stop Intel Leaks On Ukraine
  Biden Orders Officials To Stop Intel Leaks On Ukraine

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  According to a report from NBC News, President Biden spoke with top administration officials on Friday and said reports in the media about US intelligence sharing with Ukraine have been counterproductive.

  The report cited two anonymous administration officials who said Biden spoke with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, CIA Director William Burns, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines. One source said Biden told them the reports “distract from our objective,” while the other source said he conveyed that the leaks must stop.

  

  This week, US officials claimed to media outlets that US intelligence helped Ukraine kill Russian generals and aided Ukraine in the sinking of the Russian warship Moskva, the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. While the claims aren’t confirmed and might not be true, the fact that US officials are making such statements to the media is a major provocation toward Moscow.

  Both the Pentagon and the White House wouldn’t outright deny the details of the reports but did downplay them by saying that the US isn’t sharing intelligence with Ukraine on specific targets.

  Asked about the Moskva, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the US was providing “relevant and timely” intelligence and that if “they do decide to do something with that intelligence, then they make the decisions about acting on it.” For their part, Russia denies that the Moskva was sunk by Ukraine and insists that a fire caused by an ammunition explosion took down the ship.

  The Biden administration has expanded intelligence sharing with Ukraine since Russia invaded, but US officials had previously been hesitant to disclose details over fears of provoking Moscow.

  In a newly published FT interview, CIA Director William Burns slammed the leaks as “irresponsible and risky”…

  Transcript: Vladimir Putin ‘doesn’t believe he can afford to lose’ — William Burns, CIA director https://t.co/fnyFULQmxn

  — Financial Times (@FT) May 9, 2022

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

  On top of the increased intelligence sharing, the Biden administration continues to escalate military aid to Ukraine. Biden is seeking from Congress $33 billion in new assistance for Kyiv, which includes $20.4 billion in military aid.

  The US objectives in the war go beyond just helping Ukraine defend itself, and the administration is digging in for a long-term campaign. Austin recently said that one of the US goals is to see a “weakened” Russia.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 19:50

• For the 19th Consecutive Week, Marko Kolanovic Says To Buy The Dip
  For the 19th Consecutive Week, Marko Kolanovic Says To Buy The Dip

  What do you do when you have dug yourself so deep in a hole with your “BTFD” recos you have about as much chance of crawling out as Melvin Capital has of hittin gits high water mark? Why, you keep digging of course.

  We are talking about JPMorgan’s chief quant and permabullish market preacher, whose relentless recos to buy no matter what we discussed back in March in “After Urging To Buy The Dip Every Week In 2022, Kolanovic Tells Clients To Buy The Dip… And He Means It This Time“, and again last month in “Is It Time To Turn Bullish On Stocks?”, when we said that “before bulls give themselves the all clear, a big red flag is that just one week after JPM’s resident permabullish cheerleader, Marko Kolanovic said to buy everything… which should be the clearest signal that one should take chips off the table and go short.”  (As a reference, the S&P was trading at 4,450 that day)

  In retrospect, our perpetually cynical view was once again correct, because since then the S&P has plunged more than 10%, and closed below 4,000 today even as Marko kept repeating to just buy the dip, buy the dip….

  Alas, being wrong every week since the start of the year has not been sufficient to get Marko to change his tune, and today the JPMorgan quant, who once upon a time (long ago) was known as Gandalf for magically moving markets with a mere whisper but has since become a bigger fade than Gartman, once again dug in his heels and for the 19th week of 2022 (here we exclude just the week of April 11 when Marko said to take “some” profits, although it wasn’t exactly clear which of his calls in 2022 has been profitable since stocks have never risen above the early Jan highs), urged JPM clients (at least those who still listen to him) to bet what little money they have left that this time stocks will finally bounce.

  “The past week’s selloff appears overdone, and driven to a large extent by technical flows, fear, and poor market liquidity, rather than fundamental developments,” Kolanovic wrote in his weekly Global Asset Allocation note. “While we expect growth to soften, we continue to push back on a base case assumption that the global economy is headed for recession, an outcome that is increasingly being priced by markets.”

  “We see supports for our pro-risk stance from COVID reopening, policy easing in China, strong labor markets, light positioning, distraught investor sentiment, and healthy consumer and corporate balance sheets” he added. Too bad nobody believes him any more. In fact, it’s so bad that even Bloomberg’s traditionally fawning writers took a swipe at the media-friendly strategist:

  Marko Kolanovic’s repeated dip-buying calls are failing to play out so far this year, but he’s sticking to his bullish stance on risk and urging investors to increase holdings in beaten-up corporate bonds.

  Kolanovic, voted the No. 1 equity-linked strategist in last year’s Institutional Investor survey, has been a steadfast bull in risky assets despite this year’s turmoil. Over the last two weeks, when the equity rout worsened, he forecast the stock market was poised for a rebound, partly because pessimism had gone too far. That prediction has yet to materialize, with the S&P 500 falling more than 3% Monday after five straight weeks of declines.

  And yes, we would share more from his latest note but we won’t since it all the same old stuff: too much bearishness, everything is great, no recession, tightening fears overblown, etc, etc.

  Of course at one point Marko will be right – that point will be when even the Fed realizes it has pushed stocks too low, too fast, and panics, sparking a historic short squeeze rally. Until then, however, those who follow the advice of Marko, or is that mARKKo, better have the same infinite balance sheet as his employer or else they’ll end up with that Cathie Wood.

  Finally, for those curious for a quick walk down memory lane, here is an annotated history of the 2022 bear market overlaid with Marko’s weekly recommendations to buy each and every dip.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 19:30

• Japan Reports More Suspected Cases Of Unexplained Acute Hepatitis In Children
  Japan Reports More Suspected Cases Of Unexplained Acute Hepatitis In Children

  Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  At least seven possible cases of acute hepatitis—inflammation of the liver—in children have been identified in Japan, the Health Ministry said Friday, but the cause of the cases is yet unknown.

  

  The first case was reported on April 25, followed by the second on April 28. Four more possible cases were reported on May 6, the ministry said in a statement (pdf). The patients are all under the age of 16.

  One of them tested positive for COVID-19, and another Adenovirus Type 1, the ministry said according to The Japan Times, without mentioning whether these were two separate people or one person who caught both viruses.

  It stated that the seven recorded cases comprised children admitted to hospitals between October, 1. 2021 and May, 6. 2022, with some having already been discharged. None of the patients received a liver transplant.

  The World Health Organization (WHO) told news outlets on May 3 that there were at least 228 probable cases of hepatitis worldwide in at least 20 countries, including Denmark, the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, and France.

  WHO stated on April 23 that the cases involved children aged one month to 16 years old, many of whom developed gastrointestinal symptoms, including abdominal pain, diarrhea, and vomiting preceding presentation with severe hepatitis and jaundice (yellowing skin and eyes).

  “The common viruses that cause acute viral hepatitis (hepatitis viruses A, B, C, D, and E) have not been detected in any of these cases. International travel or links to other countries based on the currently available information have not been identified as factors,” it said.

  In Indonesia, a mysterious form of hepatitis has been linked to the deaths of three children ages two, eight, and 11, The Jakarta Post reported on May 3. The Health Ministry said the children developed diarrhea and jaundice, adding that the case was still under investigation.

  The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said Friday that it was investigating more than 10 cases of a mysterious form of hepatitis in children, saying that five have died so far.

  Dr. Jay Butler, the CDC’s deputy director of infectious diseases, said during a briefing said the agency is investigating 109 cases of acute hepatitis in 24 U.S. states and Puerto Rico. The cause of the outbreak is not yet clear, he stressed, adding that about half of the children had adenovirus infections.

  The UK Health Security Agency reported that (pdf) the country’s case count had risen to 163, dating back to early January, adding that 11 children have received liver transplants so far. UK officials ruled out the COVID-19 vaccine as a potential cause.

  “There are fewer than five older case-patients recorded as having had a COVID-19 vaccination prior to hepatitis onset,” the report said, adding that most of the impacted children are too young to receive the shot. “There is no evidence of a link between COVID-19 vaccination and the acute hepatic syndrome.”

  Jack Phillips contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 19:10

• Pentagon To Give Ukraine High-Precision Laser-Guided Rockets
  Pentagon To Give Ukraine High-Precision Laser-Guided Rockets

  On Monday The Washington Post is reporting that for the first time the Pentagon will provide Ukrainian forces “high-precision laser-guided weapons” as part of the recently approved mammoth arms package amid Russia’s invasion.

  As expected, defense contractors will continue seeing a windfall of profits: “The Pentagon is expanding delivery of commercially available weapons and military equipment to Ukraine, detailing on Friday its $136 million in purchases of aerial drones, laser-guided rockets, binoculars and other items set for shipment soon.”

  

  The WaPo details further that “The weapons and equipment, to be purchased from U.S. companies, represent a separate category of military assistance than the vast quantities of armaments that the United States already has provided Ukraine from existing Pentagon stocks.”

  Pentagon undersecretary for acquisition and sustainment Bill LaPlante has vowed to utilize “all available tools to support Ukraine’s armed forces in the face of Russian aggression.”

  This is but the latest in the ramped-up continuing saga of it’s not a proxy war simply because we insist it’s not a proxy war… Many Western military analysts have pointed to the game-changing nature of US weapons and intelligence-sharing on the Ukraine battlefield, saying it’s greatly slowed and even stalled the Russian advance, also in the east, where Russian forces have focused their current objective on taking the Donbas.

  According to further details of a system called the “advanced precision kill weapon system”:

  This round includes $22.6 million worth of 70mm rockets — known as the advanced precision kill weapon system — that can be fired from helicopters

  …the advanced precision kill system, for instance, works by converting low-cost ammunition into guided weapons. U.S. forces have used it to supplement the firepower inherent to a variety of aircraft, including helicopters and fighter jets.

  Below: what was reported as of last week, part of the massive US weapons pipeline to Kiev. Infograph: Breaking Defense

  

  Last month Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin bluntly admitted of US policy aims in Ukraine: “we want to see Russia weakened to the degree it cannot do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.” He also sought to stress before the American public during an interview that the US is not fighting a “proxy war”. However, there’s clearly a contradiction in these two statements, especially given Biden administration actions in the form of unprecedented military assistance

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 18:50

• Biden's 'Ministry Of Truth' Tsar: Parents Concerned About Critical Race Theory Are "Disinformers"
  Biden’s ‘Ministry Of Truth’ Tsar: Parents Concerned About Critical Race Theory Are “Disinformers”

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

  The Biden administration’s new disinformation chief says that parents who are upset about critical race theory (CRT) making its way into public school classrooms are “disinformers” who “weaponize” the issue “for profit.”

  [ZH: let’s not forget the US Attorney General’s son makes millions selling CRT materials]

  

  Nina Jankowicz, who was appointed to lead the newly established Disinformation Governance Board at the Department of Homeland Security, dismissed the pushback against CRT indoctrination at an event in Ohio last October, when the debate over parents’ right to direct their children’s education had taken center stage in high-profile elections, including Virginia’s gubernatorial race.

  “Critical race theory has become one of those hot-button issues that the Republicans and other disinformers, who are engaged in disinformation for profit, frankly, … have seized on,” she said in a video that has recently regained attention.

  Jankowicz added that she lived in Virginia, where parents in Loudoun County fiercely resisted attempts to inject leftist political activism into local school curricula and policies. She called Loudoun “one of the areas where people have really homed in on this topic.”

  “But it’s no different than any of the other hot-button issues that have allowed disinformation to flourish,” she said. “It’s weaponizing people’s emotion.”

  Jankowicz then told her audience to be alert when they read news articles that make them feel emotional, adding that she supports government-funded, left-leaning institutions such as NPR and PBS, because these media outlets “get into the nuance of the issues” and “provide a balanced, nonpartisan source of information.”

  Jankowicz’s speech at the City Club of Cleveland took place on Oct. 29, 2021, weeks after U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland released a memo bringing together a coalition of federal and local law enforcement to address alleged “threats of violence” against teachers and school board members from unruly parents.

  Garland has conceded that his memo was based in part on a September 2021 letter to President Joe Biden by the National School Boards Association. The now-notorious letter characterized disruptions at school board meetings as “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crime,” and urged the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security and the FBI to invoke counterterrorism laws to quell “angry mobs” of parents, who sought to hold school officials accountable for promoting CRT and for imposing COVID-19 restrictions such as mask mandates on their children.

  Jankowicz’s comments resurfaced as her new post, tasked with addressing “disinformation that imperils the safety and security of our homeland,” has generated much scrutiny. Many have since compared the disinformation board to George Orwell’s fictional “Ministry of Truth,” the main purpose of which was to rewrite history to manipulate and control the population.

  “The Biden administration wants a government agency dedicated to cracking down on what its subjects can say, an idea popular with Orwellian governments everywhere,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said in a May 3 statement. “This board is unconstitutional and un-American.”

  Cotton has introduced a proposal that would bar any federal funds from going to the board. He was joined by 18 Republican senators as co-sponsors.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/09/2022 – 18:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest