- Circus Politics Are Intended To Distract Us. Don't Be Distracted
Circus Politics Are Intended To Distract Us. Don’t Be Distracted
Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,
“There is nothing more dangerous than a government of the many controlled by the few.”
– Lawrence Lessig, Harvard law professor
It is easy to be distracted right now by the bread and circus politics that have dominated the news headlines lately, but don’t be distracted.
Don’t be fooled, not even a little.
We’re being subjected to the oldest con game in the books, the magician’s sleight of hand that keeps you focused on the shell game in front of you while your wallet is being picked clean by ruffians in your midst.
This is how tyranny rises and freedom falls.
What characterizes American government today is not so much dysfunctional politics as it is ruthlessly contrived governance carried out behind the entertaining, distracting and disingenuous curtain of political theater. And what political theater it is, diabolically Shakespearean at times, full of sound and fury, yet in the end, signifying nothing.
We are being ruled by a government of scoundrels, spies, thugs, thieves, gangsters, ruffians, rapists, extortionists, bounty hunters, battle-ready warriors and cold-blooded killers who communicate using a language of force and oppression.
The U.S. government now poses the greatest threat to our freedoms.
More than terrorism, more than domestic extremism, more than gun violence and organized crime, even more than the perceived threat posed by any single politician, the U.S. government remains a greater menace to the life, liberty and property of its citizens than any of the so-called dangers from which the government claims to protect us.
No matter who has occupied the White House in recent years, the Deep State has succeeded in keeping the citizenry divided and at each other’s throats.
After all, as long as we’re busy fighting each other, we’ll never manage to present a unified front against tyranny in any form.
Unfortunately, what we are facing is tyranny in every form.
The facts speak for themselves.
We’re being robbed blind by a government of thieves. Americans no longer have any real protection against government agents empowered to seize private property at will. For instance, police agencies under the guise of asset forfeiture laws are taking Americans’ personal property based on little more than a suspicion of criminal activity and keeping it for their own profit and gain. In one case, police seized more than $17,000 in cash from two sisters who were trying to start a dog breeding business. Despite finding no evidence of wrongdoing, police held onto the money for months. Homeowners are losing their homes over unpaid property taxes (as little as $2300 owed) that amount to a fraction of what they have invested in their homes. And then there’s the Drug Enforcement Agency, which has been searching train and airline passengers and pocketing their cash, without ever charging them with a crime.
We’re being taken advantage of by a government of scoundrels, idiots and cowards. Journalist H.L. Mencken calculated that “Congress consists of one-third, more or less, scoundrels; two-thirds, more or less, idiots; and three-thirds, more or less, poltroons.” By and large, Americans seem to agree. When you’ve got government representatives who spend a large chunk of their work hours fundraising, being feted by lobbyists, shuffling through a lucrative revolving door between public service and lobbying, and making themselves available to anyone with enough money to secure access to a congressional office, you’re in the clutches of a corrupt oligarchy. Mind you, these same elected officials rarely read the legislation they’re enacting, nor do they seem capable of enacting much legislation that actually helps the plight of the American citizen. More often than not, the legislation lands the citizenry in worse straits.
We’re being locked up by a government of greedy jailers. We have become a carceral state, spending three times more on our prisons than on our schools and imprisoning close to a quarter of the world’s prisoners, despite the fact that crime is at an all-time low and the U.S. makes up only 5% of the world’s population. The rise of overcriminalization and profit-driven private prisons provides even greater incentives for locking up American citizens for such non-violent “crimes” as having an overgrown lawn. As the Boston Review points out, “America’s contemporary system of policing, courts, imprisonment, and parole … makes money through asset forfeiture, lucrative public contracts from private service providers, and by directly extracting revenue and unpaid labor from populations of color and the poor. In states and municipalities throughout the country, the criminal justice system defrays costs by forcing prisoners and their families to pay for punishment. It also allows private service providers to charge outrageous fees for everyday needs such as telephone calls. As a result people facing even minor criminal charges can easily find themselves trapped in a self-perpetuating cycle of debt, criminalization, and incarceration.”
We’re being spied on by a government of Peeping Toms. The government, along with its corporate partners, is watching everything you do, reading everything you write, listening to everything you say, and monitoring everything you spend. Omnipresent surveillance is paving the way for government programs that profile citizens, document their behavior and attempt to predict what they might do in the future, whether it’s what they might buy, what politician they might support, or what kinds of crimes they might commit. The impact of this far-reaching surveillance, according to Psychology Today, is “reduced trust, increased conformity, and even diminished civic participation.” As technology analyst Jillian C. York concludes, “Mass surveillance without due process—whether undertaken by the government of Bahrain, Russia, the US, or anywhere in between—threatens to stifle and smother that dissent, leaving in its wake a populace cowed by fear.”
We’re being ravaged by a government of ruffians, rapists and killers. It’s not just the police shootings of unarmed citizens that are worrisome. It’s the SWAT team raids gone wrong—more than 80,000 annually—that are leaving innocent citizens wounded, children terrorized and family pets killed. It’s the roadside strip searches—in some cases, cavity searches of men and women alike carried out in full view of the public—in pursuit of drugs that are never found. It’s the potentially lethal—and unwarranted—use of so-called “nonlethal” weapons such as tasers on children for “mouthing off to a police officer. For trying to run from the principal’s office. For, at the age of 12, getting into a fight with another girl.”
We’re being forced to surrender our freedoms—and those of our children—to a government of extortionists, money launderers and professional pirates. The American people have repeatedly been sold a bill of goods about how the government needs more money, more expansive powers, and more secrecy (secret courts, secret budgets, secret military campaigns, secret surveillance) in order to keep us safe. Under the guise of fighting its wars on terror, drugs and now domestic extremism, the government has spent billions in taxpayer dollars on endless wars that have not ended terrorism but merely sown the seeds of blowback, surveillance programs that have caught few terrorists while subjecting all Americans to a surveillance society, and militarized police that have done little to decrease crime while turning communities into warzones. Not surprisingly, the primary ones to benefit from these government exercises in legal money laundering have been the corporations, lobbyists and politicians who inflict them on a trusting public.
We’re being held at gunpoint by a government of soldiers: a standing army. As if it weren’t enough that the American military empire stretches around the globe (and continues to leech much-needed resources from the American economy), the U.S. government is creating its own standing army of militarized police and teams of weaponized, federal bureaucrats. These civilian employees are being armed to the hilt with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment; authorized to make arrests; and trained in military tactics. Among the agencies being supplied with night-vision equipment, body armor, hollow-point bullets, shotguns, drones, assault rifles and LP gas cannons are the Smithsonian, U.S. Mint, Health and Human Services, IRS, FDA, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Education Department, Energy Department, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and an assortment of public universities. There are now reportedly more bureaucratic (non-military) government civilians armed with high-tech, deadly weapons than U.S. Marines. That doesn’t even begin to touch on the government’s arsenal, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, and the speed with which the nation could be locked down under martial law depending on the circumstances.
Whatever else it may be—a danger, a menace, a threat—the U.S. government is certainly no friend to freedom.
To our detriment, the criminal class that Mark Twain mockingly referred to as Congress has since expanded to include every government agency that feeds off the carcass of our once-constitutional republic.
The government and its cohorts have conspired to ensure that the only real recourse the American people have to hold the government accountable or express their displeasure with the government is through voting, which is no real recourse at all.
Consider it: the penalties for civil disobedience, whistleblowing and rebellion are severe. If you refuse to pay taxes for government programs you believe to be immoral or illegal, you will go to jail. If you attempt to overthrow the government—or any agency thereof—because you believe it has overstepped its reach, you will go to jail. If you attempt to blow the whistle on government misconduct, you will go to jail. In some circumstances, if you even attempt to approach your elected representative to voice your discontent, you can be arrested and jailed.
You cannot have a republican form of government—nor a democratic one, for that matter—when the government views itself as superior to the citizenry, when it no longer operates for the benefit of the people, when the people are no longer able to peacefully reform their government, when government officials cease to act like public servants, when elected officials no longer represent the will of the people, when the government routinely violates the rights of the people and perpetrates more violence against the citizenry than the criminal class, when government spending is unaccountable and unaccounted for, when the judiciary act as courts of order rather than justice, and when the government is no longer bound by the laws of the Constitution.
We no longer have a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.”
Rather, what we have is a government of wolves.
For too long, the American people have obeyed the government’s dictates, no matter now unjust.
We have paid its taxes, penalties and fines, no matter how outrageous. We have tolerated its indignities, insults and abuses, no matter how egregious. We have turned a blind eye to its indiscretions and incompetence, no matter how imprudent. We have held our silence in the face of its lawlessness, licentiousness and corruption, no matter how illicit.
How long we will continue to suffer depends on how much we’re willing to give up for the sake of freedom.
For the moment, the American people seem content to sit back and watch the reality TV programming that passes for politics today. It’s the modern-day equivalent of bread and circuses, a carefully calibrated exercise in how to manipulate, polarize, propagandize and control a population.
As French philosopher Etienne de La Boétie observed half a millennium ago:
“Plays, farces, spectacles, gladiators, strange beasts, medals, pictures, and other such opiates, these were for ancient peoples the bait toward slavery, the price of their liberty, the instruments of tyranny. By these practices and enticements the ancient dictators so successfully lulled their subjects under the yoke, that the stupefied peoples, fascinated by the pastimes and vain pleasures flashed before their eyes, learned subservience as naively, but not so creditably, as little children learn to read by looking at bright picture books.”
The bait towards slavery. The price of liberty. The instruments of tyranny.
Yes, that sounds about right.
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” have learned only too well how to be slaves.
Tyler Durden
Thu, 03/23/2023 – 00:00 - Why Hypersonic Weapons Change Everything
Why Hypersonic Weapons Change Everything
Authored by Alex Krainer via TrendCompass,
When it comes to all matters military, I have been following a handful of analysts among whom Croatian Admiral Davorin Domazet (retired) emerged as perhaps my favorite. He has deep and detailed command of technical matters (like Andreiy Martyanov he insists that you can’t prevail in modern warfare without deep knowledge of of advanced mathematics and probability). More importantly, he has perhaps the clearest understanding of the broad historical context of today’s clash between Russia and the western powers.
Unfortunately, Admiral Domazet does not give many interviews and none in English, but I thought that his last one was important enough to share more broadly in this article.
If you happen to speak Croatian/Serbian languages, you can find the interview, published on 17 March 2023 at this link. It runs over 2 hours.
The context is everything
Domazet is the only military analyst that I know of, who takes into account the history of western financial oligarchy, their Venetian roots, migration to Amsterdam where they formed the Dutch Empire, and subsequent move to London which, to this day remains the ideological and spiritual headquarters of the undead British Empire.
He has correctly labelled humanity’s enemy as the “western occult oligarchy,” and has even called the war in Ukraine as the clash between Christ and anti-Christ, underlining that the anti-Christ is in the west. Mind you Croatia is a NATO member state and is, like Poland, a catholic Slavic nation, sharing even some of its cultural Russophobia (though it may not be quite as rabid in Croatia as it is in Poland).
About Russia’s hypersonic weapons
However, the part of Domazet’s last interview that I found particularly worth sharing wass what he laid out about Russia’s hypersonic weapons.
It was in 2018 that Vladimir Putin took the stage to present Russia’s new hypersonic weapons. The term “hypersonic” refers to missiles that fly at speeds of 5 mach and higher. At the time, many in the west dismissed Putin’s claims and thought it was a bluff. We now know that he wasn’t bluffing. Russia is the only country in the world that has deployment-ready hypersonic missiles – not one but three types: Zircons, Kinzhals and Avantguards.
Domazet explained why these weapons are radical game changers in warfare. Namely, in World War 1, tanks were the game changing military technology; since World War 2, it’s been the air-force. Aircraft carrier strike groups have been an irresistible force wherever they travelled, dominating the seas ever since. But hypersonic precision missiles have rendered that force obsolete overnight.
The main military front in today’s global conflict, according to Domazet, are the Anti-Ballistic (ABM) batteries which the US has set up on the Poland-Romania axis, and the Russians on the North Pole-Kaliningrad-Crimea-Syria axis. These are defensive systems, conceived to intercept incoming nuclear missiles. However, today’s ABM systems are only effective against missiles flying at speeds up to mach 3.5 (3.5 x the speed of sound).
The Kinzhal turns mighty aircraft carrier strike groups into sitting ducks
Russia’s new Kinzhal missile flies at speeds of mach 12 to mach 15 and nothing in western defensive arsenals can stop its strike. During the war in Ukraine, Russia a stunning demonstration of its power. The first Kinzhal strike, delivered one month after the beginning of hostilities in Ukraine, was perhaps the most significant: Russian forces targeted a large weapons depot in Ukraine which had been built to withstand a nuclear strike. It was buried 170 meters (over 500 ft) underground and protected by several layers of armored concrete.
The Kinzhal flies at altitudes of between 20 and 40 km, with a maximum range of 2,000 km. When above target, it dives perpendicularly and accelerates to 15 mach, gathering enormous kinetic energy in addition to its explosive payload. That first strike with a single Kinzhal missile destroyed Ukraine’s nuke-proof underground weapons depot. This was a message for the west.
Moscow calling: we can sink ALL your carriers
The Kinzhal was developed with the express purpose of destroying aircraft carrier strike groups. If it could destroy a warehouse built to withstand a nuclear strike, it can cut through an aircraft carrier like a hot knife through butter.
According to Admiral Domazet, neither the western powers nor China are anywhere near having weapons like that. He explained that the critical issue with hypersonic weapons are the extreme temperatures reached during hypersonic flights on the surface of missiles, which can cause the missiles to break apart mid-flight. Russia is the only nation that has developed special materials that enable the missiles to withstand this stress, so their flight can be controlled throughout its trajectory and delivered with pinpoint accuracy.
Western intelligence estimated that Russia had some 50 Kinzhals at the start of the war in Ukraine, and thus far it has used only 9 of them. Last week, they fired six Kinzhals in a single salvo. That too, was a message. Here’s how Domazet explained it: United States have 11 aircraft carrier strike groups. Of these, fewer than half will be active at any one time (while others are in dock for maintenance, or in preparation). Firing six Kinzhals in one go is military-speak for, “we have the capability to sink ALL of your aircraft carriers in at once.”
Russia will run out of ammunitions any minute now, (experts say)…
Russia has the capacity to build about 200 of them per year and now has means of delivering them anywhere from aircraft, ships and submarines. In addition to destroying aircraft carriers, they can destroy NATOs ABM missile sites also. In a nutshell, Russia has – for now – won the arms race.
It could take the western powers 10 years or longer to catch up and until then, the only way to avoid losing the war is to either concede defeat and accept Russia’s security demands, or to escalate the conflict to nuclear exchange.
A conservative estimate suggests that at least a billion people would perish in such a conflict and nobody would win. Who would do such a thing? The idea of using nuclear weapons is, in fact, so repugnant that we can be assured that our leaders will never chose the path of escalation. Surely, nobody’s that evil, are they?
Alex Krainer – @NakedHedgie is the creator of I-System Trend Following and publisher of daily TrendCompass reports. For US investors, we propose an inflation/recession resilient portfolio covering a basket of 30+ financial and commodities markets; in 2022, we significantly outperformed the S&P 500 as well as the 60/40 death trap investment model. For more information, you can drop me a comment or an email to xela.reniark@gmail.com
Alex Krainer’s TrendCompass is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 23:00 - "Totally Exculpatory": Purported Cohen Letter To FEC Could Hobble Manhattan DA's Trump Case
“Totally Exculpatory”: Purported Cohen Letter To FEC Could Hobble Manhattan DA’s Trump Case
A letter purported to be from Michael Cohen’s attorney says that Cohen acted alone when he paid Stormy Daniels in 2016 – a revelation which could undercut Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s case against Donald Trump.
“In a private transaction in 2016, before the U.S. presidential election, Mr. Cohen used his own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford [Stormy Daniels],” reads the 2018 letter from Cohen attorney Stephen Ryan to the Federal Election Commission, which asserts that Trump was not involved in the hush payment to the former porn star.
🚨BREAKING: New Bombshell Document DESTROYS Manhattan DA’s Case Against Trump
2018 Letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyer to the FEC declares Cohen used his own personal funds to pay Stormy Daniels. Trump Camp. NOT party to transaction, did NOT reimburse Cohen for payment. It’s OVER pic.twitter.com/QacsjSbZAz
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) March 22, 2023
“Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed Mr. Cohen for the payment directly or indirectly.”
Trump posted the letter on Truth Social on Wednesday evening, saying “Wow, look what was just found—A Letter from Cohen’s Lawyer to the Federal Election Commission,” adding “This is totally exculpatory, and must end the Manhattan District Attorney’s Witch Hunt, immediately.“
“Cohen admits that he did it himself. The D.A. should get on with prosecuting violent criminals, so people can walk down the sidewalks of New York without being murdered!”
As Just the News notes,
If authentic, the document could indeed be exculpatory for Trump. A potential charge legal experts have floated hinges on Trump falsifying his business records to hide a potential campaign finance violation.
Trump’s alleged falsification stems from his listing of a payment to Cohen as a legal fee, which some have suggested was a reimbursement for Cohen’s payment to Daniels. Trump’s lawyer, Joe Tacopina, denies the record’s inaccuracy and has contended that “[t]he payments were made to a lawyer, not to Stormy Daniels. The payments were made to Donald Trump’s lawyer, which would be considered legal fees.”
In short:
— The Right To Bear Memes (@grandoldmemes) March 22, 2023
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 22:55 - Coronal Hole '30 Times Earth's Size' Hurls Solar Plasma Towards Earth
Coronal Hole ’30 Times Earth’s Size’ Hurls Solar Plasma Towards Earth
NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory released a photo showing a massive coronal hole forming in the sun’s atmosphere, ejecting a stream of fast-moving solar winds toward Earth.
“The current coronal hole, the big one right now, is about 300,000 to 400,000 kilometers across,” Alex Young, the associate director for science at NASA Goddard’s Heliophysics Science Division, told Bussiness Insider. He said, “that’s about 20-30 Earths lined up back-to-back.”
Young said coronal holes unleash solar winds that can travel between 500-800 km per second. He explained the coronal mass ejection would reach Earth by Friday.
“We will probably start seeing the effects of the high-speed wind on March 24.
“When the high-speed wind reaches Earth, the particles and the magnetic field it carries will interact with Earth’s magnetic field, effectively rattling it or like ringing a bell,” he said.
Space Weather website SolarHam said when the solar winds hit Earth, it will produce a moderate (G2) geomagnetic storm.
Here’s a visual of the CME’s impacts on modern society.
In addition to this week’s geomagnetic storm risk, Sunspot Cycle 25 has already started and is anticipated to be active. This could spell trouble for the digital economy, as disruptions caused by solar flares may lead to economic harm.
Last year, Elon Musk’s satellite internet service Starlink lost 40 satellites after a geomagnetic storm knocked them out of orbit.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 22:40 - A Headline Few Saw Coming: "Barney Frank Was Right About Signature Bank"
A Headline Few Saw Coming: “Barney Frank Was Right About Signature Bank”
Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,
The FDIC all but confirms Signature was closed to send a message about crypto…
Barney Frank Was Right About Signature Bank
The Wall Street Journal comments Barney Frank Was Right About Signature Bank
We never thought we’d write that headline. But on Sunday the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. announced that New York Community Bancorp’s Flagstar Bank will assume all of Signature Bank’s cash deposits except for those of crypto companies. This confirms Mr. Frank’s suspicions—and ours—that Signature’s seizure was motivated by regulators’ hostility toward crypto.
Mr. Frank alleged last week that regulators seized Signature, whose board he served on, “to send a message to get people away from crypto.”
CoinDesk reported last week that crypto firms were looking for bank accounts off-shore such as at FV Bank in Puerto Rico, Jewel Bank in Bermuda, and Tether and FTX-tied Deltec in the Bahamas. Moving dollar deposits of U.S. crypto companies and their customers offshore will make them less safe and potentially more vulnerable to money laundering.
In other words, regulators are undermining their ostensible goals. As usual, financial regulators shoot first, and make others pay later.
Everything But Crypto
PYMNTS reports Everything But the Crypto: Flagstar Scoops Up Failed Signature Bank
While the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) denied reports that any buyer of Signature Bank would need to divest its crypto business, the buyer, New York Community Bancorp-owned Flagstar Bank, did anyway.
This, as the FDIC noted in a press release announcing the sale, that Flagstar Bank’s bid for Signature Bank did not include around $4 billion of deposits tied to the failed institution’s digital banking business.
“The FDIC will provide these deposits directly to customers whose accounts are associated with the digital banking business,” the agency said in a Sunday (March 19) announcement.
The shuttering of both Silvergate Bank, which voluntarily liquidated, and Signature Bank, which failed, has made it increasingly difficult for crypto platforms and investors to transfer traditional currencies by closing two critical banking on-ramps for the digital asset industry.
FDIC Statement
Depositors of Signature Bridge Bank, N.A., other than cash depositors related to the digital-asset banking businesses, will automatically become depositors of the assuming institution. All deposits assumed by Flagstar Bank, N.A., will continue to be insured by the FDIC up to the insurance limit.
Flagstar Bank’s bid did not include approximately $4 billion of deposits related to the former Signature Bank’s digital-assets banking business. The FDIC will provide these deposits directly to customers whose accounts are associated with the digital-asset banking businesses. Questions may be directed to (866) 744-5463.
The FDIC estimates the cost of the failure of Signature Bank to its Deposit Insurance Fund to be approximately $2.5 billion. The exact cost will be determined when the FDIC terminates the receivership.
FDIC Statement Translated
The FDI made a Statement on Signature Bank. Here is my translation:
To punish crypto, we are willing to lose $2.5 billion, even though our solution will require offshore funding, which in turn will make the deposits less safe and more vulnerable to money laundering.
Zero Reserve Banking
Meanwhile, please note Fed Policy: It’s Not Fractional Reserve Banking, It’s ZERO Reserve Banking
If you think I am joking, I am not.
We are in a banking crisis precisely because of Fed actions coupled with zero reserve requirements on deposits.
* * *
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 22:20 - China Backs Russia's Draft UN Resolution On Nord Stream Probe
China Backs Russia’s Draft UN Resolution On Nord Stream Probe
China is backing Russian efforts to get to the bottom of the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage attacks, with state-run Xinhua on Wednesday announcing the foreign ministry’s support for a UN Security Council (UNSC) draft resolution.
Russia has gotten more vocal about alleging that Washington was behind it, following the publication of legendary journalist Seymour Hersh’s report which detailed a CIA and US Navy covert op in coordination with Norway’s intelligence services.
Anadolu Agency/Getty Images Citing a foreign ministry spokesperson, Xinhua reported “Wang made the remarks at a regular press briefing in response to a media query on Russia’s draft resolution at the UNSC in February calling for an international independent investigation commission on the gas pipeline incident.”
“Russia is said to have started the silence procedure on the draft, but the United States and some other Western members of the UNSC broke silence and objected to such a commission.”
Moscow and Beijing have taken Washington’s resistance to its resolution as a sign of guilt, while also suggesting Western allies are obfuscating:
Wang said China has also noticed the attitude of some Western members of the UNSC and hopes they will truly abandon geopolitical selfish interest, earnestly fulfill the obligations and responsibilities of UNSC members, and constructively participate in the consultations of the draft to make positive efforts for an early consensus on the resolution.
The Kremlin has also lately highlighted that the latest mainstream media narrative out of the West is meant to distract and divert the spotlight off Washington.
The theory that’s gained prominence is that rogue Ukrainian partisans blew up the natural gas pipelines on September 26. However, Russian officials have laughed this off, stressing that the bombing would have been of such difficulty as to require the resources of a government and military/intelligence apparatus.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 22:00 - Detransitioned Teen Girl Sues Kaiser Permanente Over Gender Transition Gone Wrong
Detransitioned Teen Girl Sues Kaiser Permanente Over Gender Transition Gone Wrong
Authored by Elizabeth Dowell via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
A detransitioned teen is suing Kaiser Permanente hospital because doctors removed her breasts during her transgender procedure.
A Kaiser Permanente hospital in Anaheim, Calif., on March 24, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times) Layla Jane is an 18-year-old woman who began to identify as transgender at age 11. Jane, at the time, wanted to transition to a male. Initially, doctors at Kaiser denied her any transition hormones, saying she could take them after turning 16. However, doctors changed their minds, approved her request, and performed a double mastectomy when she was 13.
Jane wrote on Twitter, “Mind boggling to me that a doctor signed off on a double mastectomy for me before I took a sex ed course. I barely started 8th grade, I was 13.”
Chloe Cole participates in a demonstration in Anaheim, Calif., on Oct. 8, 2022. (Brad Jones/The Epoch Times) In the letter of intent to sue (pdf), her attorneys at LiMandri and Jonna LLP accused the doctors of approving the breast-removal surgery “without performing an adequate evaluation and treatment of Layla’s extensive mental health co-morbidities.”
According to the letter, Jane suffers from anxiety, depression, pubertal struggles, body dysmorphia, and serious self-image concerns.
“These doctors also pushed Layla and her parents down this transition path engaging in intentional, malicious, and oppressive concealment of important information and false representations,” the letter states.
The lawsuit demands unspecified amounts of pay for damages related to her health issues during her transition period from ages 12 to 17. The case listed Jane as suffering from permanent, irreversible mutilation, an induced state of endocrine disease, an increased risk of being infertile, and the fact that she would never be able to breastfeed a child.
During an appearance on Fox News with her attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, Jane said, “I don’t think I’m better off for the experience, and I think transition just completely added fuel to the fire that was my pre-existing conditions.”
In a statement to DailyMail, Kaiser said that its doctors “practice compassionate, evidence-based medicine founded on sound research and best medical practices.”
“When adolescent patients, with parental support, seek gender-affirming care, the patient’s care team carefully evaluates their treatment options,” Kaiser spokesman Marc Brown said. “The care decisions always rest with the patient and their parents, and, in every case, we respect the patients and their families’ informed decisions about their personal health.”
The Epoch Times reached out to Kaiser for comment.
Chloe Cole, 18, is another young woman who detransitioned and filed a lawsuit against the hospital giant.
Read more here…
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 21:40 - "We Are Headed For Another Train Wreck": Bill Ackman Blames Janet Yellen For Restarting The Bank Run
“We Are Headed For Another Train Wreck”: Bill Ackman Blames Janet Yellen For Restarting The Bank Run
Yesterday morning we joked that every time Janet Yellen opens her mouth, stocks dump.
Yellen opens mouth and stocks dump
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 21, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Well, it wasn’t a joke, and as we repeatedly noted today, while Jerome Powell was busting his ass to prevent a violent market reaction – in either direction – to his “most important Fed decision and presser of 2023”, the Treasury Secretary, with all the grace of a senile 76-year-old elephant in a China market, uttered the phrase…
- YELLEN: NOT CONSIDERING BROAD INCREASE IN DEPOSIT INSURANCE
… and the rest was silence… or rather selling.
Commenting on our chart, Bloomberg’s Mark Cudmore noted it was Yellen who was “to blame for the stock slump”, pointing out that “the pessimistic turn in US stocks began within a minute of Janet Yellen starting to speak.”
The S&P 500 rose almost 1% in the first 47 minutes after the Fed decision. Powell wasn’t the problem either: the index was 0.6% higher in the first 17 minutes after his press conference started.
Why am I picking that exact timing of 2:47pm NY time? Because that is the minute Yellen started speaking at the Senate panel hearing. The high for the S&P 500 was 2:48pm NY time and it fell more than 2.5% over the subsequent 72 minutes. Good effort.
Picking up on this, Bloomberg’s Mark Cranfield writes that banking stocks globally are set to underperform for longer after Janet Yellen pushed back against giving deposit insurance without working with lawmakers. He adds that “to an aggressive trader this sounds like an invitation to keep shorting bank stocks — at least until the tone changes into broader support and is less focused on specific bank situations.” Earlier, we addressed that too:
*YELLEN: NOT CONSIDERING BROAD INCREASE IN DEPOSIT INSURANCE
At least until spoos drop below 4K again
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 22, 2023
Looking ahead, Cranfield warns that US financials are likely to be the most vulnerable as they are the epicenter of the debate. Although European or Asian banking names may outperform US peers, that won’t be much consolation for investors as most financial sector indexes may be on a downward path.
The KBW bank index has tumbled from its highs seen in early February, but still has a way to go before it reaches the pandemic-nadir in 2020. Traders smell an opening for a big trade and that will fuel more downside. Probably until Yellen blinks.
And if Bill Ackman is right, she will be doing a whole lot of blinking in days if not hours.
Ackman crying in public While we generally make fun of Ackman’s self-serving hot takes on twitter, today he was right when he accused Yellen of effectively restarting the small bank depositor run which according to JPMorgan has already seen $1.1 trillion in assets withdrawn from “vulnerable” banks. This is what Ackman tweeted:
Yesterday, @SecYellen made reassuring comments that led the market and depositors to believe that all deposits were now implicitly guaranteed. That coupled with a leak suggesting that @USTreasury, @FDICgov and @SecYellen were looking for a way to guarantee all deposits reassured the banking sector and depositors.
This afternoon, @SecYellen walked back yesterday’s implicit support for small banks and depositors, while making it explicit that systemwide deposit guarantees were not being considered.
We have gone from implicit support for depositors to @SecYellen explicit statement today that no guarantee is being considered with rates now being raised to 5%. 5% is a threshold that makes bank deposits that much less attractive. I would be surprised if deposit outflows don’t accelerate effective immediately.
Ackman concluded by repeating his ask: a comprehensive deposit guarantee on America’s $18 trillion in assets…
A temporary systemwide deposit guarantee is needed to stop the bleeding. The longer the uncertainty continues, the more permanent the damage is to the smaller banks, and the more difficult it will be to bring their customers back.
… but as we noted previously pointing out, you know, the math…
Math: $18 trillion in deposits, $125 billion in the deposit insurance fund. https://t.co/Zsu2RsJk41 pic.twitter.com/nb3Ypnt1gd
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 21, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
… absent bipartisan Congressional intervention – which is very much unlikely until the bank crisis gets much, much worse – this won’t happen and instead the Fed will continue putting out bank fire after bank fire – even as it keeps hiking to overcompensate for its “transitory inflation” idiocy from 2021, until the entire system burns down, something which Ackman’s follow-up tweet was also right about:
Consider recent events impact on the long-term cost of equity capital for non-systemically important banks where you can wake up one day as a shareholder or bondholder and your investment instantly goes to zero. When combined with the higher cost of debt and deposits due to rising rates, consider what the impact will be on lending rates and our economy.
The longer this banking crisis is allowed to continue, the greater the damage to smaller banks and their ability to access low-cost capital.
Trust and confidence are earned over many years, but can be wiped out in a few days. I fear we are heading for another a train wreck. Hopefully, our regulators will get this right.
Narrator: no, they won’t.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 21:20 - How Fauci's Wife Used NIH Position To Backstop Her Husband’s Pandemic Health Directives
How Fauci’s Wife Used NIH Position To Backstop Her Husband’s Pandemic Health Directives
Authored by Adam Andrzejewski via OpenTheBooks,
It’s the Washington, D.C. power couple that cost taxpayers nearly $1 million per year.
While Dr. Anthony Fauci gave the nation its pandemic public policy prescriptions, his wife, Dr. Christine Grady, the Chief Bioethicist at Fauci’s employer, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided the moral framework.
The Faucis are important to the center-left, because they represent the pinnacle moment of the administrative state – top-down public policy run by an elite group of government scientists.
Conversely, to the center-right, the Faucis represent “the fatal conceit of the elites.” As Noble Laureate economist Friedrich Hayek theorized, the elites are no match for billions of free people acting in their own best interests.
MEET THE FAUCIS
While Tony Fauci was the top paid federal bureaucrat and out-earned the U.S. President at $480,654 per year, Christine Grady, as the chief bioethicist at NIH out-earned the U.S. Vice President ($243,749). When adding 35-percent in benefits, the couple cost taxpayers an estimated nearly $1 million per year.
CHART: Tracking the Fauci household net worth which increased from $7.6 million to $12.6 million between the start of 2020 and the end of 2021. Source: OpenTheBooks.com lawsuit production from NIH on Fauci’s financial disclosures. It’s difficult to know where Anthony Fauci ends and Christine Grady begins. Here’s how Tony Fauci described Grady’s influence on his public policy decisions:
“I’ve benefited greatly from this partnership of overlapping interest and common interest. So, a lot of the things that I do with regard to the development of vaccines, the development of therapies, being involved with outbreaks and pandemics, have ethical overtones to them. I can say that I am very blessed to be living with someone who is very likely, most people think, one of the most outstanding ethicists in the world. To have her in the house — you know, as a consultant on ethical issues—is pretty advantageous.”
So, the Faucis lived a conflict of interest at the breakfast table, the office, and back home around the dinner table. However, NIH has never acknowledged this.
In fact, NIH forced our organization to file two federal lawsuits with the public-interest law firm Judicial Watch as our lawyers to finally bring transparency to the Fauci/Grady job descriptions, conflict of interest documents, financial and ethics disclosures, contracts, and other documents.
Then, NIH slow-walked thousands of pages of production. Yet, no nepotism waivers were produced, no acknowledgement of conflicting interests, and no records documenting violations of federal ethics policy.
Slide developed by Dr. Anthony S. Fauci and presented by Dr. Christine Grady during her NIH presentation COVID Vaccines: Approaches to Vaccine Trial Design November 4 2020. Many of the prescriptions on this slide showed little efficacy in after-action studies. Source: FOIA While Grady’s work during the pandemic was described as “invaluable” by then-NIH director Francis Collins, the general public knows little about her day-to-day responsibilities.
An open records request for Grady’s job description reveals she, too, is meant to use her position to influence policy.
Screenshot from Christine Grady’s job description, received. Source: FOIA Advocating Lockdowns
Dr. Fauci knew that his “draconian policies” on social isolation and economic lockdowns would have “collateral negative consequences,” and admitted Christine Grady was a driving force behind his hardline approach.
In a November 2021 interview with the couple, Fauci said that he gained strength from his wife’s support saying, “background and her experience in really core ethical principles [helped] me to really feel much more comfortable in what I was saying.”
In the interview, Christine Grady described how she mind-mapped national policy with her husband:
“But we’ve had conversations about the sort of consequences of telling people to stay home and what it would do for the economy. And there were a lot of people in those days that, and still who said, it’s ruining the economy. It’s much more important to just keep things going and not worry about transmitting virus…I said, that one of the messages should be, how many lives are you willing to sacrifice? And that message would be pretty stark and pretty brutal, but that’s really what the trade-off was…And so we’ve had that kind of conversation over dinner more than once, actually.”
Fauci replied that these conversations “sharpened [his] resolve” to move forward with lockdown policies.
Social isolation was one of the individual sacrifices Grady and Fauci thought were necessary to make on behalf of “public health.”
Vaccine Development & Public Safety
Like her husband, Grady exclusively focused her attention and remarks on vaccine development rather than other potential ways to treat and combat the spread of COVID-19.
One major paper she co-authored in 2020 advocated for vaccines to be distributed under emergency use authorization (EUA), which is how the federal government ultimately proceeded.
In this paper, Grady’s advocacy for vaccines came with a troubling acknowledgement:
“even with mandated safety monitoring after EUA distribution, it would be difficult or impossible to ascertain vaccine-induced adverse events.”
However, during most of her public presentations, she asserted that vaccines were developed in a fast, but “safe and rigorous” manner. Just one of many examples can be found here.
By November 2021, she said the risk of unknown long-term effects were “not zero” but that “there is a balance between benefiting the public health now versus waiting for all the information we might get.”
Despite these admissions, Grady often said she was “disturbed” by vaccine hesitancy, implying that safety concerns were somehow unreasonable.
Vaccine Mandates
Grady’s stance on vaccine mandates changed radically throughout the pandemic.
In June 2020, a presentation she gave suggested “immunity passports” could cause “discrimination without much overall gain.” A passport system would allow businesses to limit or deny access to those who remained unvaccinated.
Six months later, in January 2021, Grady said, “I do believe that healthcare providers, like everyone else, should have the choice” whether to take the vaccine or not.
But by early October 2021, Grady had decided the choice facing health care workers was a drastically different one: whether to get the vaccine or lose their jobs.
Later that month, she also flipped her position on vaccine passports. What once was a potential source of discrimination was recast as a way to access “social benefits” like restaurants and movie theaters.
It’s a disturbing way to describe Americans free association of movement.
Grady went on to co-author a March 2022 report approving of social ostracization for the vaccine-hesitant and encouraging employers to pressure their workers:
“While some employers might understandably feel hesitant to pressure employees to get vaccinated, our analysis suggests that it is often ethically acceptable to inform, encourage, strongly encourage, incentivize, and subtly pressure unvaccinated people to benefit them, the organization, and other employees.”
In fewer than two years, Grady had completely altered her assessment of vaccine mandates and widespread restrictions on the behavior of unvaccinated Americans. Gone were concerns about discrimination and freedom of choice.
As Dr. Fauci pushed and pressured the public to get vaccinated for the sake of their neighbors and family members, Grady began considering it ethical to fire workers who did not comply.
Likewise, it became a “social benefit” to get a vaccine passport that would allow people to avoid government restrictions on their free movements.
Screenshot of Tweet – Dr. Fauci and Dr. Grady maskless at the Washington National baseball game in summer 2020 after Fauci threw out the first pitch. Mask Mandates
While her husband advocated masking and double masking—even when “fully vaccinated”—Dr. Grady consistently backed his position.
In July 2020, during an InStyle interview, Grady answered questions about masking:
Interviewer: Let me ask you, Chris, as a bioethicist, what do you make of this moment we’re in, when even a mask has become more of a divisive issue?
Grady: Well, I would say that masks shouldn’t be divisive. It’s a relatively easy way to protect one’s self and others. And so for public health reasons, I think everybody should do it. From an ethical perspective there is always this tension between what you ask people to do that feels like a restriction of their liberty and what is required for public health. And in this case, it seems like a slam dunk. It’s not restricting liberty much, and it’s very helpful for public health.
Grady was consistent and in November 2021 spoke to the ethical balancing test of public safety versus individual freedom and never viewed mask wearing to be much of an infringement on individual rights:
“There’s a classic tension between public health, and individual interests and freedoms. Where there seems to be this conflict to the things that we do to protect the public health, and to protect the population for the common good. Sometimes they are perceived to be, and sometimes they do in small ways, infringe on people’s freedoms. There are principles of public health ethics that help you sort out the kinds of interventions that we should use: Things that are effective, that are proportional, where the benefits outweigh the risks that are necessary, that are least infringement possible, that are transparent, that we can publicly justify.
…What’s striking to me is that, the kinds of burdens that we’ve asked people to undertake, like putting on a mask, don’t really infringe on one’s freedoms very much. They’re low burden and they have an effect. They do protect the person who’s wearing the mask, as well as the people that are around them.”
A recent credible study on mask wearing during the pandemic argued there is no clear impact of masking on Covid-19 infection rates.
Patients Dying in Isolation
During the pandemic, Grady revealed a default preference for government control over individual rights and responsibilities. Grady was an early proponent of one of the most heinous pandemic polices: patients dying in isolation.
For example, while uncritically accepting dying in isolation as a fact of the pandemic, Grady’s primary solution was to expand funding for health care workers to have access to therapy and other resources to heal from their “moral distress.”
As early as April 2020 Grady said:
“Because of visiting policies and fear of contagion sometimes when somebody is really sick their family cannot visit them, they can’t see them…the stress and the sadness and the isolation on families is and is going to be great.”
In a November 2020 NIH presentation she called these “lonely” deaths “understandable:”
“It’s a lonely kind of death, many institutions, understandably have visitor policies which either restrict the number of visitors to one or zero so sometimes people are dying without having their family nearby and that puts an additional burden on the healthcare staff.”
In one co-authored paper urging healthcare workers to “temper these potentially dehumanizing scenarios with imaginative solutions that do not sacrifice compassion and equal respect on the altars of safety and efficiency.”
She interrogates the tension between individual freedom and community safety in a book published April 26, 2022, as a co-author proposing a radical “solidarity model” for ethics in healthcare, stating that rather than emphasizing a respect for individuals to make decisions in their own interest:
“We should recognize that there are times when solidarity takes precedence over individual liberties, and broadening our concept of “respect for persons” means uniting as a profession to protect all those who expect to receive care from nurses in whatever healthcare setting they find themselves.”
She co-edited a section in the same book arguing this extends to dying in insolation:
“The solidarity model may apply to restricted family visitation, which generated moral distress for nurses, particularly when patients died without loved ones present…”
CONCLUSION – GRADY AND THE NEXT PANDEMIC
As demonstrated by her own words, Grady’s record evinces an understanding of ethics that begs fundamental moral questions, regularly subordinates individuals beneath an amorphous “public health,” and relies on subtle but unacknowledged shifts to retain an alleged moral high ground.
While some of her observations early in the pandemic did show an interest in providing nuance to policymaking—questioning the usefulness of immunity passports and highlighting issues with long-term vaccine effects under a EUA rollout—this quickly gave way to conformity to broader political zeitgeist, painting pushback as ignorant, uncaring, and simply wrong.
By 2021 her public statements never suggested a limit to sacrifices the individual should ethically make on behalf of “public health,” from masking, to taking vaccines, to foregoing family gatherings even at the point of one’s own death.
Both Fauci and Grady made clear that they wish for ethicists like Grady to have more power and more influence over political decision-making.
As Grady remains the chief NIH bioethicist, Americans should ponder: does Grady’s philosophy advance what is “fair” and “just” in public health policy? What does her continued leadership mean for the future of American policy.
Taxpayers compensate Grady generously, and they’re owed full transparency about her role, responsibilities and influence – during the pandemic and into the future.
Note: We reached out to Dr. Christine Grady and NIH for comment. While acknowledging our requests, no statement or comment was received before publication.
ADDITIONAL READING
Dr. Anthony Fauci: The Highest Paid Employee In The Entire U.S. Federal Government Published January 21, 2021 | Forbes
Dr. Anthony Fauci’s Little Known Biodefense Work. It’s How He Became The Highest Paid Federal Employee. Published October 20, 2021 | Forbes
No, Fauci’s Records Aren’t Available. Why Won’t NIH Immediately Release Them? Published January 12, 2022 | Forbes
Breaking: Fauci’s Net Worth Soared To $12.6 Million During The Pandemic – Up $5 Million (2019-2021). Published September 28, 2022 | OpenTheBooks.Substack.com
HISTORIC RELEASE: Dr. Anthony Fauci’s Official Work Calendar (November 2019 – March 2020) | Published October 20, 2022 | OpenTheBooks.Substack.com
ABOUT US
OpenTheBooks.com – We believe transparency is transformational. Using forensic auditing and open records, we hold government accountable.
In the years 2021 and 2022, we filed 100,000+ FOIA requests and successfully captured $19 trillion government expenditures: nearly all federal spending; 50 state checkbooks; and 25 million public employee salary and pension records from 50,000 public bodies across America.
Our works have been featured at the BBC, Good Morning America, ABC World News Tonight, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, C-SPAN, Chicago Tribune, The New York Times, NBC News, FOX News, Forbes, National Public Radio (NPR), Sinclair Broadcast Group, & many others.
Our organization accepts no government funding and was founded by CEO Adam Andrzejewski. Our federal oversight work was cited twice in the President’s Budget To Congress FY2021. Andrzejewski’s presentation, The Depth of the Swamp, at the Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar 2020 in Naples, Florida posted on YouTube received 3.8+ million views.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 21:00 - Cashless Society: Panera Bread Debuts "Frictionless" Palm Payment System
Cashless Society: Panera Bread Debuts “Frictionless” Palm Payment System
Amazon’s palm-reading payment technology was first introduced at numerous Whole Foods locations in California, enabling customers to pay for their groceries by scanning their palms at checkout terminals rather than using cash or a card. Now Panera Bread is experimenting with Amazon’s cashless payment system as the war on cash marches on.
On Wednesday, Panera Bread announced plans to roll out a “contactless payment method” to several stores with additional locations in the coming months. The bakery-cafe chain has over 2,000 locations, and its loyalty program has 52 million members.
“Panera is the first national restaurant company to use Amazon One as both a way for guests to pay and access their loyalty account with their palm,” the company said.
“Our philosophy has been centered around leveraging best-in-class technology to create a better Panera experience and using that to deepen our relationship with our loyal guests. Introducing Amazon One, as a frictionless, personalized, and convenient service, is another way we’re redefining the loyalty experience,” Niren Chaudhary, CEO of Panera Bread and Panera Brands, stated.
At the moment, dozens of Whole Foods locations and Amazon Go stores have integrated Amazon One contactless payment.
By summer, Panera Bread might have at least two dozen stores equipped with Amazon’s contactless payment system, as reported by Panera’s Chief Digital Officer George Hanson in an interview with CNBC.
“We think the payment plus loyalty identification is the secret sauce that can unlock a really personalized, warm and efficient experience for our guests in our cafes,” Hanson said.
The adoption of contactless payment systems by corporate giants like Amazon and Panera Bread, both known for their massive loyalty programs, seems to signal a shift towards a cashless society.
Recall the pivot toward a cashless society was clear as day. Perhaps the coin shortage during the pandemic was a pilot test. And anyone who dared mention a looming cashless society was deemed a ‘conspiracy theorist.’
Just remember who is also shaping the world and influencing corporations and politicians away from a cash economy:
Dethroning cash as king. How digital payments are enabling a shift away from the cash economy https://t.co/FUYE2KHVfn @WEFUpLink pic.twitter.com/QpRmA61JXz
— World Economic Forum (@wef) February 22, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
… and the rollout of contactless payment comes just before the Federal Reserve is set to activate its digital dollar in July.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 20:40 - Yellen Pulls Rug Out From Powell's Dovish Promises: Gold Gains As Banks Bust
Yellen Pulls Rug Out From Powell’s Dovish Promises: Gold Gains As Banks Bust
Tl; dr: “Damn it, Janet!”
Bill Ackman was pissed at Janet’s apparent flip-flop
Yesterday, @SecYellen made reassuring comments that led the market and depositors to believe that all deposits were now implicitly guaranteed. That coupled with a leak suggesting that @USTreasury, @FDICgov and @SecYellen were looking for a way to guarantee all deposits reassured… https://t.co/GqaP5LYpza
— Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Yesterday, @SecYellen made reassuring comments that led the market and depositors to believe that all deposits were now implicitly guaranteed. That coupled with a leak suggesting that @USTreasury, @FDICgov and @SecYellen were looking for a way to guarantee all deposits reassured the banking sector and depositors.
This afternoon, @SecYellen walked back yesterday’s implicit support for small banks and depositors, while making it explicit that systemwide deposit guarantees were not being considered.
We have gone from implicit support for depositors to @SecYellen explicit statement today that no guarantee is being considered with rates now being raised to 5%.
5% is a threshold that makes bank deposits that much less attractive. I would be surprised if deposit outflows don’t accelerate effective immediately.
A temporary systemwide deposit guarantee is needed to stop the bleeding.
The longer the uncertainty continues, the more permanent the damage is to the smaller banks, and the more difficult it will be to bring their customers back.
…and so was the stock market.
* * *
Nothing sums up the ‘trapped’ Fed better than today’s price action…
-
GME soaring: a legacy of record QE and helicopter money
-
PACW crashing: a legacy of the fastest rate-hikes since Volcker
But, he summed it all up succinctly early in his press conference: “It will be bumpy” describing the process of getting inflation back down, adding that it “has a long way to go.”
But as usual, all the major price action took place as Powell spoke.
As Guy LeBas (@lebas_janney2m) commented:
“The choice to start the presser with a discussion of the banking system has a clear policy message: the mini-banking crisis is the most important thing in the Fed’s thinking right now. Second is the focus on the labor markets, which policymakers still seem to view as too tight.”
Powell claimed that “deposit flows in the banking system have stabilized”, noting their strong actions, but he fails to comment on the massive rotation likely below the surface from small-banks to big-banks (since deposit flows OUT of the banking system may have stabilized but we suspect the rotation hasn’t).
Someone forgot to tell banking system investors…
Powell says FOMC considered a pause, but hike was supported by “strong consensus”.
Powell dismissed market’s expectations: “Rate cuts are not in our base case.”
Powell said some members recognized the impact of the financial system crisis on credit tightening – which could do the job of some rate-hikes.
This prompted a ramp in stocks (and bonds) as the market smells fewer rate-hikes if the credit market tightens itself.
We have our own opinion on that relative to the impact on the consumer…
If only enough banks crash we can finally stop pushing your credit card APRs to 30% https://t.co/rHn8akXs2P
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Not exactly something stocks should get excited about.
Bloomberg’s model suggests Powell’s opening remarks from the post-meeting press conference were much more dovish than the recent trend, though still slightly hawkish, according to Ira Jersey. This move was driven mostly by more dovish statements, but also less hawkish ones, he said.
“The indicator is quite close to neutral, suggesting the possibility of a pause has increased meaningfully at the May meeting compared with the recent past.”
Then Janet struck:
*YELLEN: NOT CONSIDERING BROAD INCREASE IN DEPOSIT INSURANCE
It’s amazing how she does it every single day now
YELLEN: NOT CONSIDERING BROAD INCREASE IN DEPOSIT INSURANCE https://t.co/dPOIcHBEgq
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
And that took stocks to the lows of the day…
Equities appeared to react to this comment from Janet Yellen during Jay Powell’s press conference. https://t.co/vRrsc2d4LN
— Nick Timiraos (@NickTimiraos) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Small Caps (small financial-heavy) were the ugliest horse in the glue factory while big-techs (Nasdaq) was the least bad of all…
The S&P reversed around the 50DMA then plunged back below its 100DMA…
Yesterday’s short squeeze was completely erased…
Regional banks took a hit…
With First Republic Bank getting slammed…
And PacWest plunged…
So, the goal of today was to stabilize banks and instead, they blew them up… “Damn it, Janet!”
Office REITS hammered again
Source: Bloomberg
Treasury yields jumped overnight and were drifting lower into The Fed statement. The dovish bias sparked a further plunge in rates with the short-end notably outperforming (2Y -20bps, 30Y -6bps). On the week, 2Y remains the laggard (+15bps) while 30Y is up just 4bps…
Source: Bloomberg
…and the yield curve steepened…
Source: Bloomberg
The 2Y yield dropped back below 4.00%…
Source: Bloomberg
Rate-hike expectations tumbled for the latter half of 2023…
Source: Bloomberg
The odds of a 25bps hike in May dropped from around 70% to below 50%…
Source: Bloomberg
The dollar puked to 6-week lows…
Source: Bloomberg
Bitcoin was clubbed like a baby seal, down from almost $29k to below $27,500…
Source: Bloomberg
Gold spiked on the dovish statement…
Oil extended its gains from yesterday with WTI back above $70…
Finally, it is worth noting that two stocks account for over 13% of the S&P 500 for the first time since the 1970s…
Source: Goldman
As goes MSFT and AAPL, so goes America.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 20:33 -
- China Gives US Advice On Ukraine After Xi, Putin Pledge To Shape New World Order
China Gives US Advice On Ukraine After Xi, Putin Pledge To Shape New World Order
China’s President Xi Jinping has arrived back in Beijing after his two-day visit with President Vladimir Putin over the China-proposed Ukraine peace plan. On the Ukraine crisis, there was nothing that can be considered a breakthrough, but the talks did prompt swift reaction from Washington.
More important are the broader implications of the two ‘dear friends’ pledging to shape a new world order and signing multiple pacts on economic, technological, and strategic cooperation. These were the words captured in a Reuters headline Wednesday… “China’s President Xi Jinping and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin set their sights on shaping a new world order as the Chinese leader left Moscow, having made no direct support for Putin’s war in Ukraine during his two-day visit.” Arguably the most important exchange came during the sendoff before Xi’s entourage headed to the airport, and was captured by (or rather intended for) the cameras…
Xi Jinping: “Change is coming that hasn’t happened in 100 years and we are driving this change together.”
Putin: “I agree.”
Xi Jinping: “Change is coming that hasn’t happened in 100 years and we are driving this change together”
Putin: “I agree”pic.twitter.com/9myzS2BsXA
— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Putin had told Xi that the peace plan “correlates to the point of view of the Russian Federation”; but the message out of Biden officials was “don’t be fooled” as it’s all about Moscow seeking to “freeze the war on its own terms,” in the words of Secretary of State Blinken. Also on Tuesday, NSC spokesman John Kirby said China is not an impartial mediator and that China “keeps parroting the Russian propaganda”.
On Wednesday the Chinese foreign ministry hit back, charging that Washington is “adding fuel to the fire” of the conflict by its “continuous supply” of weapons to the battlefield. Spokesman Wang Wenbin was asked directly about Kirby and Blinken’s comments from the day prior.
“The US side claims that China’s stance isn’t impartial. But is it impartial to continuously supply weapons to the battlefield? Is it impartial to constantly escalate the conflict? Is it impartial to allow the effects of the crisis to spill over globally?” Wang said.
“We advise the American side to rethink its own stance on the Ukraine issue, turn away from the erroneous path of adding fuel to the fire, and stop shifting the blame to China,” he added. The spokesman further insisted Beijing has “no selfish motives on the Ukraine issue, has not stood idly by… or sought profit for itself,” but that “what China has done boils down to one thing, that is, to promote peace talks.”
He went on to assert that contrary to popular assumptions in the West, the global community stands by China on the side of diplomatically pursuing peace. According to a transcript:
On the Ukraine issue, voices for peace and rationality are building. Most countries support easing tensions, stand for peace talks, and are against adding fuel to the fire. This is also China’s position. President Xi Jinping’s visit to Russia is a journey of friendship, cooperation and peace. It has been warmly received internationally. We call on the US to reflect on its own role in the Ukraine issue, stop fueling the flames, and stop deflecting the blame on China.
AP image: a toast during this week’s summit in Moscow. Wang spelled out that “We will continue to stand firm on the side of peace and dialogue and on the right side of history and work together with the rest of the world to play a constructive part in facilitating a political settlement of the Ukraine issue.”
To the surprise of many, Ukraine’s President Zelensky on Tuesday invited China to start talks on a path forward based on offering a “Ukraine formula” for peace negotiations. It’s unclear what Beijing’s response will be, but it was widely seen as an unexpected and positive overture. It has also become clear that whatever peace talks might come to fruition involving China mediation, the US is not going to lead, but will likely be sidelined – despite the closeness to Kiev.
Lord help us pic.twitter.com/OERfp4ks0A
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Below, Rabobank gives hard-hitting commentary on the overall implications of the Xi-Putin meeting, and the rapidly bifurcating world driven by Russia and China increasingly uniting against their common enemy the United States.
* * *
For a strident view on the Putin-Xi meeting and its broader implications, @samagreene, professor at the Russia Institute at King’s College London, notes:
“…China’s domination of Russia is complete. Xi praised Putin, touted strong relations with Russia, unity in the UNSC, and promised coordination on IT and natural resources trade. And that’s it. Putin, by contrast, was almost obscenely generous – and not just with his praise…. He pledged completion of the Strength of Siberia 2 pipeline… [which] replaces structural dependence on Europe with structural dependence on China, at a time when Russia is a price taker for hydrocarbons. That’s a strategic win for China.
Further, Putin announced a reorientation of agricultural trade towards China and a strategic role for China in developing Russia’s far east and high north – a move Putin’s own security apparatus has long resisted (for obvious reasons). Again, strategic wins for China… And Russia offered Chinese companies first dibs on the assets of departing Western companies – again strengthening China’s presence in Russia, with no reciprocal strengthening of Russia’s presence in China…
While there were undoubtedly agreements we are not meant to know about, there is no indication here of a significant increase in military support for Russia – nor even of a willingness on Xi’s part to ramp up diplomatic support. A swing and a miss for Putin…
Putin greeted Xi with a rhetorical bear hug. Xi gave Putin a pat on the head and told him to run along now and play… Putin tells his people he’s fighting for Russia’s sovereignty. In truth, he’s mortgaged the Kremlin to Beijing. The question now is one for Xi: What will he do with his newest acquisition?”
That leaves the EU facing a two-for-one in Russia and China, and as Politico notes, ‘Europe’s China policy will shape transatlantic relations’. The implication is large German firms lean on the large German government, “putting Europe’s priorities on a likely collision course with US strategic goals, which will focus on confronting China in economic, military and, increasingly, ideological domains.”
On which, US historian Kotkin says, “So I’m in love with the Cold War. I’m in favour of the Cold War. The Cold War is not only a good thing – it’s a necessary thing, because we have to uphold…the terms of the way we share the planet…. You know, I hear a lot of people saying, “Oh my God, no Cold War with China. God forbid we should have a Cold War with China.” And I think to myself, “What world do these people live in?” First, we’re already in a Cold War with China, because China started that long before we understood that that’s what they were doing. And secondly, would you prefer a hot war? The alternative to Cold War is capitulation– which you can imagine I’m not in favour of– or hot war.”
Yet maybe the EU is feeling Cold too. As @Schuldensuehner points out, China is losing importance as a German export destination: February exports to it were -12.4% while those to the US were +19%, making it by far the most important market, as well as supplying key LNG imports (and Fed swaplines); France is number two, far ahead of China. Moreover, Germany is considering China export restrictions similar to those of the US, according to its economy minister, who adds, “We have to prevent losing our technology leadership because we don’t look closely.” Notably, China just threated the Netherlands over its tech export controls (“This will not be without consequences. I’m not going to speculate on countermeasures, but China won’t just swallow this.“): how long until the same message is heard in Berlin?
A bifurcating world like this only complicates real economy investment decisions, supply chain issues, and monetary policy decisions.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 20:24 - Julie Kelly: The Death Of Dissent
Julie Kelly: The Death Of Dissent
Authored by Julie Kelly via AmGreatness.com,
The lead prosecutor in charge of the January 6 investigation, the largest probe in Justice Department history, just confirmed what American Greatness has reported for months: the number of criminal cases related to the Capitol protest is expected to at least double before it’s all over.
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves, an advisor to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign who took over the powerful office in late 2021, sent a letter to the chief judge of the D.C. District court warning up to 1,200 more individuals could face charges.
“We expect the pace of bringing new cases will increase, in an orderly fashion, over the course of the next few months,” Graves told Beryl Howell, who ended her term as chief judge last week.
Graves’ office just surpassed 1,000 total defendants in what he renamed the “Capitol Siege” investigation—which means the final caseload might well exceed 2,000.
Graves also indicated his team would ramp up the number of felony indictments; the overwhelming majority of charges so far are low-level offenses, including the laughable “parading in the Capitol” misdemeanor. The Biden regime clearly wants to juice the numbers before the 2024 election season.
And Graves isn’t wasting any time. Eight people have been charged since March 1, including a married couple from Indiana arrested on a civil disorder felony and four misdemeanors. The D.C. federal courthouse is monopolized by January 6 hearings and trials on a daily basis; one judge announced he would retire rather than deal with January 6 cases for the next several years.
In addition to ruining the lives of thousands of Americans for mostly nonviolent participation in the events of January 6, the Justice Department is accomplishing a more sinister goal: criminalizing and silencing political dissent in America. I warned two years ago, as Attorney General Merrick Garland’s prosecutors bastardized a post-Enron law in an attempt to turn political protesters into lifelong felons, that January 6 would be used in this manner.
News of the imminent arrest of Donald Trump demonstrated the degree of the regime’s success. After NBC News reported that law enforcement agencies were preparing for unrest following the announcement of state charges against Trump in the Stormy Daniels saga, Trump responded on Truth Social. “[THE] FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE & FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK! PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!” Trump wrote on March 18.
Trump followed up with a second post: “WE MUST SAVE AMERICA! PROTEST, PROTEST, PROTEST!!!”
Before January 6, 2021, an American political leader who called for mass protests would not be heard as calling for violence. Trump, in fact, did not encourage his followers to behave violently. He merely—and perhaps unwisely, given the current Gestapo-like conduct of the FBI and federal prosecutors—asked his supporters to protest the unprecedented act of arresting a former president and current candidate for president.
But his social media posts were enough to cause traumatizing flashbacks among the ruling class. The easily traumatized Washington Post columnist Philip Bump weighed in immediately. “The things that made Jan. 6 dangerous were a call to action and a time and place for that action to take place [sic],” Bump tweeted on Saturday morning, conveniently omitting that Trump urged peace during his speech on January 6. “It’s not just that Trump is again demanding a response, it’s that he’s telling people when.”
Iraq War booster David Frum, partially responsible for decades of deadly violence around the globe, insisted that Trump “and his supporters proved on January 6, 2021, their readiness to use violence to defy the law.” Vox claimed Trump’s posts were an “echo of the capitol riots of January 6, 2021.” Salon writer Areeba Shaw said Trump’s “extreme rhetoric” on Truth Social “echoed similar language he used at a Washington rally shortly before the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.”
“It’s almost like he’s attempting to organize his domestic terrorists to show up and to resist him being arrested,” Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) warned. Waters infamously encouraged Democrats in 2018 to “create a crowd” to publicly harass Trump Administration officials.
By Monday afternoon, in order to advance optics to support the January 6 comparison, the New York Police Department began installing steel barricades around the Manhattan criminal courthouse, the site of the expected announcement. Politico reported that Capitol Police this week planned to erect “bike-rack type fencing” around the Capitol building—because that worked so well on January 6.
Republicans, understandably, cautioned against plans to protest, not over manufactured fears that another “insurrection” would occur but legitimate fear of how any protest will be criminalized by the Biden regime.
“We don’t need to protest about the Communists Democrat’s [sic] planning to arrest Pres Trump and the political weaponization of our government and election interference,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) tweeted over the weekend. She later warned of likely infiltration by undercover agents or informants. “How many Feds/Fed assets are in place to turn protest against the political arrest of Pres Trump into violence?”
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) also downplayed Trump’s calls for protests and appeared to help Trump walk back his own statements. “I don’t think people should protest this, no. And I think President Trump, if you talk to him, he doesn’t believe that, either,” McCarthy said during a Sunday press briefing. As if referring to January 6 himself, McCarthy urged “calmness” in response to Trump’s arrest.
Regardless of the disparate responses from both political sides, the clear winner here is the Biden regime, and the Justice Department in particular. The ongoing manhunt for Trump supporters is yielding victories of all sizes, not the least of which is the elimination of once-cherished rights to petition the government and redress grievances without being considered a domestic terrorist.
And if anyone thinks conditions will improve soon, just wait until this same Justice Department indicts Trump for “inciting” the events of January 6.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 20:20 - DOJ Asks SCOTUS To Quickly Restore Ban On Guns In Domestic Violence Cases
DOJ Asks SCOTUS To Quickly Restore Ban On Guns In Domestic Violence Cases
Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland speaks during a press conference at the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington on March 7, 2023. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) The Biden administration formally asked the Supreme Court to review an appeals court ruling that invalidated a federal law that bars people under domestic violence-related restraining orders from possessing firearms.
U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar filed the new petition (pdf) in United States v. Rahimi, court file 22-915, which was docketed by the Supreme Court on March 21.
Because the appeals court ruling has “significant disruptive consequences,” Prelogar asked the Supreme Court to expedite consideration of the government’s petition in the hope the court would “consider the petition before it recesses for the summer.”
The appeals court “overlooked the strong historical evidence supporting the general principle that the government may disarm dangerous individuals,” Prelogar wrote.
The request came after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in February struck down Section 922(g)(8) of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, a 1994 law that prohibits a person who is subject to a domestic restraining order from having a gun.
The 5th Circuit determined that the law had ceased to be constitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s landmark June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. That decision held that restrictions on guns must be deeply rooted in American history if they are to survive constitutional scrutiny.
The ban on the possession of firearms by someone under a domestic restraining order “is an outlier that our ancestors would never have accepted,” the circuit court stated in its ruling.
The case involves Zackey Rahimi of Texas, who previously entered a guilty plea to violating the statute. Rahimi was involved in five shooting incidents after the restraining order was entered against him in February 2020. After the Bruen decision was handed down, Rahimi asked the courts to review his conviction given the change in Second Amendment jurisprudence.
Read more here…
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 19:40 - Science Journal Nature Admits Biden Endorsement Damaged Their Reputation
Science Journal Nature Admits Biden Endorsement Damaged Their Reputation
Leading science journal Nature admitted on Monday that their endorsement of Joe Biden in the 2020 US election harmed their credibility, trust in science, and made virtually no difference when it came to influencing voters one way or the other.
In 2020, Nature endorsed Joe Biden in the US presidential election. A survey finds that viewing the endorsement did not change people’s views of the candidates, but caused some to lose confidence in Nature and in US scientists generally https://t.co/lvrgXmsrl5
— nature (@Nature) March 20, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
According to a survey conducted in July and early August 2021, random Trump and Biden supporters were notified of Nature‘s endorsement, while a control group was given irrelevant information about the journal’s new website design.
As James Billot writes in The Post;
…the strength of reaction to the endorsement was particularly acute among Trump supporters, with treated participants (i.e. those who viewed the endorsement) scaling much higher on negative attitudes towards Nature‘s impartiality and knowledge. For Biden supporters, there was a marginal uptick in positive attitudes.
Besides reducing trust in Nature among Trump supporters, the endorsement also had a cascading effect on their attitudes towards science and scientists more generally. Trump supporters were less likely to report high levels of trust towards US scientists than Biden supporters after the endorsement, and the gap is larger for treated participants.
In addition, the shifts in trust in Nature resulted in lower demand for Covid-related information from the journal among Trump supporters. Results found that, at the height of the Delta variant surge in the US, the endorsement led to a -14.2 percentage point reduction in the frequency at which Trump supporters requested Nature articles, whereas the upswing for Biden supporters was negligible.
These results show that Nature’s endorsement had a hugely divisive effect on its readership. Treated Trump and Biden supporters became two to four times more polarised than the control participants on these stated measures of trust in Nature. Meanwhile, treated Trump supporters were 38% less likely than control Trump supporters to request stories from the publication’s website. What’s more, the endorsement had little effect on changing participants’ opinions about the two presidential candidates, rendering it ineffective.
* * *
I’m hard pressed to think of a better way to destroy the trust of (about half or more) of the public in our scientific institutions than to have these institutions openly display their political biases. https://t.co/L7lMV07fqr
— Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) March 21, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 19:20 - Welcome To The Era Of Warring Elites
Welcome To The Era Of Warring Elites
Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,
What the Warring Elites don’t want us to realize is that a system of transparent competition in which no fiefdom is allowed to become dominant best serves the interests of society at large.
I’ve been writing about Warring Elites for a long time (since 2007). As I have often noted, historian Michael Grant identified profound political disunity in the ruling class as a key cause of the dissolution of the Roman Empire.
More recently, I’ve observed that Our Fragmentation Accelerates (December 20, 2019).
Eras of Warring Elites have two key dynamics. One is that the Elites’ interests diverge from those of the society as a whole. In expansive eras, the many competing interests within the Elite class find common ground in supporting the status quo, and relegate their turf squabbles to the private club rooms. On the whole, the shared interests of the Elite class align with society at large.
Since I see the global status quo as fundamentally neofeudal, we can say the interests of the Nobility and Peasantry overlap: each class benefits from political and social stability, economic expansion and broad-based distribution of prosperity.
In disintegrative eras, this integrative, shared dynamic breaks down and the interests of the Elite diverge from those of society at large. The competition between neofeudal camps in the Elite class breaks into open conflict, and the result is a profound political disunity of hardened camps fighting to protect their fiefdoms from any diminishment of wealth or power.
This leads not just to political fragmentation but to social fragmentation as the Elite fiefdoms wage a propaganda battle for the hearts and minds of the Technocrat Class and the Peasantry. The propaganda war is not just to establish the traditional us and them divisions in which we are good and they are evil, it’s also about cultivating The Plantation of the Mind so that all the neat rows of thoughts and emotions serve the interests of the Plantation Owners. I’ve discussed this for many years: Colonizing the Plantation of the Mind (August 25, 2010) and Social Media’s Plantation of the Mind (May 28, 2020).
Each neofeudal fiefdom hopes we’ve seen too many movies in which the line between Good and Evil is cartoonishly clear. Each Elite fiefdom seeks to mask its single-minded devotion to its own self-interest behind fine-sounding claims of noble ideals: a Multipolar World (in which we’re free to pillage the planet), Freedom of Speech (controlled by us, of course), Decentralized Finance (which just so happens to be owned and controlled by the few) and a vast spectrum of other cover stories for the enrichment of Elite fiefdoms at the expense of society at large.
With the emergence of AI Chatbots, each Warring Fiefdom now has the means to overwhelm the media with billions of automated messages about the good and noble and idealistic goals of our Fiefdom and how the evil Central State is scheming to limit our powers of predation (Central State, Bad, our Fiefdom, Good!) or some rabble of Peasantry threatens our extraction of wealth and our death-grip on power (Nobility-owned Fiefdom, Good, Peasantry, Bad!).
The core message is always the same: increasing our wealth, power, profits and control is good for you, too. You’ll all benefit if you help us secure our fiefdom from any threats.
The propaganda is designed to not just colonize our minds but eliminate any urge to ask cui bono, to whose benefit? The single-minded self-interest of each Elite fiefdom must be hidden lest the powerless lower classes start asking if the expansion of one fiefdom’s power and control actually benefits society at large or not.
In this no-holds-barred existential struggle for supremacy, Elite fiefdoms will tear down society to weaken any potential resistance. So national interest is cast as Evil, while Multipolar Wonderfulness is Good (now the whole world can finally sing happy songs around the campfire!), any regulatory restraints are Evil while the rigged “free market” is Good (let the “market” which we control choose winners and losers; hey, surprise, we won!). Every fiefdom should be free to pillage without restraint (“Ask your doctor about Euphorestra,” etc.).
In the Era of Warring Elites, Everything is Staged (October 22, 2020). The Elite fiefdoms don’t care if society and the economy fragment and collapse; they welcome the dissolution of national purpose, civic virtue and shared sacrifice as obstructions to their own limitless greed for more power and control.
In a weakened Nation-State, the fiefdoms will be free to pillage without restraint. If society is an obstruction, they will gladly tear it down with propaganda designed to fragment the Peasantry and undermine any entity which might have the power to restrain their limitless greed. (I discuss the essential roles of national purpose, civic virtue and shared sacrifice in my book Global Crisis, National Renewal.)
Before you buy into a slickly scripted depiction of what needs to be undermined to hasten its collapse, ask to whose benefit? Exactly who benefits from promoting the collapse of this or that? We already know the answer: the Elite fiefdoms who will be free to pillage once any source of resistance has been broken into pieces.
What the Warring Elites don’t want us to realize is that a system of transparent competition in which no fiefdom is allowed to become dominant best serves the interests of society at large. Before we tear everything down, ask who will rush to fill the power vacuum with their own self-serving agenda?
In the meantime, “Ask your doctor about Euphorestra.”
* * *
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)
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 19:00 - Starbucks Baristas Strike, "Demand End To Illegal Union-Busting Campaign"
Starbucks Baristas Strike, “Demand End To Illegal Union-Busting Campaign”
Starbucks Workers United, representing thousands of baristas, tweeted early Wednesday morning that more than 100 Starbucks stores “are striking to demand an end to Starbucks’ illegal union-busting campaign.”
BREAKING: Workers at over 100+
Starbucks stores across the country are striking to demand an end to Starbucks’ illegal union-busting campaign. While the company keeps a metaphorical ’empty chair’ for us in the boardroom, we’re demanding a real seat at the table! #StarbucksStrike— Starbucks Workers United (@SBWorkersUnited) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Bloomberg reported that the work stoppage involves stores in more than 40 US cities. The union has said Starbucks’ anti-union campaign against it violates the company’s own commitment to respect its employees’ rights.
The fight between the union and Starbucks has intensified, with both parties alleging that the other is not bargaining in good faith.
The union represents about 3% of the coffee chain’s 9,300 US stores, though the unionization movement is expanding.
Bloomberg added:
The work stoppage comes one day before Starbucks’s annual shareholder meeting, the first for new CEO Laxman Narasimhan, who officially took the reins from Howard Schultz this week. Investors including New York City pension funds have put forward a resolution this year urging the company to conduct a labor-rights audit, and Schultz is slated to be grilled by lawmakers at a US Senate committee hearing next week.
The union posted images of unionized baristas striking on Wednesday morning:
Good morning, strike morning! We are out on STRIKE with stores up and down I-71 for fair bargaining, better wages, all our tips, fair scheduling, and more!
Join Cleveland SBWU partners at Crocker Park and/or MayLee! pic.twitter.com/bzQcCszfFX
— cleveland starbucks organizers (@ClevelandSBWU) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Day 2 of the #lausdstrike happens as Starbucks workers across Los Angeles County join workers on strike at over 100 locations nationwide.
From our stores, to our schools, to the state house, and beyond, the California labor movement. Won’t. Back. Down! https://t.co/LfiL59CkSa pic.twitter.com/wLiQguP5KV
— Fight for $15 LA (@Fightfor15LA) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Starting the day with the @SBWorkersUnited A.M. #StarbucksStrike crew at 88 E. Broad. Store closed, no scabs! pic.twitter.com/JhLcdVPUKF
— Jeremy Baiman (@jeremybaiman) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Oviedo Mitchell Hammock is ON STRIKE pic.twitter.com/0Nn9M1JTYm
— Labor Clay (@BlastOffBlastic) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
We out here! Arlington Courthouse & Merrifield, Falls Church, VA #Starbucks stores checking in! #StarbucksStrike #tobeapartner #onedaylonger #wunomatterwhat #wumarjb #sbwumarjb #1u pic.twitter.com/vkFvBzM0PP
— Workers United MARJB (@WorkersUnitedMA) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
It’s uncertain whether coffee lovers are closely following the battle between the union and Starbucks. Customers simply desire their daily dose of a vanilla latte, white chocolate mocha, or chai latte — and nothing more.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 18:40 - Coinbase Tumbles After-Hours On Wells Notice Disclosure
Coinbase Tumbles After-Hours On Wells Notice Disclosure
Coinbase shares are tumbling after-hours, down almost 20% on the day, following its disclosure that it received a notice from the SEC formally declaring the securities regulator’s plans to bring an enforcement action against the largest US crypto exchange.
SEC Chair Gary Gensler has repeatedly said many of the tokens and products offered by crypto companies are securities and that the trading platforms need to register with his agency, and in a filing this afternoon, Coinbase said the so-called Wells notice regards aspects of its exchange as well as the staking service Coinbase Earn and Coinbase Wallet.
Bloomberg reports that representatives from Coinbase have met with the SEC more than 60 times over the last nine months to try to resolve the issues, but those talks haven’t been fruitful, according to a person familiar with the matter.
“We are prepared for this disappointing outcome and confident in the legality of our assets and services,” Paul Grewal, chief legal officer of Coinbase, said in a statement.
“If needed, we welcome a legal process to provide the clarity we have been advocating for and to demonstrate that the SEC simply has not been fair or reasonable when it comes to its engagement on digital assets.”
This isn’t the first time Coinbase has received a Wells notice.
The SEC warned the company in 2021 that it considered the company’s proposed “Lend” product, which would have allowed users to earn interest by lending out their crypto holdings, to be a security. The exchange later canceled the launch.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong took to Twitter to explain:
Today Coinbase received a Wells notice from the SEC focused on staking and asset listings.
A Wells notice typically precedes an enforcement action.
Two years ago the SEC reviewed our business in detail and approved Coinbase to go public. Our S1 clearly explained our asset listing process and included 57 references to staking.
Coinbase runs a rigorous asset review process and has rejected more than 90% of assets that have applied to be listed on the platform.
While we understand that this is all part of the journey to reforming our financial system, we are right on the law, confident in the facts, and welcome the opportunity for Coinbase (and by extension the broader crypto community) to get before a court.
We are proud to stand up for our customers and the industry in these moments.
Going forward the legal process will provide an open and public forum before an unbiased body where we will be able to make clear for all to see that the SEC simply has not been fair, reasonable, or even demonstrated a seriousness of purpose when it comes to its engagement on digital assets.
In the meantime, Coinbase will continue to do what we do best: build the most trusted products and services in order to advance our purpose of updating the financial system, and creating more economic freedom in the world.
We’re excited to work with all governments and regulators around the world who are focused on putting in place clear rules to regulate the crypto industry.
Additionally, Decrypt reports that earlier on Wednesday, Coinbase had notified users it will suspends Algorand staking rewards on March 29.
Last August, after the U.S. sanctioned Ethereum mixing service Tornado Cash and wallets that had used it, Armstrong said that if threatened by regulators, he would rather shut down Coinbase staking than censor transactions.
Armstrong concluded a subsequent blog post with a clear message to the regulators:
Tell us the rules and we will follow them. Give us an actual path to register, and we will register the parts of our business that need registering.
In the meantime, the U.S. cannot afford for regulators to continue to threaten the good actors in the crypto industry for doing the same legal and compliant things they’ve always done.
This unfair approach will only drive innovation, jobs, and the entire industry overseas. At our core, we are the very same company that we were on April 14, 2021 when we became a public company at the end of the lengthy process with the SEC itself. We remain confident in the legality of our assets and services, and if needed, we welcome a legal process to provide the clarity we have been advocating for and to demonstrate that the SEC simply has not been fair or reasonable when it comes to its engagement on digital assets.
In the meantime, Coinbase will continue to do what we do best: updating the financial system by building the most trusted products and services to advance our mission of creating more economic freedom and opportunity around the world.
The Wells Notice follows the SEC’s suing Tron founder Justin Sun (and a number of celebrities) on allegations the TRX and BT tokens are unregistered securities (among other charges).
Does anyone else see a very recent pattern, between Silvergate, Signature Bank, and now this – did Liz Warren lay down the law to bring a dragnet against crypto?
WAR ON CRYPTO https://t.co/Uk0r2J8tu9
— RYAN SΞAN ADAMS – rsa.eth 🏴🦇🔊 (@RyanSAdams) March 22, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Who knows, maybe this could go to SCOTUS? Now that crypto has clearly become the Democrats’ latest boogeyman.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 18:20 - China's Auto Industry Association Urges "Cooling" Of Price War, As Major Manufacturers Slash Prices
China’s Auto Industry Association Urges “Cooling” Of Price War, As Major Manufacturers Slash Prices
Just hours after we wrote about maniacal price cutting in the automotive industry in China, China’s auto industry association is urging automakers to “cool” the hype behind price cuts.
The statement was made in order to “ensure the stable development of the industry”, Automotive News Europe reported on Tuesday.
The China Association of Automobile Manufacturers even went so far as to put out a message on its official WeChat account, stating that “A price war is not a long-term solution”. Instead “automakers should work harder on technology and branding,” it said.
The consumer disagrees…
Recall we wrote earlier this week that most major automakers were slashing prices in China. The move is coming after lifting pandemic controls failed to spur significant demand in China, the Wall Street Journal reported this week. Ford and GM will be joined by BMW and Volkswagen in offering the discounts and promotions on EVs, the report says.
Retail auto sales plunged the first two months of the year and automakers are facing additional challenges in trying to transition their business models to prioritize EVs over conventional internal combustion engine vehicles.
Ford is offering $6,000 off its Mustang Mach-E, putting the standard version of its EV at just $31,000. Last month, only 84 of the vehicles were sold, compared to 1,500 sales in December. There was some pulling forward of demand due to the phasing out of subsidies heading into the new year, and Ford had also cut prices by about 9% in December.
A spokesperson for Ford called it a “stock clearance”.
Discounts at Volkswagen are ranging from around $2,200 to $7,300 a car. The cuts will affect 20 gas powered and electric models. Its electric ID series is seeing price cuts of almost $6,000. The company called the cuts “temporary promotions due to general reluctance among car buyers, the new emissions rule and discounts offered by competitors.”
Even more shocking is Citroën-maker Dongfeng Motor Group, who is offering a 40% discount on its C6 gas-powered sedan, now priced at $18,000.
Kelvin Lau, an analyst at Daiwa Capital Markets, told the Journal that automakers are also trying to get rid of 500,000 vehicles collectively stored in their inventory, most of which are older vehicles that won’t meet new emissions standards.
David Zhang, a Shanghai-based independent automobile analyst, added: “Some car makers have been seeing very few sales. At this rate, the manufacturers’ production and dealership networks will collapse.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 03/22/2023 – 18:00
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
