Nov 08

Today’s News 8th November 2022

  • China Quietly Boost Oil Imports In Preparation For Reopening
    China Quietly Boost Oil Imports In Preparation For Reopening

    Alongside the neverending charade over when/if the Fed will pivot (it will, it just needs to really break the market and the economy first, at which point it will be too late to do anything), a similarly heated – and some would say even more important – discussion surrounds China’s decision to drop its doomed covid zero policy. Here, there has certainly been movement in recent days, with Chinese stocks soaring over the past week amid rampant speculation that Beijing is contemplating easing or rolling back its draconian covid zero restrictions.

    And even though both the local government and skeptical China watchers have repeatedly tried to shoot down any unfounded rumors (based on spurious screengrabs) that China is set to ease its anti-covid measures, a new report from Goldman’s commodity team published late on Monday (and available to pro subscribers), concludes that China has quietly if aggressively ramped up crude imports by more than 2.5m b/d in recent weeks in preparation for an eventual reopening, whose timing Goldman still views as most likely to take place some time in 2Q 2023.

    Here are some more details from the Goldman report tiled appropriately enough “China signals the beginning of the end for lockdowns”:

    • The oil market remains depleted of its main buffers: inventories and spare capacity. Concurrently, the risk of meaningful supply disruptions in Libya, Russia, Iraq, and Iran is currently elevated. As such, the risk distributions around our current oil forecasts are skewed squarely higher given spot demand continues to realize robustly.
    • Nevertheless, positioning in oil and broader commodities are barely above their 2Q20 lows, in part due to concerns on China oil demand – the final significant fundamental downside risk. We believe current lockdowns are subtracting as much as 0.9 mb/d from our Jan-22 expectations.
    • Our China economists believe recent headlines simply mark the start of an multi-month preparation period for reopening, and so have maintained their current base case of 2Q23 reopening, once the winter flu season has passed.

    • Nevertheless, any news around China reopening can drive rallies in oil, even if only muting uncertainty. To this end, China has already ramped up crude oil imports by more than 2.5 mb/d in recent weeks, in preparation for this event, as well as to replenish depleted inventory.

    Goldman also conducts an “Effective Lockdown Index”-based exercise for contextualizing what a more rapid reopening may mean for demand and prices.

    Not surprisingly, it finds that each 5% increase in the China ELI is worth c.0.2 mb/d of oil demand…

    … and that a bull-case early reopening would pose $6/bbl upside risk to the bank’s current $110 Brent 2023 forecasts, while a less-likely full international reopening would amount to almost $15/bbl.

    On the other hand, maintenance of the current status quo for restrictions would instead amount to c.$12/bbl of downside to next year’s forecasts. Consistent with this, the bank also finds the oil market-implied increase in the probability of reopening next year increased by 25% last week.

    Lastly, an additional macro risk to commodity prices this year has been the dollar, which has endured one of the sharpest  appreciations in history.

    Goldman expects the USD TWI to depreciate by up to 3% as China reopens, as Asian economies benefit, and broader markets trade more ‘risk-on’. This could support oil prices an additional $3/bbl.

    Much more in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:55

  • Victor Davis Hanson: The Pathetic Democratic Pantheon
    Victor Davis Hanson: The Pathetic Democratic Pantheon

    Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

    Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi are of no use to the Left in the midterms because it is their radical ideology that was finally enacted and wrecked the country…

    Over the last few months the four icons of the Democratic Party—Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi—have hit the campaign trail. 

    They’ve weighed in on everything from “right-wing violence” and “election denialists” to the now tired “un-American” semi-fascist MAGA voter—and had nothing much to say about inflation, the border, crime, energy, or the Afghanistan debacle. In this, they remind us just how impoverished and calcified is this left-wing pantheon. 

    So why should we take anything they say seriously, given their own records—and especially given their mastery of projecting their own shortcomings upon others as some sort of private exculpation or preemptive political strategy?

    Still Hopin’ and Changin’? 

    Barack Obama this past week has assumed the role of surrogate president. He is storming the country, while Joe Biden mopes at home or visits shrinking blue enclaves so he can claim post facto, “At least I was out there stumping.” 

    Over the last six years, we have become accustomed to Obama’s periodic getaways from one of his three estates. It is always the same. From time to time, he reenters politics to remind us that he did not just cash in on his presidency to become a multi-millionaire. Instead, he is still the Chicago “community activist” of his youth. And so, Obama will not be overshadowed by the Biden crew that is enacting all the crazy things he as president had warned were a bit much even for him. 

    At the funeral of the late John Lewis, Obama turned his eulogy into a political rant. He weighed in on the “racist” filibuster, the “Jim Crow relic” that he desperately sought in vain to use to stop the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito. 

    At campaign stops, he deplores “divisions” that he, more than any modern figure, helped create. The entire left-wing vocabulary of disparagement for the white lower-working classes (e.g., deplorables, dregs, chumps, irredeemables, etc.) got its start with Obama’s putdown of Pennsylvania voters who rejected him in the 2008 primaries as “clingers.” 

    In interviews, Obama suddenly now blasts harsh rhetoric—this from the wannabe tough guy who stole the “The Untouchables” line about bringing a knife to a gun fight. Well before crazy Maxine Waters’ calls to arms, Obama advised his supporters “get in their faces.”

    Still, on the campaign trail, Obama appears not so much animated as stale. It is as if he has been suddenly stirred from a long coma that commenced in 2008. It’s the same old, same old—sleeves rolled up. He still resorts to the scripted outbursts of mock anger. And the nerdy prep school graduate still amateurishly modulates his patois—now policy wonk, now breaking into the Southern African-American pastor accent when an audience needs more preachy authenticity. 

    He still tries to rev up his crowds with the familiar attacks: Republican demons will cut Social Security, the MAGA semi-fascists are captives of Donald Trump (as if the Democrats have not ceded their souls to woke hysterics), the Republican fanatics will all but kill women by denying abortions, and extremists unlike himself are dividing the country. 

    On and on, Obama shouts about social justice. And then he wraps up and must decide to which of his mansions he will fly home (via private jet)—Kalorama, Martha’s Vineyard, Hyde Park, or soon the Waimanalo estate.

    Obama offers no solutions much less hints at his own culpability in his sermons. There is nothing about the open border he helped birth. Nothing about Biden’s failed energy policies now bankrupting the middle class that were simply a reification of his energy secretary Steven Chu’s perverse wishes for European-priced gas (“Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”). 

    There is nothing about Obama’s old boasts about shutting down coal plants and skyrocketing electricity (“Under my plan . . . electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”). 

    Nothing is said about the Skip Gates psychodrama and his blanket stereotyped attack on police, the tossing of his own grandmother under the racial bus, the Trayvon Martin racial editorialization, the Ferguson mythologies, and all his efforts to create a binary nation of oppressors and oppressed, as Obama himself determined who is the victim, who the victimizer.

    Drew Angerer/Getty Images

    The Role Model Pelosi

    After the terrible attack on her husband, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s colleagues are rightly calling for an end to extremist rhetoric. If we are to follow the Democratic clarion call, what might Pelosi herself do to help us to lower the temperature?

    Here are a few modest suggestions. 

    Contrary to press reports, conservatives deplored the attack on Paul Pelosi. They want his attacker behind bars with no bail until his trial date. And if convicted they wish him to serve a long sentence before parole is even considered. Let us dish out a proper punishment to David DePape; one that can serve as a model to all such thugs who do his kind of devilish work daily against the innocent and weak—but unlike him, are usually exempt from punishment.

    Recall that DePape should never have been in the United States. He is an illegal alien who violated his visa and should have had a warrant out for deportation, especially given his prior history of lawlessness. Would that the illegal alien who murdered innocent San Franciscan Kate Steinle had been subject to the likely punishment that now is awaiting DePape.

    So yes, we all must lower the temperature. As speaker of the House, Pelosi can do her part in quieting passions, given half the country are her fellow Americans who do not live in the darkness of lies. She might ask Joe Biden to quit calling them semi-fascists and un-American. 

    Pelosi herself should never again tear up her copy of the state of the union address on national television. In that congressional forum she was attacking the presidency, not just Donald Trump. Half the voters feel as strongly about Joe Biden as she does about Donald Trump. If, as House speaker, Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) were to follow Pelosi’s precedent and rip up the next Biden State of the Union, would Pelosi find that continuation of her precedent conducive to healing the nation’s wounds?

    Pelosi herself should not use any more violent imagery in expressing her anger at a president of the opposite party, much less threaten to use physical violence. 

    When she was asked to clarify what she meant in screaming about Trump (“I hope he comes. I want to punch him out. . . . I’ve been waiting for this . . . I’m going to punch him out, and I’m going to go to jail, and I’m going to be happy.”), she scoffed that she could not follow up on her threat only because Trump would never come to Congress to give her the opportunity. 

    Whatever one thinks of Trump, Pelosi only lowers the bar when she boasts about feloniously striking a president of the United States. 

    That Joe Biden had boasted twice about taking Trump behind the gym to beat him up, and others such as actor Robert DeNiro have echoed such threats (“I’d like to punch him in the face”) was no excuse for her reckless talk. After 2016 it was hard to calibrate all the ways the leftists had shouted ways of slaying Donald Trump—by stabbing, shooting, incineration, or decapitation.

    Pelosi should never again delay legislation aimed at protecting Supreme Court justices from the sort of violence that occurred when Justice Brett Kavanaugh was run out of a restaurant, or anti-abortion protesters swarmed his home, or a would-be assassin showed up at his house. 

    Why was Pelosi so fearful about expediting such added security? Would prompt action have empowered the factual narrative that the chief threat to Supreme Court justices now arises from radical abortion protestors?

    Pelosi might have reminded Democrats to tone down their rhetoric after the near-fatal shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.). After all, the shooter was a highly political, left-wing activist and former Bernie Sanders’ volunteer. But she did no such thing.

    She could have privately reprimanded her own daughter that it was not a funny thing to cheer on the violent attack against Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who suffered broken ribs, a collapsed lung, pneumonia, and had to undergo pulmonary surgery. 

    When the younger Pelosi used her family name to gain traction by tweeting “Rand Paul’s neighbor was right,” (if she had used her married last name would anyone have read it?), it sent the message that there was a sort of happiness on the Left that a political opponent had been a target of violence. The Left is furious at Donald Trump, Jr. for crudely mocking the Pelosi assault, but he unfortunately followed a precedent long set by others.

    Kyle Mazza/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

    She’s Back!

    Hillary Clinton is occasionally asked to weigh in on the midterm campaigns, but never in a swing state or hotly contested race. Her presence, like that of Joe Biden’s, would immediately lose the endorser a critical 1-2 points. 

    Clinton recently warned that the 2024 election likely will be illegitimate due to Republican instigated “voter fraud.” 

    Her outburst can be translated into something like, “The midterm left-wing wipeout may be just a preliminary to a 2024 Democratic disaster.” Hillary preempted Biden who, in his third and latest McCarthyite speech, warned that the “Mega Maga” people are planning devilry years in advance and so, like Hillary, he can now cast doubt on the legitimacy of future elections the Democrats will lose. 

    In truth, no one has done more in the last century to impugn the integrity of U.S. elections than Hillary Clinton. She has questioned the 2016, 2020, and 2024 elections, on the theory that any election Democrats might lose is an “attack on democracy.” 

    Her sins go way beyond feloniously destroying subpoenaed emails and devices or leveraging her New York senatorial run by Bill Clinton’s presidential pardons or using her office to enrich her family’s foundation as in the case of Uranium One. 

    When we return to sane times, historians will assess her 2016 efforts to destroy her opponent, his transition, and his presidency as the greatest election scandal in modern memory. She used three paywalls to hide her efforts to hire foreign national Christopher Steele (who was simultaneously working with the FBI). 

    On spec, she used her own contacts such as Charles Dolan to fabricate a phony hit dossier against her opponent and then to seed it within the media and the Obama bureaucracy to smear Trump.

    Not content with that failed and likely illegal effort, she then declared the duly elected president illegitimate and the 2016 election all but stolen. 

    Her Hollywood friends cut videos begging electors to renounce their constitutional duties, ignore their state tallies, and vote instead for Hillary. Had they gotten their way, the entire federal election system as we know it would have been destroyed.

    Then her surrogate, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, sued to overturn the election. Clinton bragged of joining #TheResistance in mock-heroic terms. As an arch-denialist, she urged Joe Biden under no circumstances to concede to Trump if he lost the 2020 vote. 

    And now she warns us of others who might emulate her own denialism? 

    What does Hillary fear in 2024? That a Trump or DeSantis will hire a Steele-like fraud to fabricate Democrat-Chinese collusion and smear a Democrat nominee? That the loser will not concede as she once urged, or the winner is illegitimate as she once insisted?

    Good Old Joe Is Just Old Joe

    Instead of a list of supposed communists, Joe Biden apparently has a roster of “election denialists” who he says are running for Senate and Congress and whom he fears will win next Tuesday. And he sets the example for others like House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.)—himself a 2004-05 election denialist—who now smears his opponents as Nazis who, he fears, by democratically voting Democrats out of office nationwide will “destroy democracy.” 

    What will Biden not lie about? The death of his son, the circumstances in which his first wife died in a car wreck, the fantasy congressional vote on his student-loan forgiveness scheme? The number of states (Joe says, 54, Obama used to swear there are 57)? The very century we are now in? Where he went to college? 

    Joe, our own Walter Mitty, has variously been a semi-truck driver, an arrested South-African street protestor against apartheid, a surrogate Puerto-Rican child, a black college enrollee, a Ciceronian populist orator, a coal miner’s scion, an honors student, a blue-chip collegiate athlete, a defender against inner-city Corn Poppers, and absolutely ignorant about the Biden family syndicate.

    Recall that a non compos mentis Biden was nominated solely as the thin veneer to a hard Left agenda whose avatars were unelectable. Biden was to feign being the colorless, stand-in “moderate” who would “unify” the fractured country, tone down the Trump rhetoric, and let the Trump record sort of proceed on autopilot. 

    Then when he played out that part and won, the leftist minders in this Faustian bargain took over to push through, on a one-vote senatorial margin, the most radical left-wing agenda in U.S. history. 

    Biden, however, took his role too seriously. He reverted to the mean-spirited, pre-senile blowhard Joe—the obnoxious messenger thus now making the noxious message even more toxic. 

    A retiring, silenced, good old Joe from Scranton was the script, not a doddering, incoherent, ”get off my lawn” old man shouting for the need of socialist policies that were the exact opposite of his previously supposed convictions. 

    The Left got their Biden. And yes, he turned over the reins of government to them. And yes, they got their neo-socialism for two years. And yes, they are destroying America as we knew it. But in doing this, the people had the rare occasion to see fully and experience the nihilist Left. And they are now about to express their loathing for what the Left has wrought. 

    The problem with the ossified Democratic Pantheon is that they are of no use to the Left in the midterms because it is their own radical ideology over the past two years that was finally enacted and wrecked the country. And all the shrieks about abortion, semi-fascists, and democracy dying cannot put back together what they shattered.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:45

  • Cryptos Plunge As FTX-Binance Battle Escalates
    Cryptos Plunge As FTX-Binance Battle Escalates

    Update (1105ET): The price of FTX Token FTT just crashed over 20% after holding support at $22 since the CEO of Alameda Research (FTX hedge fund) offered to buy all Binance’s FTT holdings at that level.

    Earlier this evening, Binance founder CZ responded with a tweet that he ‘will let the market decide’…

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

    And that triggered aggressive selling in FTT…

    This is triggering selling pressure across much of the crypto space as FTX liquidity/contagion fears spread as a bank-run of sorts occurs on assets sitting on the FTX platform.

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

    Solana is being hammered lower since it is part of FTX’s reserves…

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

    As we detailed below, Bankman-Fried denied CZ’s allegations: “A competitor is trying to go after us with false rumors,… FTX is fine. Assets are fine.”

    “FTX has enough to cover all client holdings.

    We don’t invest client assets (even in treasuries).

    We have been processing all withdrawals, and will continue to be.”

    Bitcoin puked below $20,000 on the back of the moves…

    Whether strategic or not, FTX is one of Binance’s largest competitors and in just one day, those comments and Binance’s sale of FTT holdings have started a chain of second and third order effects.

    *  *  *

    As we detailed earlier, new battle of the billionaires is brewing (if not boiling over) among the current kings of crypto as tensions between Binance founder  Zhao “CZ” Changpeng and FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried have escalated a war of words on Twitter into actions over CZ’s claims that FTX’s hedge fund’s asset base may not be all it’s cracked up to be.

    The drama began early Sunday morning when FTX’s FTT token suddenly plunged as rumors surfaced that a giant whale with 23 million FTT, probably Binance, might be dumping its tokens.

    FTT trade volume surged to its highest level in more than a year amid the wave of selling pressure…

    Shortly after that initial plunge, Zhao said his company would liquidate its entire FTT holdings in the coming months, on fears that the token might collapse in the same manner as Terra (LUNA) in May 2021.

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

    Binance was an early investor in FTX.

    Zhao referenced “recent revelations that have came to light,” but did not elaborate publicly.

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

    However, his actions come shortly after a Nov 2nd article on CoinDesk that said much the balance sheet of Bankman-Fried’s trading house Alameda Research is comprised of the FTT token.

    Cointelegraph reports that, according to the CoinDesk report, Alameda Research had $14.6 billion on its balance sheet as of June 30, with FTT being the largest holding at $5.8 billion, making up 88% of its net equity. In addition, the firm held $1.2 billion in Solana, $3.37 billion in unidentified cryptocurrency, $2 billion in “equity securities” and other assets.

    On the other hand, Alameda Research reportedly had liabilities worth $8 billion, including $2.2 billion worth of loans collateralized by FTT.

    That, coupled with the firm’s alleged exposure to illiquid altcoins, prompted some analysts to predict its insolvency in the future. 

    “Alameda will never be able to cash in a significant portion of FTT to pay back its debts,” wrote Mike Burgersburg, an independent market analyst, for the Dirty Bubble Media Substack, noting:

    “There are few buyers, and the largest buyer appears to be the very company which Alameda is most closely tied to […] the fair market value of their FTT in the event of large sales would rapidly approach $0.”

    Bankman-Fried responded in a brief tweet thread, saying: “A competitor is trying to go after us with false rumors,… FTX is fine. Assets are fine.”

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

    He went on to note that:

    “FTX has enough to cover all client holdings.

    We don’t invest client assets (even in treasuries).

    We have been processing all withdrawals, and will continue to be.

    It’s heavily regulated, even when that slows us down.  We have GAAP audits, with > $1b excess cash.  We have a long history of safeguarding client assets, and that remains true today.

    Concluding with an ‘oilve branch’ perhaps:

    “I’d love it, @cz_binance, if we could work together for the ecosystem.”

    Notably, as Decrypt reports, Zhao’s actions (and the Alameda leaks) follow weeks of criticism directed at FTX’s founder and Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried for regulatory proposals he put forth in a blog post which recommended restrictions regarding DeFi. He has since committed to revising his regulatory position.

    While it’s fun to watch billionaire whiz-kids slinging mud at each other, the collateral damage (quite literallY) could be significant for the rest of the crypto universe.

    “Overall, FTT is a relatively illiquid token on open markets, so Binance’s plans to liquidate all FTT tokens they hold is quite a significant market event,”  Clara Medalie, head of research at analytics firm Kaiko, said.

    “Alameda will likely dedicate considerable resources to ensure the price of FTT doesn’t crash.”

    In fact, Alameda’s CEO tweeted that her trading firm’s financial condition is stronger than what was reflected by the balance sheet CoinDesk wrote about. She also offered, in a reply to the Binance CEO’s post, to buy his firm’s FTT token holdings for $22 each.

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

    Nothing to worry about at all…

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

    Nevertheless, the FTX outflows continue…

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

    Overall, as Kaiko concludes, it is clear that FTT market makers are working overtime to maintain the price of FTT, which is down 3% over the past day along with most other cryptocurrencies. Despite a massive surge in selling pressure, there is barely a dent in market depth and only a slight increase in price slippage. Ultimately it may be in all parties’ best interest to engage in an OTC transaction as suggested by Caroline Ellison to limit price impacts, especially considering Binance, FTX, and Alameda all risk large losses should FTTs price fall significantly.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:25

  • Trump Says "Big Announcement" Coming On Nov. 15 Amid Expectations Of Presidential Bid
    Trump Says “Big Announcement” Coming On Nov. 15 Amid Expectations Of Presidential Bid

    Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times,

    Former President Donald Trump teased confirmation of his anticipated 2024 president bid to supporters on Monday, revealing he will make a “big announcement” on Nov. 15.

    Trump was in Dayton, Ohio, on Nov. 7, holding a campaign rally for local Republican candidates, particularly J.D. Vance who is seeking the state’s Senate seat. He told supporters that the midterms are a “country-saving election.”

    “Two years ago, we were a great nation and we will be a great nation again,” Trump said.

    “The first step to saving America is winning an epic victory for Republicans tomorrow.”

    Near the end of the rally, Trump hinted that he will seek another bid for the White House in 2024.

    “I’m going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday, November 15, at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida,” Trump said, without elaborating.

    He added, “We want nothing to detract from the importance of tomorrow.

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

    Trump has been hinting that he will make another run for president for months.

    At an Iowa rally on Nov. 3, Trump dropped a strong hint that he would seek reelection.

    “And now, in order to make to make our country successful, and safe, and glorious, I will very, very, very, probably do it again, okay?” Trump said. “Very, very, very probably.”

    The crowd at the rally cheered in response, erupting in chants of “Trump! Trump! Trump!”

    “That’s nice, well, get ready, that’s all I’m telling you, very soon,” Trump said. “Get ready.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:20

  • Are Republicans More Conservative Than Democrats Are Liberal?
    Are Republicans More Conservative Than Democrats Are Liberal?

    The 2022 midterm election is once again characterized by extreme polarization between the parties. As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, despite moderate positions gaining slightly this year, an annual survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs shows that moderates are in the minority in both parties the United States.

    In July, 42 percent of self-described Democrats said they were moderates or conservatives, opposite 58 percent who considered themselves liberals. The gap is even bigger in the Republican Party, where 77 percent identified as conservatives and only 23 percent said of themselves that they were moderates or liberals. According to this survey, this makes Republicans in fact a whole lot more conservative than Democrats are liberal.

    Infographic: Are Republicans More Conservative Than Democrats Are Liberal? | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    A height of polarization was reached last year, when 80 percent of Republicans said they were conservatives and the number of liberal Democrats rose to 60 percent. Diving deeper into the data shows that 13 percent of Republicans described themselves as “extremely conservative” in 2022 as opposed to 9 percent of Democrats who considered themselves “extremely liberal”.

    However, considering all respondents across both parties, self-described moderates are the biggest group in the U.S. at 36 percent, followed very closely by 35 percent of conservatives.

    Time will tell if the upcoming election will mirror voter preferences and favor conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats over of middle-of-the road winners. According to FiveThirtyEight, 70 percent of GOP candidates who have said they believed the 2020 elected was rigged are expected or likely to win their races, compared to other Republicans whose odds were put at only 37 percent by the website. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 23:00

  • FBI Announces "Enhanced" Firearm Background Checks For Young Adults To Start Next Week
    FBI Announces “Enhanced” Firearm Background Checks For Young Adults To Start Next Week

    Submitted by Gun Owners for America.,

    The FBI, through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has announced that a mandatory wait period for 18–20-year-old legal adults, as enacted by the gun control known as Cornyn-Murphy or the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, will go into effect November 14, 2022.

    Gun Owners of America reported on this issue in October 2022, when the FBI launched their Enhanced Background Checks for 18–20-year-olds in the state of Maine.

    Those under the age of 21 will receive an initial delay that could last about two weeks. This delay is supposedly to allow the FBI to contact local law enforcement and check with state databases to enhance the background check system’s effectiveness. This is nothing but a way to make it more difficult for young adults to own firearms. It’s a mandatory wait period that anti-gunners have now added to a background check system that is broken well beyond repair.

    Parents might not want their children to receive mental healthcare as minors, if it might create an administrative record resulting in the loss or delay of their child’s constitutional rights when they turn 18. Those 17 and under who hunt, play shooting sports, or who wish to own firearms for self-defense as adults may choose to avoid essential mental healthcare in order to retain their right to own and operate firearms. If someone under 18 wants to legally buy a hunting shotgun or a target rifle on their 18th birthday, they may use the consequences of the law as an excuse to not get the mental health care they need. 

    The “enhanced background check” is in fact a mandatory delay or wait period on the purchasing of a firearm for those under 21 years old. Mandatory waiting periods put Americans’ constitutional rights on hold when they may be in the middle of a dangerous situation, whether that be a threat from someone they know, a dangerous period of rioting and looting, or any number of scenarios. Further, allowing local law enforcement tips and hearsay to result in the denial of a constitutional right would truly constitute an arbitrary and unconstitutional gun ban.

    The “enhanced background checks” will include “checks with state databases and local law enforcement.” Since Congress admits that such an enhancement is truly necessary for one category of adults, then will they soon find themselves answering why these delays and “enhancements” do not apply to all other law-abiding people? Further, allowing local law enforcement tips and hearsay to result in the denial of a constitutional right will truly constitute an arbitrary and unconstitutional gun ban.  

    For an example on how firearm purchase delays can be deadly, look no further than the case of Carol Browne of New Jersey. Carol Browne was stabbed to death by a former boyfriend. She had applied for a permit to purchase a pistol on April 21st, 2015, and was murdered on June 3rd, 43 days later, still waiting for approval. New Jersey State law requires that a Firearms Purchaser ID card be issued within 30 days, but often the wait is much longer. Carol’s killer didn’t need a gun, but Carol sure did. And she could still be alive today if arrogant officials had not denied her the right to protect herself.

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

    * * *

    We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 22:40

  • The Trojan Horse Presidency
    The Trojan Horse Presidency

    Authored by Dmitri Orlov,

    The US midterm elections are nigh and, as I happen to be a good and patriotic Russian national, it behooves me to meddle in them. Election-meddling is an example of Russia’s soft power, which is much nicer than Russia’s hard power, so you should be glad that it’s still on offer.

    I am on record saying that “The United States is not a democracy and it doesn’t matter who is president” multiple times in multiple places, and I stand by that statement, which I believe to be a provable statement of fact. Statistics show that there is zero correlation between public preferences and public policy decisions but a strong correlation between business lobby group preferences and pubic policy decisions. Thus the US is not a democracy (rule by the people) but an oligopoly (rule by business groups). From this it follows that it doesn’t matter who is president because both parties of the Democrat-Republican duopoly are owned by the same set of business groups.

    And so it doesn’t matter who is president and your vote means nothing? Granted; but then does it matter WHETHER there is a president? Methinks, it does!

    What if the president is an organo-servo-robot, a senile puppet, backed up by a vice president specifically chosen for being even more feeble-minded? This is an excellent ploy for putting in power an extremist group that is only tangentially related to the usual business lobbies that determine what gets done in Washington. Don’t think of some vast and amorphous “deep state”: executing such a power grab requires tight coordination, some amount of secrecy or, at least, discretion, and, of course, vast sums of money. Think instead of a singularly well-endowed evil oligarch and his multiple minions whom he has carefully groomed and insinuated into positions of power.

    The overall goal of such an extremist group may well go far beyond the usual interests of business lobbies, such as preserving shareholder equity, a wider spot at the federal subsidy trough, knocking down transnational barriers to trade and movement of capital, lower business taxes and so on. These zealots may well have an altogether different view of the future in mind, in which a tiny group of ultra-rich owns everything while the rest of us own nothing but, being made tame and docile through all sorts of medical and technical manipulation, feel happy about this state of affairs… like so many animals in a menagerie… not too many animals, mind you: drastic population reduction is likely a key goal of theirs.

    What might the overall goals of this organization be? It’s not exactly a secret. Here’s a sample, taken from the “Goals 2030” document from the 2018 conference at the Complexity Institute in Santa Fe:

    • No private or personal property.

    • Guaranteed basic income for all who accept this “new normal.”

    • Cash free society; digital money (as a method of social control).

    • Hydrocarbon ratings for states and companies.

    • Tight social controls (via drones, facial recognition, etc.)

    • Rationing of all consumption, including energy and natural resources.

    • Patents on all seed stocks and restrictions on food production for personal use.

    • Almost total elimination of livestock. The remaining population to be fed a vegetarian diet augmented with artificial protein, insects, etc.

    • Population reduction through sterilization and birth control.

    • Enforced vaccination.

    • Ban on alternative forms of medicine.

    • Erasure of sexual (male/female) distinctions.

    • Child sterilization and castration (chemical and/or surgical).

    Some people may recognize in this list various items that have been on offer for some time at the Davos conference and other venues. That famously went nowhere when the perennial Davos maître d’, a Mr. Klaus, if memory serves, teleconferenced in Putin and Xi to ask them whether they’d like to go along with such a plan. The two answered that, no, they have plans of their own that serve the needs of their people. This threw a large wrench into the works.

    The plan (I am guessing) was to use the senile grandpa and his idiot sidekick as a Trojan horse to infest the White House, then use that position to destroy America, and then use America’s rotting corpse as a staging area for launching similar attacks worldwide. But if Putin and Xi, and with them 80% of the world, are having none of it, then what? Fight a war against Russia and China in tandem, and lose it? What then?

    And so they now wait for the inevitable. Russia is done chewing through the original Ukrainian military and its Soviet-era weaponry stockpile and is now halfway through chewing through any remaining Ukrainian raw recruits (old men and children, essentially), plus NATO mercenaries and NATO’s weaponry stockpile, all without breaking a sweat. It is now gradually disabling all public works throughout the Ukrainian territory, much of that work being done using a low-budget artificially intelligent flying chainsaw called Geranium 2. (We Russians like names like that. A 152mm cannon is called Hyacinth B; a 240mm self-propelled mortar is called 2S4 Tulip. Would you like to smell our flowers?)

    The lack of electricity, heat or running water gives the remaining half of the Ukrainian population a very good reason to pack their suitcases and head West. Those 15-20 million additional ornery Ukrainians demanding to be fed and housed will be sure to do wonders for Western morale. This will come at a time when Western restrictions on the import of Russian energy will begin to seriously bite. People won’t be pleased.

    Do you think the not even particularly shadowy oligarch whose minions who are currently running amok in the White House have a plan for dealing with the horrible mess they have created? No, they do not. They are freaking out. Worse yet, they are losing narrative control. The Biden presidency no longer looks real; it looks like what it actually is: a hoax. And if he isn’t real, then who are the cockroaches that have been running amok in the White House these past two years?

    At this point, only a very silly person might think that Biden, who can barely read an entire sentence from a teleprompter without stumbling at least once, keeps shaking hands with ghosts, calling out to dead people in the audience, needs multiple tries to correctly name the country on which he has spent $20 billion, was able to review, never mind write, those 100 presidential orders he has signed, 19 of them during his first week in office.

    Then who did write them and why? Wouldn’t you like to find out? I can’t tell you how to vote, but I can tell you this: in some states (not all) there is a specific way you can vote to make it more likely that we will find out who these cockroaches are. Flushing them out of their hiding places in positions of power and stepping on them would come next.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 22:00

  • US Wants Official Of Ukrainian Descent As Next NATO Chief
    US Wants Official Of Ukrainian Descent As Next NATO Chief

    A person of Ukrainian descent to fill NATO’s top post? That’s what a recent New York Times report suggested could happen as it detailed “the race is on” to select NATO’s next Secretary General.

    “While the officials cautioned that these are early days, and very often the names that surface first do not survive the bargaining among NATO’s 30 members, they said one prime candidate has surfaced in Washington: Chrystia Freeland, 54, the Canadian-Ukrainian deputy prime minister and finance minister of Canada,” NY Times wrote. 

    Chrystia Freeland, center, to Justin Trudeau’s right in a May visit to Ukraine. Canadian govt. via Twitter

    Freeland has long been seen as Ukraine’s top ally within Canadian political leadership. The Times called her a “prime candidate” in the eyes of Washington insiders to replace NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

    The report described further, “Ms. Freeland, 54, a former journalist (who is married to a reporter for The New York Times), has also been Canada’s foreign minister.” And listed that “Her advantages are considerable: she speaks English, French, Italian, Ukrainian and Russian; she has run complicated ministries; she is good at news conferences and other public appearances; and she would be the first woman and first Canadian ever to run NATO.”

    Russian state media over the last few days has highlighted Freeland’s candidacy for the top NATO spot, strongly hinting that Moscow would see someone of Ukrainian descendancy in the position as somewhat of an intentional and highly symbolic provocation.

    Freeland’s maternal grandparents emigrated from Ukraine to Alberta, Canada in 1939 – though her mother later returned to the family’s homeland and was a well-known figure within the Ukrainian independence movement which sought to undermine Soviet power there.

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

    Freeland herself has long been on a Kremlin blacklist, as the Washington D.C.-based think tank Wilson Center describes in a backgrounder: 

    Despite Freeland’s well established international reputation, in 2014 the Alberta-born politician found herself added to the Kremlin’s list of unwelcome visitors. Moscow has always exercised its gatekeeping abilities through territorial and border control, but how did a Canadian civil servant come to be banned from entering Russia?

    The 2014 no-entry list was generated in response to sanctions imposed by both Canada and the United States after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea. Although the list possessed symbolic implications, reminding the international community of Russia’s willingness to respond and reject the West, Freeland’s name is of particular distinction. Her presence on that list was intentional– a decision rooted deeply in Freeland’s family history and her recent past. 

    The Wilson Center profile also included…

    As an undergraduate at Harvard University, Freeland spent a semester abroad in Ukraine, advocating for political and social reform under the Soviet puppet state. As a pro-democracy agitator from 1988-1989, Freeland posed an acute threat to Soviet political order, a threat noted by the KGB. 

    In the wake of the February Russian invasion, Freeland has remained a staunch supporter of Ukraine, and also as a hawk she’s consistently pushed back against Canadian politicians and Western officials who have dared suggested any level of compromise or territorial concessions with Russia for the sake of ceasefire.

    On this front, The New York Times emphasizes, “Where any of the candidates come down on support for Ukraine in the war against Russia will be a critical factor.”

    Screenshot of Freeland attending a 2019 Festival of Ukrainian Culture event in Toronto.

    However, the report further notes that it’s still early in the selection process, with others like Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas or president of Slovakia Zuzana Caputova as other top contenders. Stoltenberg’s term was recently extended to last till the end of September 2023. NYT notes that “Both Washington and Brussels want a conclusion before the next American presidential election in November 2024.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 21:40

  • LATimes Op-Ed Says Press "Failing Americans' By Treating Both Parties Equally
    LATimes Op-Ed Says Press “Failing Americans’ By Treating Both Parties Equally

    Authored by Eric Utter via American Thinker,

    History professor Robert S. McElvaine recently wrote an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times in which he stated that journalists are “failing Americans” by insisting on treating both political parties equally.  Yes, as we know, there is nothing more dangerous to a representative republic than a free and objective press.

    McElvaine claimed that the United States is in “the final stages of the most critical election for the survival of the American experiment since 1864” and added that journalists bear responsibility for protecting America’s future from “right-wing” extremists.

    He wrote: “America’s future hangs on the defeat of the right-wing extremist authoritarians who have seized the name of Lincoln’s party.  If we lose, news corporations and journalists with a misplaced sense of ‘balance,’ ‘neutrality’ and ‘nonpartisanship’ will bear a considerable share of the blame.”  Down with balance, neutrality, and nonpartisanship!  Screw objectivity!  To hell with equal treatment, justice, fairness, equality, and equity when it comes to “journalists'” duty to the people!  The people don’t know how to think, so the media must tell them what to think…or democracy is doomed!  Mass indoctrination is the last, best hope for democracy!

    McElvaine further ostracized reporters for not adequately attacking conservatives for pushing ideas that are “increasingly reminiscent” of Hitler’s rise to power.  Um, “professor,” if anyone is implicitly threatening to round political opponents up and send them to prison or concentration/labor/re-education camps, it’s far left Democrats.  In fact, they’ve already done that.

    Yet the Nutty Professor soldiered on, saying: “In the final days of this election season, Americans must recognize that the existential struggle we are engaged in now is not just a game.  If the enemies of democracy prevail and take control of either house of Congress in the midterms, there will be no ‘wait till next year.’  They would probably refuse to accept the election of a Democratic president in 2024.  The game would be over, if not permanently, at least for many years.”  Projection!  Democrats refused to accept the election of a Republican president in 2000 and in 2016.

    Bizarrely, McElvaine’s op-ed appeared shortly after a study by the Media Research Center found that Republicans overwhelmingly received more negative coverage from the press than Democrat candidates did in the months leading up to the midterm elections.

    Democrats have spent much of the past few weeks telling us all that democracy will die unless we vote as they tell us to.  

    Oddly, they suddenly now believe there are objective truths.  Two of them, in fact.  One, that MAGA Republicans are evil.  And two, that the rest of us are too stupid to realize this if the news media’s reports are unbiased.

    We get to pick “our truth” when it comes to, say, what sex or gender we claim to be.  But not if we believe it’s problematic to allow an experimental mRNA vaccine/gene therapy into our body — or if we believe that voting for Republicans is in the best interest of ourselves and our nation.  I mean, the “my truth” thing can go only so far, right? 

    Anybody else see a problem with this?  McElvaine’s op-ed is advocating for outright discrimination against one of the two major political parties — including its adherents, who constitute nearly half of the electorate — in the interest of democracy!

    The vast majority of so-called journalists, like the vast majority of so-called professors, are “failing Americans” by trying to convince them that they give a rat’s rear end about democracy…when all they really care about is their own primacy.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 21:20

  • North Korea: Record Number Of Missile Tests Was 'Practice' To Attack US, South
    North Korea: Record Number Of Missile Tests Was ‘Practice’ To Attack US, South

    North Korea last week fired a missile that crossed over the south’s disputed maritime border for the first time since the division of the Korean peninsula in 1948. On Monday the south’s navy announced it has  “recovered what is presumed to be the debris of the North’s short-range ballistic missile.”

    Also unprecedented is that the missile landed a mere 50 miles from the South Korean coastal city of Ulsa, Yonhap said, coming amid a record number of missile launches within a 24-hour timeframe last Wednesday.

    A recent N.Korean missile launch, via AP

    Pyongyang was reacting to a week of the largest-ever joint US-South Korean military drills, which had a large aerial component of over 200 combined aircraft. The exercises ended on Saturday, and also came as Seoul as well as Washington intelligence officials have been warning allies to expect Kim Jong-Un to conduct a nuclear test at any time.

    On Monday North Korea itself explained the ramped up launches for the first time, directing its rhetoric in the form of new threat aimed at the United States. Pyongyang says the military was “simulating the attack” on US and South Korean targets as a result of the provocative six days of drills. 

    “As part of the countermeasures to smash the continued frenzy of war provocations of the enemy, our army launched to the east sea the super-large multiple launch rocket system, five tactical ballistic missiles of different kinds and 46 long-range missiles of multiple launch rocket system,” state-run KCNA news agency reported of the North Korean military statement.

    Pyongyang further claimed it launched a “special functional warhead paralyzing the operation command system of the enemy” along with the “mobilization of 500 fighters” – in reference to fighter jets. Pentagon officials remain skeptical of this claim of the north deploying 500 jet fighters. 

    US and South Korean officials say they haven’t seen evidence of this “special” warhead that the KCNA statement referenced. The north has vowed to keep up the pressure…

    “The recent corresponding military operations by the Korean People’s Army are a clear answer of (North Korea) that the more persistently the enemies’ provocative military moves continue, the more thoroughly and mercilessly the KPA will counter them,” the General Staff of North Korea’s military said in a statement carried by state media.

    The region has been put on edge over the rapidly increased numbers of tests, especially US-ally Japan: 

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Meanwhile, a joint US-South Korea military statement last week warned as follows in response to Pyongyang’s posturing and rhetroic: “Any nuclear attack against the United States or its allies and partners, including the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons, is unacceptable and will result in the end of the Kim regime.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 21:00

  • Trump Changes Tune, Tells Florida Supporters To Vote For DeSantis
    Trump Changes Tune, Tells Florida Supporters To Vote For DeSantis

    Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    After calling Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis “Ron DeSanctimonious” on Saturday night, former President Donald Trump called on his Miami supporters to vote for the Florida GOP governor during the 2022 midterms.

    “With thousands of proud, hard-working American patriots, incredible people–just two days from now, the people of Florida are going to reelect the wonderful, the great, a friend of mine, Marco Rubio to the United States Senate, and you’re going to reelect Ron DeSantis as your governor of the state,” he said at an event while stumping for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). 

    “And you’re going to elect an incredible slate of true MAGA warriors to Congress.”

    U.S. President Donald Trump and Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis hold a COVID-19 and storm preparedness roundtable in Belleair, Fla., on July 31, 2020. (SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)

    Trump drew headlines when he made the quip about DeSantis at a rally for Dr. Mehmet Oz and Doug Mastriano, Republicans who are campaigning for Pennsylvania’s Senate and gubernatorial seats, respectively. DeSantis and his campaign have not responded to Trump’s comment on Saturday.

    DeSantis is facing off against former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a Democrat, and Rubio, meanwhile, faces Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.).  Recent polls have shown DeSantis is ahead of Crist and have shown that Rubio leads Demings.

    Trump and DeSantis are both widely considered to be the top contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, although DeSantis has not made any indication on whether he intends to run during the 2024 contest. When asked about running for president, DeSantis has consistently said he’s campaigning to keep his position as Florida’s governor.

    His comments Saturday came as he was talking about polling for possible 2024 GOP candidates, which have shown Trump with a significant lead.

    “We’re winning big in the Republican Party for the nomination like nobody’s ever seen before. There it is, Trump at 71 percent, Ron DeSanctimonious at 10 percent,” Trump said in Pennsylvania. “Mike Pence at seven, oh, Mike is doing better than I thought. Liz Cheney there’s no way she’s at 4 percent. There’s no way. There’s no way. But we’re at 71 to 10 to 7 to 4.”

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 20:40

  • Philly Home Depot Workers Reject Union In Lopsided Vote
    Philly Home Depot Workers Reject Union In Lopsided Vote

    Workers at a Philadelphia Home Depot store on Saturday night overwhelmingly shot down a drive to unionize the location. It would have become the first fully-unionized Home Depot store. 

    No votes outnumbered yes votes by more than a three-to-one margin. The final tally came in at 165 to 51, according to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which supervised the vote. 

    “We’re happy that the associates at this store voted to continue working directly with the company,” Home Depot spokeswoman Margaret Smith told WHYY. “That connection is important to our culture, and we will continue listening to our associates and making The Home Depot a great place to work and grow.”

    The vote was initiated by a September petition that had 106 signatures out of 266 employees at the Roosevelt Boulevard Home Depot in Northeast Philly. Organizers have filed a complaint with the NLRB alleging that Home Depot managers interfered with their efforts. 

    Lead organizer Vincent Quiles in front of the Northeast Philly Home Depot (Kimberly Paynter/WHYY)

    The Philly Home Depot union push is part of a broader union-organizing surge: Over the first half of 2022, 1,411 American workplaces filed union-organizing petitions with the National Labor Relations Board—the highest mark since 2015. 

    However, the blowout loss is the latest splash of cold water on union activists who’ve been targeting big-chain retailers across the country with mixed success. Last month, employees at an upstate New York Amazon warehouse killed an Amazon Labor Union (ALU) drive by a 2-to-1 margin.

    In April, the ALU scored a headline-making victory, when workers at a Staten Island Amazon processing facility voted to unionize, in a vote where yes votes prevailed 2,654 to 2,131. More than 8,300 were eligible to vote.

    Amazon Labor Union President Chris Smalls (Eric Lee/Bloomberg)

    Amazon filed an objection to the vote, alleging that the NLRB’s Brooklyn office violated labor law by appearing to support the unionization push. In September, the NLRB declared that Amazon “had not met its burden” of establishing that the NLRB had engaged in “objectionable conduct.”  

    The labor skirmishes are getting spicy: Earlier this month, Apple decided to withhold an increase in benefits from employees at its sole unionized store, which is in Towson, Maryland.

    Starbucks has fired similar benefit-withholding shots across the bow of unionization forces, triggering NLRB accusations of unlawful practices. The coffee seller has been perhaps the most visible target of successful retail-unionization attempts, with some 250 stores voting to unionize over the past year.  

     

    Meanwhile, back in Philly, Politico reports the Home Depot story has a strange-bedfellow angle: 

    One top Home Depot executive who works on employment practices at the company is Derek Bottoms, the husband of Keisha Lance Bottoms, director of the Office of Public Engagement in the White House and the former Atlanta mayor, Daniel Lippman reports. 

    The Northeast Philly Home Depot workers clearly saw that unionization has downsides. That’s clear on a macro scale too: Since the start of the pandemic, right-to-work states have added 1.3 million jobs, while union-friendly, non-right-to-work states have lost 1.1 million. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 20:20

  • Delaware Professor: Doubting Fetterman's Fitness Is Embracing Eugenics
    Delaware Professor: Doubting Fetterman’s Fitness Is Embracing Eugenics

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    On the eve of the midterm elections with Pennsylvania’s Senate race viewed as a dead heat, Democratic candidate John Fetterman declared “I run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade.” It was obviously a jarring moment for his pro-choice crowd particularly after calling for the codification of Roe. It was an all-too-familiar moment for the candidate who suffered a serious stroke that has impaired his communication and processing skills. However, as we previously discussed, many on the left have swatted back questions concerning Fetterman’s fitness as “ableism.” Now, the Washington Post has run a long column from University of Delaware Professor Jaipreet Virdi declaring that it is not just embracing ableism but eugenics to question Fetterman’s fitness.

    Professor Virdi is an associate professor at the University of Delaware who describes herself as “Deaf & forever a radical.”  She is a prominent and influential voice against discrimination against the deaf.

    There were parts of her column that I thought raised valuable and probative insights, including Virdi’s observation that “disabled people are the ‘original life hackers,’ people who adapt to their circumstances and find their way through the disabled world, by creating new objects and paths that allow them full participation.” She is also right that we need to reevaluate how our expectations might be barriers to those with disabilities. However, she engages in her own sweeping generalizations of those who raise these concerns and tells them that they must “jettison[] eugenics-influenced ideas about disability.”

    Virdi frames her analysis by insisting that Fetterman is just given to “verbal stumbles and pauses.”  The problem is that we do not know if there is more serious cognitive damage. Fetterman has refused to release his medical records despite requests from the media, including newspapers that support him.

    Moreover, Fetterman had this stroke before the primary vote but he and his staff kept the serious impact of the stroke a secret. After he received the nomination, they then largely prevented the media or voters from questioning him and sharply limited his public appearances. They would only agree to one debate and insisted that it occur relatively late in the election after hundreds of thousands voted.

    In other words, we still do not know the extent to which Fetterman can process information and communicate. His sole debate was widely viewed as alarming.

    However, it is the escalation of the rhetoric that is most notable about the Washington Post column. Professor Virdi explains that the doubts raised over Fetterman are reflective of our history with eugenics and view that certain groups are “socially deficient.”

    “As far as eugenicists were concerned, science said that “moral” flaws were hereditary and threatened the health of the nation. This meant that the solution to social problems such as crime, promiscuity and poverty aimed at the institutionalization and sterilization of the “morally degenerate”. As [Sir Francis ] Galton envisioned, human improvement was only possible through consistent, scientific intervention brought about by eugenics: ‘What nature does blindly, slowly, and recklessly, man can do proactively, swiftly, and kindly.’”

    Professor Virdi ties such doubts over the fitness of disabled people to past efforts of sterilization and the view that “controlling human reproduction through better breeding was a must.” She warns the such “at its core, eugenics simply applied a scientific gloss to existing racial, class, and gender prejudices. Immigrants, people with disabilities, and racial and ethnic minorities were among those identified as socially ‘disabled.’”

    As I wrote in the earlier column, there is no reason why a senator cannot be fully effective despite a disability, including the use of such devices as readers.  The problem in Pennsylvania is that the Fetterman campaign has actively prevented efforts to determine if there are more serious cognitive difficulties for Fetterman in processing information.

    In the end, the Fetterman strategy worked in sheltering the candidate from further questioning or debates. The best way to dispel such questions would have been greater interaction with the candidate to show that this was limited, as Professor Virdi suggests, to mere “verbal stumbles and pauses.”  As it stands, voters will largely vote without such information and any doubts are the result of the concerted effort to leave these questions answered.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 20:00

  • Chinese Exports And Imports Unexpectedly Contract For The First Time Since May 2020
    Chinese Exports And Imports Unexpectedly Contract For The First Time Since May 2020

    As markets debate whether the Fed will follow other central banks with a (soft) pivot, the global economy is going from bad to worse: overnight, the latest Chinese customs data showed that China exports as well as imports unexpectedly contracted simultaneously for the first time since May 2020 as elevated inflation and rising interest rates hurt global demand.

    Chinese exports declined (-0.3% y/y) in October (vs exp +4.5%), the first drop since May 2020 on Covid outbreaks and weak external demand, following a +5.7% increase in September while the implied sequential export growth dropped to -3.8% m/m in October (vs. +0.5% in September).

    Imports fell (-0.7% y/y) following a +0.3% gain in the previous month, while sequentially imports fell 3.5% mom sa non-annualized in October (vs. -1.0% in September).  Import value declined sequentially on the lower prices of metal ores and weaker imports of tech-related products, such as computers and LCD panels. The trade surplus was well below consensus from weaker exports, though the level was slightly higher than September.

    The overall trade surplus slightly widened to a near +$85.15 billion (up from $84.74 billion in September, but below the forecast of $95.97 billion).

    According to Goldman, the export weakness broadened across destinations and products. Import of energy goods accelerated somewhat despite a weak import print. Other than weaker DM demand on tighter financial conditions and the ongoing European energy crisis, the contraction of exports partially came from port operation disruptions due to Covid outbreaks.

    Some more details on China’s trade data from Goldman:

    1. By major export destination, exports weakness broadened in October. The year-over-year growth of exports decelerated across most major trading partners. Among major DM countries, growth of exports to the European Union decelerated the most (-9.0% yoy in October vs. 5.6% in September). Growth of exports to United States decelerated to -12.6% yoy in October (vs. -11.6% in September). Among major EM economies, growth of exports to ASEAN decelerated to 20.3% yoy in October (vs. 29.5% in September), and the implied sequential growth turned negative.

    2. By major export category, export growth moderated across most products. The export growth of tech-related products dropped the most (cellphones and LCD panels, see Exhibit 3).

    Among tech-related products, exports of LCD panels declined 16.2% yoy in October (vs. -6.6% in September), and export growth of cellphones moderated to 7.0% yoy in October (vs. 23.2% in September). Among housing-related products, exports of home appliances fell 25.0% yoy in October (vs. -19.8% in September). Among Covid-related products, exports of computers declined 16.5% yoy in October (vs. -12.6% in September).

    3. Among major import categories, import growth of most energy goods remained solid in October on efforts to ensure energy security, and manufacturing related products rebounded.

    Among energy goods, import growth of crude oil picked up to 43.8% yoy in October (vs. +34.2% in September) with import volume up 14.1% yoy (vs. -2.0% yoy in September). Import growth of coal accelerated somewhat to 2.8% yoy in October (vs. +1.5% in September) with volume up 8.3% yoy (vs. 0.5% yoy in September). Among major metal ores, import values declined on lower prices. For instance, iron ore import value fell 26.8% yoy in October (vs. -38.8% in September) with import volume up 3.7% yoy (vs. +4.3% yoy in September). Among manufacturing related products, import growth of machine tools rebounded significantly in sequential terms (+44% mom sa non-annualized in October).

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 19:40

  • Top 10 House Races To Watch On Election Night
    Top 10 House Races To Watch On Election Night

    Authored by Dan Berger via The Epoch Times,

    The House of Representatives hangs in the balance on Election Day. The Democrats currently have a 221-212 lead in Congress, with two vacancies, but Republicans appeared poised to take the chamber this year.

    RealClearPolitics gauges 228 seats leaning, likely, or solidly Republican, 174 similarly poised to go Democratic, and 33 as toss-ups. Most of the toss-up seats currently belong to Democrats. If Republicans win the night, as generally predicted, the big question will be how big the “red wave” will be and the size of the GOP’s majority.

    Analysts differ on the key races. This list includes some seen as bellwethers, or areas where outcomes tend to mirror broader trends. The list also includes some races where veteran lawmakers are in a tight race to defend their seats.

    Here’s a list of 10 House races to watch on Election Night on Nov. 8.

    North Carolina State Sen. Wiley Nickel (D) speaks to a crowd after winning the Democratic primary for the 13th congressional district of North Carolina at an election night event May 17, 2022 in Raleigh, North Carolina. (Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

    North Carolina District 13

    Because it’s in the East and the polls close at 7:30 p.m., this race between Democratic State Sen. Wiley Nickel and young Trump-backed Republican newcomer Bo Hines will yield results early. And its demographics, split between North Carolina’s rural counties and Raleigh’s suburbs, make it useful in analyzing other races in similar districts.

    With rural areas across the country colored red and big cities colored blue, the battle nowadays is in the purple suburbs. During the Trump presidency, suburban voters drifted away from the Republicans. A question to be answered on Tuesday is whether Democrats, helped by issues like abortion, can keep suburbanites in their column or whether Republicans, aided by a bad economy they’ve tied to Biden administration policies, can draw them back.

    Nickel, a veteran Democratic Party politico, served as an advance man for Al Gore in the 1990s and for the White House during Barack Obama’s presidency. He ran for office unsuccessfully in his native California before moving to North Carolina and going to work as a criminal defense attorney.

    Hines, who at 25 would, if elected, become one of the youngest members of Congress, grew up in the Charlotte area. He played football for a year at North Carolina State before transferring to Yale and playing there too.

    Each candidate epitomizes what his party’s voters in North Carolina seek right now, Nickel as relatively moderate and Hines as a Trump-backed conservative.

    “It’s like two districts rolled into one,” Democratic strategist Morgan Jackson of Raleigh said of CD 13 to The Epoch Times. “It’s the closest, most swing race in North Carolina. It’s truly a jump ball.”

    Rep. Cindy Axne (D-Iowa) speaks during news conference discussing the “Shutdown to End All Shutdowns (SEAS) Act” in Washington on Jan. 29, 2019. (Zach Gibson/Getty Images)

    Iowa’s District 3

    This district stretches from Des Moines south and southwest toward Omaha, including Des Moines suburbs, fast-growing exurbs, and rural areas. Democratic incumbent Cindy Axne has won the seat twice without yet reaching 50 percent of the vote. Following redistricting, the area voted narrowly for Donald Trump over Joe Biden in 2020.

    It’s the second most likely tipping point after North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District, analyst Nathaniel Rakich said in a FiveThirtyEight podcast. Rakich said it’s a good seat to watch because it has two reasonably strong candidates, the incumbent Axne and Republican state Senator Zach Nunn. Campaign ads mostly feature national issues, like abortion and crime, rather than local ones.

    “It’s the epitome of an everyday-American, average-Joe Congressional district,” Rakich said on a podcast at his website. “Republicans will have to beat some tough Democratic incumbents to have a majority or at least a sizeable majority.”

    With the addition of Republican-trending rural counties, the district became easier for Republicans than in two previous races against Axne.

    Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) speaks at a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, on May 2, 2017. (Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images)

    New York’s 17th Congressional District

    This race features the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Sean Patrick Maloney, one of the most influential members of his party and not someone who would be expected to be in a close race in this Hudson Valley district.

    But the GOP is making a late surge in the blue state, led by gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin. His anti-crime message has resonated as New York City residents deal with a wave of sensational crimes in the streets and subways.

    Maloney is a ten-year incumbent in the neighboring 18th District but chose to run in the 17th after redistricting. He has seen his lead against Republican Michael Lawler shrink. The Cook Political Report and Real Clear Politics reclassified the race as a toss-up.

    The Democrats have had to spend more and campaign harder for what was supposed to have been a safe seat. The DCCC spent $605,000 on an ad for Maloney last month, and former President Bill Clinton came to campaign for him.

    Political science professor Shawn Donahue of the University at Buffalo told The Epoch Times this was the race he watched most closely in the state. “Maloney looks particularly vulnerable. The Republicans are throwing money” at a race in a district Joe Biden won by 10 points over Donald Trump in 2020.

    “If Maloney were to lose, he would be the biggest person to lose since Cantor.”

    Eric Cantor of Virginia’s 7th District, the House Majority Leader from 2011 to 2014, lost a primary to economics professor Dave Brat in 2014 and resigned first his leadership position and then his seat.

    “As head of the party’s campaign committee, you’d think you’d have your own race in the bag so you could concentrate on other cases around the country,” Donahue said of Maloney.

    Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) speaks at a press conference on July 20, 2021, in Washington, DC.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

    Ohio’s 9th Congressional District

    Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) is the longest-serving woman in House history. If she wins this election over Republican J.R. Majewski, she’ll pass the late Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) as the longest-serving woman in Congress.

    But this district in northwest Ohio, centered on Democratic stronghold Toledo, has, with redistricting, become more challenging for the party. It once stretched along the Lake Erie shoreline to include Democratic parts of the Cleveland area but has lost them while adding Republican-leaning rural areas west of Toledo. The DCCC has identified Kaptur’s seat as vulnerable.

    The Cook Political Report has it leaning Democratic. But Real Clear Politics, which calls it a toss-up, notes that in the 2020 presidential race, voters here favored Donald Trump by almost 3 points over Joe Biden. FiveThirtyEight gives Kaptur a 76 percent chance of winning. Kaptur, 76 and a close Biden ally, was first elected in 1982. Majewski, 42, is an Air Force veteran and nuclear power plant manager.

    John Gibbs a candidate for congress in Michigan’s 3rd Congressional district speaks at a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump near Washington, Mich., on April 2, 2022. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

    Michigan’s 3rd Congressional District

    Republican Rep. Peter Meijer lost his seat in a primary upset to John Gibbs. Gibbs had been a Trump appointee to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, although not confirmed, while Meijer, whose family owns a Michigan-based supercenter chain, was one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump in the final days of his administration.

    The upset raised the chances this seat might flip to the Democrats, represented by Grand Rapids attorney Hillary Scholten. Real Clear Politics rates this race, in a district Biden carried by 11 points, as a toss-up. Cook’s has it leaning Democratic, and FiveThirtyEight gives Scholten a 57 percent chance of victory.

    Gibbs was one of the Republican candidates supported in the primaries by Democrats who pegged them as extremists and thus easier to beat in November. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent $435,000 promoting Gibbs over Meijer.

    “We thought (Gibbs) was an easier candidate, and he has proven to be because he’s a nut and he’s too conservative for Western Michigan,” DCCC Chairman Sean Patrick Maloney told CNN’s Jake Tapper, defending the party’s tactics.

    Monica De La Cruz, (R-Texas) believes her progressive opponent’s radical views will not sit well with traditional Hispanic voters. (Photo courtesy of Monica De La Cruz)

    Texas’ 15th Congressional District

    This race in a South Texas district traditionally voting blue is seen as a stark clash of ideology between two Hispanic women, Democrat Michelle Vallejo and Republican Monica De La Cruz.

    The district has been represented by Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, a Democrat. But after redistricting, he left it open to run in the neighboring 34th district against Republican Rep. Mayra Flores. She made history in June by winning a special election to become the first Republican to represent the area in more than a hundred years.

    Vallejo, a Columbia grad supported by progressives like Elizabeth Warren, wants to make the district more “equitable,” supports abortion, “Medicare for all,” “green energy,” and wants to offer “rights and opportunities” to illegal immigrants.

    De La Cruz, raised by a single mother, put herself through the University of Texas. She is pro-life, favors faith and family, ties Democratic policies to soaring inflation, and supports resuming President Donald Trump’s tough border policies. She’s endorsed by Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. De La Cruz ran well against Gonzalez in 2020, losing by 6,588 votes.

    Hispanics have begun moving toward Republicans recently, upsetting Democratic dependence upon them as part of their base. FiveThirtyEight analyst Galen Druke said in a podcast he’d be watching this race in an 80 percent Hispanic district to see how this trend, with national implications, is evolving.

    A file image of House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Subcommittee ranking member Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.) (C) and Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 25, 2017. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Georgia’s 2nd Congressional District

    Sanford Bishop has held this seat in southwest Georgia for 30 years since it was drawn as a black majority district. He’s stood out as a moderate who can cross the party aisle and a Democrat who can appeal to white farmers and other rural voters.

    But redistricting has helped the Republicans here, and newcomer Chris West is still in the race. Republicans hope a red wave on Election Night will help the young lawyer and real estate developer upset the Congressional veteran Bishop, the longest-serving member of the Georgia delegation. Bishop’s long record and deep roots in the district could help him hang on to win.

    Real Clear Politics rates the district a toss-up. Two most recent polls of likely voters, one by Insider Advantage and the other by Trafalgar Group, show Bishop up by 3 and 4 points, respectively, both within the margin of error. West’s campaign website says it’s the only competitive race in the Deep South.

    The district includes Columbus and Macon, small towns, farmland, and military bases like Fort Benning. Bishop’s House committee positions in agriculture, military, and veteran affairs have positioned him to serve constituents in those areas.

    Charles Bullock, a University of Georgia political science professor, told The Epoch Times that Bishop had won reelection in the past when the district’s black population dropped as low as 39 percent. It stands after redistricting at 49 percent.

    Marci McCarthy, chairman of the DeKalb County Republican Party in the Atlanta metro area, said lst week that black voters in the state’s rural areas had not had a strong turnout in early voting up to that point.

    Lori Chavez-Deremer, former mayor of Happy Valley, Oregon, is the Republican nominee to represent Oregon’s 5th Congressional District. (Photo courtesy of Lori Chavez-Deremer)

    Oregon’s 5th Congressional District

    For a redrawn district stretching from Portland’s southern suburbs further south and inland, this race might serve as a referendum on the Portland metro area’s progressive politics.

    It’s now an open seat after a moderate Democrat incumbent, Kurt Schrader, lost the primary to progressive candidate Jamie McLeod-Skinner. While Schrader was endorsed by Joe Biden, the very progressive Elizabeth Warren endorsed McLeod-Skinner. The civil servant faces Lori Chavez-Deremer, a Republican and former mayor of the Portland suburb Happy Valley.

    RealClearPolitics rates the race a toss-up. The Cook Political Report classifies it as leaning Republican. Joe Biden won the district by 9 points in 2020.

    Redistricting eliminated coastal areas that favored Schrader. It hasn’t necessarily made the district easier for a Republican, one of Chavez-Deremer’s campaign leaders, Ben Roche, told The Epoch Times. But the political climate on crime, energy, and education may favor Republicans.

    Chavez-Deremer has campaigned as a moderate, someone who, as mayor, worked with both parties to fix civic problems. Roche said that Portland’s suburbs like Happy Valley have seen growing crime attributed to homeless drug addicts from Portland, a trend fed by the city’s progressive policies on homelessness and criminal justice. Portland was a center of BLM disorders in 2020 and of calls to defund the police.

    This undated photo provided by the Christy Smith For Congress campaign shows candidate Christy Smith. (Christy Smith For Congress via AP)

    California’s 27th District

    This district in Los Angeles County has become more difficult for the GOP through redistricting, losing the conservative Simi Valley. The 25th District has covered the area, and Republican Mike Garcia holds that seat. But the new 27th trends Democratic by almost 13 points.

    Garcia will be in his third race against the same opponent, Christy Smith, whom he defeated in 2020’s general election by only 333 votes.

    “It would be a stretch seat for Republicans normally,” the only seat the party holds in Los Angeles County, said FiveThirtyEight editor Maya Sweedler in a podcast where she picked it as a seat of crucial interest. “But if Garcia is running hot on election night, it will be notable for Republicans. I’m curious if Garcia can hang to this.”

    FiveThirtyEight calls Garcia slightly favored, with a 65 percent chance to win. Real Clear Politics says the race leans GOP. The Cook Political Report labels it a toss-up.

    Garcia is a former Navy fighter pilot who then worked for Raytheon. Smith, a former California Assemblywoman, has worked for the U.S. Department of Education.

    Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.), second from left, speaks during a press conference in Washington on Sept. 27, 2019. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District

    Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas, elected in 2018, faces Republican opponent Karoline Leavitt, who is just 25. She worked as an assistant press secretary in the Trump White House and later as director of communications for House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.)

    Trump did not endorse a candidate in the crowded GOP primary but later supported Leavitt with an enthusiastic shout-out on Truth Social.

    FiveThirtyEight terms Pappas as slightly favored to win, with a 65 percent chance of victory. Real Clear Politics, though, says it leans Republican, with it having gone for Trump over Biden by 1 point in 2020. The Cook Political Report calls it a toss-up.

    Pappas, co-chairs the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus. He has campaigned on health care and lowering the cost of prescription drugs and said in a debate that he wants to modernize trucking and shipping regulations to “unkink supply chains.”

    Leavitt told Fox News that she wanted to “really reach out to my generation of voters. . . . I live among them, my friends, my former college roommates, my former colleagues who are really being indoctrinated by the left’s agenda and their messaging. We desperately need strong, conservative, youthful voices on our side of the aisle that are standing up for our country.”

    Like many Republican and Democratic opponents around the country, the two have clashed on abortion, Biden’s economic policies, and the outcome of the 2020 election.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 19:20

  • The Funeral Business Is Booming (And Not Because Of COVID)
    The Funeral Business Is Booming (And Not Because Of COVID)

    Authored by Alex Berenson via ‘Unreported Truths’ Substack,

    How bad is the rise in mortality?

    So bad funeral companies are starting to worry.

    Today Service Corporation International, the largest for-profit funeral operator in North America, had its quarterly earnings call. SCI had another great quarter, you’ll be pleased to hear! So far in 2022 the company has made almost $500 million in profits – and its stock is up over 15% since last week’s earnings report.

    (Death is your best investment!)

    SCI’s management seems fairly open with investors. For many years, much of the company’s growth came from buying family-run funeral homes as their operators, umm, died out. The underlying funeral business is slow growth and very predictable.

    At least it used to be.

    As Thomas L. Ryan, Service Corporation’s chairman and chief executive, told investors Wednesday morning:

    If you go back in this industry and particularly with SCI, year-to-year you would see the numbers of deaths — probably in one year you may be down 1% or 2%, in the next year you’re up 1% or 2% which you could predict was pretty good accuracy over a year and over a big footprint like ours what was probably going to happen… 2020 comes along, Covid, game-changer, right. We’re having to do at one point of time 20 percent more funerals which is unheard of in a year versus, let’s say, a year or two before.

    So Service Corporation expected that once Covid passed, its business would go back to normal…

    What we would have expected is, why wouldn’t we go back towards, let’s say, a 2019 level, maybe you get a percent or so growth of 2019, I would expect that. So that would be a reasonable level that we think would stabilize. And that’s kind of what we anticipated…

    Only that’s not what has happened.

    What we’re telling you is, the third quarter of this year, we did 15% more calls than we did in the third quarter of 2019. That is not what anybody would have anticipated and that has just a very de minimis amount of Covid deaths [emphasis added] in it.

    Covid is gone. But people keep dying. Why?

    Unsurprisingly, Ryan did not mention mRNA vaccines anywhere. Why would he? Doing so would only make for headaches he and Service Corporation do not need.

    But, earlier in the call, he did point to “more cancer deaths” and more broadly a decline in overall health:

    We believe these excess services are more permanent in nature into a combination of aging demographics, higher risk, less healthy lifestyle developed during the pandemic.

    Ryan also suggested delayed medical care might be an issue.

    These explanations are… strained, at best. Aging demographics are hardly new, and the lockdowns that drove a “less healthy lifestyle” ended as early as mid-2020 in most red states and by early 2021 almost everywhere. Opioids and overdoses generally remain a horrendous crisis, but deaths appear to have peaked in early 2022 and fallen slightly since. And for all the discussion of delays in medical care, hospitals and doctors offices have functioned essentially normally for at least 18 months.

    In any case, the United States is hardly alone in seeing a large and so far unexplained spike in deaths in 2022.

    Countries from Germany to Australia to Taiwan are seeing similar trends.

    They all have something in common. No points for guessing what.

    In any case, Service Corporation is expecting business to stay good for years to come.

    “These trends are hard to reverse quickly,” Ryan said.

    “I hope three, four, five years from now will subside a bit. But I don’t think it’s any time soon.”

    *  *  *

    [ZH: It is not just funeral services companies. Market participants were somewhat stunned when Lincoln Financial announced results last week and shares collapsed over 30% after a shocking, and unexpected, $2.6 billion Q3 loss.

    “A Catastrophe (and Not the Natural Kind),” Wells Fargo Securities analysts said in a note to clients Wednesday night, following the after-market release of earnings by the Pennsylvania life-insurance and annuities company.

    What drove the big loss?

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

    So, we wonder, is that the post-vaxx-new-normal-world-order trade: Short Life Insurers, Long Funeral Service Providers?]

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 18:40

  • Top Dems Warn Party Seen As 'Extreme' And Driving Inflation
    Top Dems Warn Party Seen As ‘Extreme’ And Driving Inflation

    A center-left think tank backed by some of the most prominent names in Democratic politics, has warned that the Democratic party is viewed as ‘extreme,’ and unconcerned with top issues among voters.

    New polling from Third Way finds that “Despite a roster of GOP candidates who are extreme by any standard, voters see Democrats as just as extreme, as well as far less concerned about the issues that most worry them.“

    A few select quotes via Axios:

    • “Democrats are underwater on issues voters name as their highest priorities, including the economy, immigration, and crime.”
    • “While Democrats maintain a lead on handling certain issues like abortion and climate change, voters also rank these issues as lower priorities.“
    • “[V]oters question whether the party shares essential values like patriotism and the importance of hard work. … Only 43% of voters say Democrats value hard work, compared to 58% for Republicans.”
    • “[E]ven in the areas where Democrats are trusted more [including education], it is not clear that voters are sold on Democrats’ approach or ability to get things done.“
    • “Democrats are benefitting from a perception among voters that Republicans are extreme, but they cannot fully reap the gains of this view, as voters think Democrats are extreme as well.“

    In short, “If Democrats manage to hold on to the House and Senate, it will be in spite of the party brand, not because of it,” reads the Third Way memo regarding the survey.

    When asked which is the most important issue for Congress to prioritize right now, inflation and the economy win out by a wide margin, with 42% selecting it as their top choice. Immigration and the border follows at 11% and protecting abortion rights rounds out the list of issues gaining double digits with 10%. When given two choices, the same priorities rise to the top, with 59% saying inflation and the economy, 30% immigration and the border, and 17% protecting abortion rights.

    When asked which party would do a better job handling each issue, Republicans hold a decisive advantage (54%-36%) on inflation and the economy. A majority of voters (53%) also worry that continued Democratic control of Congress will make inflation worse, while less than a quarter (23%) say the same about Republican control. And 56% say Democrats are not focused enough on the economy, while only 36% say the same about their opponents. -Third Way

    As Axios notes, “Lifelong, respected Democrats are saying the quiet part out loud — that if Republicans have a huge night on Tuesday, as polls are blaring, Democrats must blame “much deeper” problems than simply the “historical trends” that beset the party in power.”

    Of course, this is exactly what James Carville, Bill Maher, and other influential Democrats have been saying for more than a year.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 18:20

  • Guy Fawkes Night Reminded Us That Bitcoin Is A Modern Vendetta Against The Establishment
    Guy Fawkes Night Reminded Us That Bitcoin Is A Modern Vendetta Against The Establishment

    Authored by Alex Lielacher via BitcoinMagazine.com,

    Bitcoin enables a digital Gunpowder Plot, giving anyone the ability to opt out of establishment control as Guy Fawkes once attempted…

    The Guy Fawkes mask – popularized by the movie “V For Vendetta” – has become a symbol of resistance against the State, worn by anti-government protesters of all factions. Bitcoiners have also picked up the mask, highlighting Bitcoin’s own struggle against the powers that be who control and benefit from the corrupt fiat currency monetary system.

    As we remembered ‘the fifth of November’ this past weekend, here’s a reminder that Bitcoin is more than number-go-up technology. At its core, it’s a monetary revolution that has the potential to change the world forever.

    WHY DOES BRITAIN CELEBRATE THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER?

    “Remember, remember, the fifth of November. Gunpowder, treason, and plot. I see no reason why gunpowder treason should ever be forgot.”

    Ask anyone in the U.K. about Guy Fawkes, and they’ll most likely quote you this poem. The fifth of November is a day when we remember one of the most notorious acts of rebellion against the state on European soil. On November 5, 1605, a group of Roman Catholic Church followers attempted to blow up parliament and kill King James I. The leader of the plot, Robert Catesby, together with his four co-conspirators — Thomas Winter, Thomas Percy, John Wright and the infamous Guy Fawkes — were angered by King James’ refusal to grant more religious toleration to Catholics.

    Through this plot, they hoped that the confusion, which would follow the murder of the king, his ministers and the members of Parliament, would provide an opportunity for the English Catholics to take over the country.

    However, their plan didn’t work.

    They were caught and later hanged for treason. Their action resulted in even more punishment against the Catholic Church. In January 1606, the U.K. Parliament established November 5 as a day of public thanksgiving.

    Today we celebrate November 5 as Guy Fawkes Night or Bonfire Night by lighting bonfires, setting off fireworks and carrying “Guys” through the streets wearing the ever-so-famous Guy Fawkes mask.

    THE CHANGING SYMBOLISM OF THE GUY FAWKES MASK

    The comic and, later, the movie, “V For Vendetta” turned the Guy Fawkes mask into a symbol with many different meanings.

    It’s no longer only memorabilia for the fifth of November, but a symbol against power, corruption and the state apparatus, as well as a means to protect your identity during a time of omnipresent surveillance.

    One of the most obvious symbols of the mask is the uprising against the powers that be.

    Throughout the film “V For Vendetta,” the character V’s identity is never revealed. There was no need to know who he was. The meaning in the graphic novel actually goes a step further and utilizes V’s facelessness to promote anarchy in the hopes of creating a new world order without leaders.

    This vision is one that many protestors or anarchists share as well. Whether they are hacktivist collectives like Anonymous, which is keen to unveil corruption and abuse of power, or protestors against state tyranny in Venezuela, India, Bahrain or Nigeria. Once they put on the mask, they become not only a protestor against power, but also a symbol for others to follow their lead. One person alone with the mask on their face is meaningless, but once a collective puts on the mask, it becomes the symbol against tyranny.

    Obviously, it’s a guard to protect one’s privacy as well, which is why you see so many Guy Fawkes masks at protests. And this blends into online culture as well.

    Satoshi Nakamoto is arguably one of the most famous anonymous activists of the past 20 years. In fact, one of the most portrayed versions of Nakamoto is as someone wearing a Guy Fawkes mask and hoodie. Like V in the movie, it was Nakamoto who launched a vendetta with the financial world.

    They didn’t seek vengeance by hacking the legacy financial system, but rather by creating a system in which everyone is able to transact freely. Once the project was big enough and able to live on its own, Nakamoto left, never to return, thereby nurturing the idea of a movement without any leaders — a leaderless resistance against the fiat monetary system.

    One of the main aspects of Bitcoin is its ability to separate money from the State. This separation is what unites Bitcoiners with protesters on the streets in Venezuela, hacktivists online and Guy Fawkes back in 1605. All of them had or have the goal of dethroning powerful institutions for a better and freer society.

    WHY ANON BITCOINERS WEAR THE GUY FAWKES MASK

    The Guy Fawkes mask is not only a symbol against tyranny but also a shield of protection to hide your identity. And anonymity is a big part of Bitcoin culture.

    Anon Bitcoiners want to protect themselves from the establishment, and the possible repercussions of having their identity linked with a technology that has the potential to topple existing monetary structures that benefit the few in power.

    While Bitcoin is slowly being integrated into the legacy financial system, adding to its legitimacy in the eyes of governments, regulators and big banking, the potential for a ban — as Bitcoin is a way to circumvent the coming central bank digital currency (CBDC) surveillance apparatus — remains a threat.

    History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.

    If you look at what happened with gold in the United States in 1933, where citizens were essentially robbed of their gold possessions, it would be foolish to think that similar plans don’t also exist for Bitcoin.

    Now, one could say as long as you have your private keys and secure your wallet in a multisig structure, not much can happen. That might be true for your bitcoin. But the fact that your identity is linked to a potentially soon-to-be-banned technology poses a risk.

    Anons are able to opt out of that dystopia by wearing a metaphorical Guy Fawkes mask and remaining anonymous. They cut off their real-life personas from their online personas, allowing them to continue to remain unlinked to Bitcoin by name.

    Bear in mind, in the future, CBDCs will exist and will likely emerge as the main tool of surveillance for the establishment. That is another reason why the mask became a symbol against the establishment, whether that be in the Bitcoin space or in activist groups like Anonymous.

    All of these different groups are willing to stand up against tyranny by “putting on the mask.”

    Symbols are only effective if enough people stand up for them. A single Guy Fawkes mask is worthless. However, if thousands of people wear them at protests or have them on in their profile pictures online, they’re able to put pressure on the establishment.

    Statements like “Bitcoin is a peaceful revolution” or “Fix the money, fix the world” have the goal of peaceful anarchy or revolution within them. They don’t want to kill or destroy innocent lives. That’s what the establishment is doing with its endless proxy wars. The goal is to inform citizens and give power back to the individual.

    IS BITCOIN THE FIAT MONETARY SYSTEM’S GUNPOWDER PLOT?

    The simple answer to this question is yes, absolutely.

    However, Bitcoiners don’t plan to blow up parliament. Although I am sure there are Bitcoiners living under truly tyrannical state rule who may be working on overthrowing their governments, Bitcoiners want to change the world peacefully, without bloodshed or physical harm to anyone.

    In “V For Vendetta” and the gunpowder plot of 1605, the goal was to topple the existing power structure at all costs. The characters were willing to sacrifice human lives to see the change they envisioned. This is very different from Bitcoin.

    Bitcoin doesn’t need a violent uprising. Bitcoin is the uprising. Bitcoin itself is a peaceful revolution. There is no need to physically occupy Wall Street or hold bank employees hostage in a robbery. All anyone has to do to take part in the Bitcoin revolution is to become part of the Bitcoin network by running a node and spreading awareness of the power that Bitcoin holds to change the world.

    Bitcoin is antifragile, hard to change and secure by design. These qualities are the gunpowder of Bitcoin. There were many attempts to change its fundamentals — the Blocksize Wars, for example — but none of the attackers were successful in their attempts.

    Bitcoin’s core of believers stuck to Nakamoto’s vision, one that is still alive today. Everyone on earth has the opportunity to take part in the Bitcoin network, benefitting from its ability to enable anyone to store, send and receive value without censorship or needing to ask for approval. That’s why the establishment fears it.

    The establishment doesn’t want you to own anything. Its members are the ones telling you what to eat, drink and spend your hard-earned money on. If you don’t obey, it will enforce new rules or shut you off by controlling your bank account. This is why CBDCs are so dangerous, as they can, in theory, give this establishment complete control over all your financial transactions.

    Just by owning and using bitcoin, you don’t have to follow these rules. You have the option to opt out.

    If there is one thing the gunpowder plot or “V For Vendetta” has taught us, it’s the power of collective minds. The establishment is afraid of more public support for Bitcoin because it knows that once we hit a certain threshold, there won’t be any going back.

    The establishment can’t turn Bitcoin off like a server.

    Without realizing it, it has built a monster. It was because of bad financial incentive structures in the past that Nakamoto created Bitcoin. The greed of the establishment was what led us here.

    One by one, from the bottom up, we’ve risen and continue to give people hope, courage and a vision for a better tomorrow.

    REMEMBER, REMEMBER, WHAT BITCOIN COULD REALLY ACCOMPLISH

    In the third act of “V For Vendetta,” the character Evey has overcome her fear of death. She knows there won’t be any going back, and the plotted revolution on the fifth of November is unavoidable, regardless of her own life.

    In the real world, the establishment has gotten to where it is today because it has been able to corrupt the system with fiat money. If it ever needed more, it was able to print it. Up until today, it was somewhat successful. But its time is running out.

    You can only print so much money before it starts inflating away. The result of that rigorous spending is visible now.

    Figureheads like Christine Lagarde of the European Central Bank or Andrew Bailey of the Bank of England don’t know how to stop inflation. They don’t see any other solution but to print more money and to throw more money at the problem. As we know, however, that doesn’t work.

    Bitcoin fixes this.

    Bitcoin’s limited supply, combined with its disinflationary monetary policy, enables holders to protect themselves from the long-term effects of inflation. But that’s not all.

    Bitcoin is also freedom money. It allows anyone in the world to participate in a new monetary system free of the chains of the fiat currency apparatus. No ruler, no regulator and no bank can lock you out of your bitcoin as long as you hold your own keys.

    That is the true power of Bitcoin. It provides us with financial sovereignty and the power to choose our own destiny.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 18:00

  • Twitter Daily User Growth Hits 'All-Time Highs' During First Week Under Musk
    Twitter Daily User Growth Hits ‘All-Time Highs’ During First Week Under Musk

    While Twitter may be shedding virtue-signaling advertisers (who totally weren’t looking for any reason to trim their ad budgets), daily user growth during the company’s first full week under Elon Musk has hit ‘all-time highs,’ according to an internal document seen by The Verge.

    According to an internal FAQ given to the company’s sales team for use in conversations with advertisers, Twitter’s monetizable daily user (mDAU) has jumped to more than 20%, while “Twitter’s largest market, the US, is growing even more quickly.”

    The company has added more than 15 million mDAUs, “crossing the quarter billion mark” since the end of Q2, when it stopped reporting financials as a public company.

    If those numbers are in line with how Twitter reported metrics when it was public, they imply that the service has yet to see a mass exodus under Musk’s ownership. He tweeted on Sunday that, since his deal to buy Twitter was announced, “user numbers have increased significantly around the world.” Twitter last reported 237.8 million mDAUs and a 16.6 percent yearly growth rate for the second quarter.

    While users may not be fleeing Twitter en masse, advertisers are. In another tweet on Friday, Musk said the company has seen “a massive drop in revenue” due to “activist groups pressuring advertisers.” Reports of a sharp spike in racist and hateful tweets after his takeover initially spooked advertisers, though Twitter said afterward that the influx was due to coordinated “trolling campaigns.” The FAQ for advertisers on Monday says that “levels of hate speech remain within historical norms, representing 0.25% to 0.45% of tweets per day among hundreds of millions.” -The Verge

    Advertisers are reportedly scratching their heads over who to voice complaints with since the resignation of top advertising exec, Sara Personette.

    The FAQ was distributed by 10-year company veteran Alex Josephson, VP of Twitter Next – an internal team tasked with helping brands create campaigns on the social network since 2019. According to Josephson’s post to the sales team, 25% of the organization was affected by last Friday’s mass layoffs, and that “the decision to scale back our presence in select geographies contributed significantly to the sales reductions.”

    Meanwhile, the FAQ addresses the upcoming revamp of the Twitter Blue subscription service which introduces paid verification – saying it will “not affect existing verified accounts at this time,” and that “large brand advertisers who are already verified will now have an additional ‘Official’ label beneath their name upon Twitter Blue’s relaunch this week.”

    Musk was reportedly tossing around a $19.99 monthly price point for blue checks, however after far-left author Stephen King threw a Twitter tantrum, Musk lowered the price to $8 per month – which he’s been tormenting 

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

     

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 11/07/2022 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest