Zero Hedge

Hezbollah's Media Spokesman Assassinated By Israel In Heart Of Beirut After Haifa Synagogue Attacked

Hezbollah's Media Spokesman Assassinated By Israel In Heart Of Beirut After Haifa Synagogue Attacked

Via The Cradle

The head of Hezbollah’s Media Relations Department, Mohammad Afif, was assassinated in a violent Israeli airstrike on a building in the heart of Beirut on Sunday. 

"Fate willed that Hajj Muhammad Afif was inside the building at the time of the attack [in the Ras al-Nabaa neighborhood]," said the Secretary-General of the Arab Socialist Baath Party, Ali Hijazi. He said Afif was holding a meeting in the Baath party headquarters at the time of the Israeli strike. "Afif did not fight with weapons and did not lead a military unit in Hezbollah. Rather, he led a media unit," Hijazi added. 

Mohammad Afif, via AP

A Lebanese security source also confirmed to Al Jazeera that Afif was assassinated in the Israeli attack on central Beirut’s Ras al-Nabaa. At least five were killed and seven injured. There was massive destruction at the site, and the toll is expected to rise.

Hezbollah MP Hussein al-Jishi said to Al Mayadeen that "the enemy’s targeting of a media spokesman who always carries his phone in his hand is further evidence of its inability, and this is neither courage nor heroism."

Hezbollah itself has yet to release a statement. Israel also heavily targeted Beirut's southern suburb and other areas of the country on Sunday.

Israel had tried to assassinate Afif on October 3, when it targeted the building of Hezbollah’s Media Relations office in the southern suburb of Beirut. On October 22, it targeted the site where Afif was giving a speech in the Ghobeiry area of the suburb.

Afif gave a speech for Martyrs Day last week, during which he affirmed to Israel that Hezbollah is prepared for a long war. 

In his speech on 22 October, Afif publicly announced Hezbollah’s responsibility for the drone attack which exploded in the bedroom window of Benjamin Netanyahu’s home in Caesarea.

"To the Israeli enemy, we say: you have only seen a little, and what happened in Haifa, Acre, and Safad is just the start ... To the leaders of the occupation: Iron for iron, blood for blood, and fire for fire," Afif said last month. 

On Saturday a synagogue in Haifa was destroyed when Hezbollah rockets rained down on the area...

Hezbollah continues to fiercely confront Israeli ground troops in southern Lebanon, while stepping up its rocket, drone, and missile attacks against Israel. 

Several Hezbollah rocket impacts resulted in heavy damage in the Haifa Bay area on November 16th. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 15:10

Trump Team Weighs Courts-Martial For Officers Who Oversaw Afghanistan Withdrawal

Trump Team Weighs Courts-Martial For Officers Who Oversaw Afghanistan Withdrawal

Donald Trump's transition team is making a list of senior military officers who oversaw the disastrous 2021 withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, and considering the possibility of court-martialing them for their failings, according to two sources cited by NBC News.  

“They’re taking it very seriously,” said a source who claims to have knowledge of the initiative. The most notorious incident of the chaotic withdrawal was the Aug. 26, 2021 suicide bombing at Abbey Gate, just outside Hamid Karzai International Airport in the Afghan capital, Kabul. Thirteen US service members and more than 170 Afghan civilians were killed. In the following days, a US airstrike intended to kill the leader of the Islamic State instead killed 10 innocents. The rapid collapse of the US-sponsored Afghanistan government allowed enormous quantities of US weapons to fall into the hands of the Taliban. 

These 13 US service members were killed by a suicide bomber at Hamid Karzai International Airport on Aug. 26 2021

Trump repeatedly pointed to the Afghanistan withdrawal debacle during his 2024 presidential campaign, calling the day of the suicide bombing "the most embarrassing day in the history of our country." Now, his transition team is exploring the creation of a commission to probe the decision-making that accompanied the withdrawal and to assess whether leaders could be charged and court-martialed. The team is even said to be considering whether officers who've left the military might be recalled to active duty to face military justice.

Potential charges include treason, a notion that seems far more rooted in casual use of the term than any reasoned legal analysis. Perhaps one might try to make the case that the forfeiture of a vast arsenal to the Taliban gave "aid and comfort" to enemies of the United States, but it seems highly doubtful such an argument would prevail in a court-martial. Alternatively, charges could theoretically be brought under provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice covering dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming an officer, or negligent homicide.  

Pete Segseth, the Fox news host whom Trump wants to appoint as Secretary of Defense, has leveled his own withering criticism at senior miltary officers. In his book "The War on Warriors," he wrote: 

“These generals lied. They mismanaged. They violated their oath. They failed. They disgraced our troops, and our nation. They got people killed, unnecessarily...And, to this moment, they keep their jobs. Worse, they continue to actively erode our military and its values — by capitulating to civilians with radical agendas. They are an embarrassment, with stars still on their shoulders.” 

According to NBC's sources, the transition team's Afghanistan accountability initiative is being led by Matt Flynn, who'd previously served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for counternarcotics and global threats. A North Carolina Army National Guard member, he has also held roles at the Department of the Interior, the White House, Department of State and Congress.

The Trump transition team's Afghanistan withdrawal accountability project is being led by former Pentagon official Matt Flynn, sources say (Photo: Steptoe) 

News of the potential prosecution of senior officers comes after earlier reports that the Trump transition team would establish a "warrior board" of retired senior military personnel which would be granted the power to review three- and four-star officers and recommend any removals of those deemed unfit for leadership. Such a board would likely target generals and admirals who've embraced woke ideology and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.  

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 14:35

Net-Zero Rollback: How Trump Might Achieve De-Regulation Goals

Net-Zero Rollback: How Trump Might Achieve De-Regulation Goals

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President-elect Donald Trump won the election on, among other things, pledges to roll back the regulations that were put in place under the Biden administration, particularly those intended to meet net-zero emissions goals in America’s energy industry.

President Donald Trump signs the last of three Executive Orders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, on Jan. 23, 2017. Ron Sachs - Pool/Getty Images

In many cases, however, that will be easier said than done, and may not be something Trump can achieve on day one, according to analysts.

According to the American Action Forum, the Biden administration has finalized 1,114 new regulations to date, adding $1.8 trillion in costs to American businesses and consumers and an estimated 346 million hours of paperwork. And depending on how the regulations were put in place, the incoming Trump administration will likely face challenges in unwinding them.

“It will be on a regulation-by-regulation basis,” Dan Kish, senior vice president of policy at the American Energy Alliance, told The Epoch Times. “There’s actually three categories: executive orders, action from Congress, and those things that have to be done through regulation.

“In other words, there’s a process that’s been set up for changing regulations,” he said. “But all of those things are available to [Trump] depending on what happens with the final Congressional outcome.”

For regulatory mandates that have gone through the formal process of being enacted as “final rules” by agencies, the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) stipulates that cancellation of those rules must go through the same process. This includes a notice and public comment period, as well as a 30-day delayed effective date and a process for judicial review if people can claim they would be adversely affected.

“You do need to undergo rule-making to change rule-making, but a lot of the Biden administration mandates weren’t issued through rule-making,” Matt Bowman, senior counsel and director of regulatory practice for Alliance Defending Freedom, which has litigated against Biden administration mandates, told The Epoch Times.

“We’ve won several cases against mandates that they didn’t bother to put through the rule-making process,” Bowman said. “Those can be taken down pretty quickly.”

Many of the regulations that were issued by direct orders from President Joe Biden will likely be rescinded in the same way.

“Executive orders will drive the overarching regulatory policy goals of the next administration,” Dan Goldbeck, director of regulatory policy at the center-right American Action Forum, told The Epoch Times. “But they will have limited direct impact on rules already on the books.”

The Role of Congress and the Courts

However, even for regulations that have gone through the rule-making process, there are several options available to the Trump administration to have them rescinded in short order. The first is have Congress overturn them using the Congressional Review Act (CRA) if Republicans are able to gain a workable majority in the House.

According to the CRA, agencies must submit final rules to Congress before they can take effect. If both houses of Congress disapprove of the rule, and the President concurs or Congress overrides a presidential veto, the rule cannot go into effect. There is, however, a time limit, effectively about 6 months, for Congress to take action.

Since its passage, the CRA has been used to overturn a total of 20 federal rules, 16 of which were Obama administration mandates overturned by a GOP-led Congress in 2017.

“It’s tough to say what the exact number will be this time around, but I expect Congressional Republicans to be quite active on this front,” Goldbeck said.

In order to avoid the fate of many Obama-era regulations that were blocked by Congress, the Biden administration rushed to finalize a number of rules well before the date when a new administration could take office.

“There’s plenty to suggest that the Biden administration made a point of finalizing some of its highest priority rules earlier this year to avoid potential scrutiny under the CRA,” Goldbeck said. “Nevertheless, the general expectation is that any rule finalized from the start of this past August onward will be vulnerable to repeal under the CRA.”

Even for regulations that are no longer subject to Congressional review, there are options to remove them fairly quickly, particularly those that have been challenged in court.

“Many of the rules, the most egregious rules the Biden administration imposed, are in court, and courts don’t need to wait for a rule-making process to strike down an illegal rule,” Bowman said. “Courts have already in some cases issued at least preliminary injunctions against those rules so that the Trump Department of Justice, if it prioritizes the President’s agenda, can acknowledge the illegality of some of these rules.”

Where lower courts have ruled in favor of the Biden administration, the DOJ can appeal those cases to the Supreme Court in hopes of getting a different verdict. And for cases that are awaiting decisions, federal agencies can delay enforcement of the rules until a verdict is reached.

‘Personnel Is Policy’

In Washington, it is often said that “personnel is policy.” Accordingly, the people that Trump puts in place within the agencies will also go a long way in determining how regulations are implemented, if at all.

“What he can do through executive orders is give instructions to the federal agencies to stand up or stand down on any number of initiatives,” Jonathan Berry, managing partner at Boyden Gray and former chief counsel to President-elect Trump’s first-term transition team, told The Epoch Times.

In addition, outside of existing agencies, Trump announced on Tuesday that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy will run a new department intended to oversee the reduction of regulations throughout the federal government and improve government efficiency.

How well Trump’s agencies coordinate among each another, including cooperation between regulators and the DOJ, will be a critical factor in determining whether or not Trump’s deregulatory agenda succeeds, according to Bowman.

“I think the President can achieve his goals if all of his appointees are on the same page,” Bowman said.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 14:00

Musk, Ramaswamy Seek Volunteers To Join New Department Of Government Efficiency

Musk, Ramaswamy Seek Volunteers To Join New Department Of Government Efficiency

Authored by T.J. Muscaro via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Tesla CEO Elon Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy announced on Nov. 14 that they are looking for volunteers to join the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), calling for the top 1 percent of small-government revolutionaries.

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk speaks at a rally for former President Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden in New York City on Oct. 27, 2024. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images

“We are very grateful to the thousands of Americans who have expressed interest in helping us at DOGE,” they announced on social media platform X. “We don’t need more part-time idea generators.

“We need super high-IQ small-government revolutionaries willing to work 80+ hours per week on unglamorous cost-cutting. If that’s you, DM this account with your CV. Elon & Vivek will review the top 1% of applicants.”

Musk further confirmed that DOGE work would be unpaid, stating on X, “Indeed, this will be tedious work, make lots of enemies, and compensation is zero. What a great deal!”

In response to that comment, Ramaswamy stated, “That stands in contrast to the many government bureaucrats who: (a) do little or no work, (b) tell people only what they want to hear, & (c) make more money than the value they create.”

DOGE’s objective is in its name: to make government more efficient, with significant spending cuts being among the top expectations.

“I look forward to Elon and Vivek making changes to the Federal Bureaucracy with an eye on efficiency and, at the same time, making life better for all Americans,” Trump said in a Nov. 12 statement announcing the new department and its leaders. “Importantly, we will drive out the massive waste and fraud which exists throughout our annual $6.5 Trillion Dollars of Government Spending. They will work together to liberate our Economy, and make the U.S. Government accountable to ‘WE THE PEOPLE.’”

Musk stated on X that all DOGE actions will be posted online to provide “maximum transparency.” This will include the creation of a leaderboard showcasing the “most insanely dumb spending of your tax dollars,” which he said would be “extremely tragic and extremely entertaining.”

He also urged the public to be vocal about anything that is being cut that they think might be important.

Trump said the initiative could be “‘The Manhattan Project’ of our time.”

The request for volunteers followed Musk’s announcement in September that he was willing to forgo compensation.

“I look forward to serving America if the opportunity arises,” Musk said in a post on X. “No pay, no title, no recognition is needed.”

DOGE will work with the Office of Management and Budget and is set to complete its work no later than July 4, 2026, America’s 250th anniversary.

“Either we get government efficient or America goes bankrupt. That’s what it comes down to. Wish I were wrong, but it’s true,” Musk wrote on X, responding to Trump’s official announcement on Nov. 12.

Caden Pearson contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 12:50

Famed Iowa Pollster Ann Selzer Retires After Bombshell Miss 

Famed Iowa Pollster Ann Selzer Retires After Bombshell Miss 

A once-respected poll showed Vice President Harris leading by three percentage points in Iowa just days before the presidential election, which ultimately resulted in Donald Trump ahead by thirteen points—a massive margin of error of sixteen percentage points. 

Following this public opinion polling blunder, pollster J. Ann Selzer stated in a guest column in the Des Moines Register on Sunday that her days advising the paper's famed Iowa Poll are over as she will be "transitioning to other ventures and opportunities." 

Selzer was once considered the "gold standard" of polling, but after Trump swept the state by a 13-point margin, winning the actual vote 56-43%, she later acknowledged her poll was a "big miss" and suggested that it might have "actually energized [d] and activated [d] Republican voters who thought they would likely coast to victory," according to CNN.

"Over a year ago I advised the Register I would not renew when my 2024 contract expired with the latest election poll as I transition to other ventures and opportunities," Selzer wrote in the Des Moines Register, emphasizing how her decision to retire was well in play before her disastrous polling results failed to capture a Trump win accurately.

She continued, "Polling is a science of estimation, and science has a way of periodically humbling the scientist. So, I'm humbled, yet always willing to learn from unexpected findings." 

Well, perhaps science can become biased when some pollsters suffer from 'Trump derangement syndrome.' 

Separately, Kristin Roberts, chief content officer of Gannett Media, which owns the Des Moines Register, told CNN that the Iowa Poll will "evolve as we find new ways to accurately capture public sentiment and the pulse of Iowans on state and national issues."

"Our mission is to provide trusted news and content to our readers and the public," Roberts said, adding, "We did not deliver on that promise when we shared results of the last Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, which did not accurately capture the outcome of the presidential election."

X user Torsten Prochnow had a good take on Selzer's retirement...

Ann Selzer's retirement marks the end of what was once considered the "gold standard" of polling, though her final performance suggests that standard had long since tarnished. Her last Iowa poll—Harris+3—was a stunning 16 points off the actual result of Trump+13. Such a massive error doesn't just undermine her credibility; it reflects a deeper problem with polling in general, especially those aligned with the leftist media narrative.

Pollsters today, with few exceptions, seem less interested in accurately gauging public opinion and more focused on shaping it. Many have become extensions of the legacy media, crafting polls designed to serve as self-fulfilling prophecies for leftist victories. These tactics, however, are crumbling under the weight of their own bias. Americans have grown wise to the manipulation, and the results of 2024 prove it: reality shattered the illusions pollsters tried to sell.

Selzer's exit feels symbolic of a larger trend—trust in mainstream polling has hit rock bottom. As Trump secures overwhelming victories like his blowout win in Iowa, it's clear that the era of using skewed polls to influence elections is over. The days of false narratives propped up by questionable polling are gone, replaced by an electorate that refuses to be gaslit.

Here's some of our reporting on pollsters oversampling and attempting to shape outcomes for a potential Harris victory in the months before the election...

Meanwhile, the odds favored Trump at the betting platform Polymarket, as financial markets are generally more efficient. Pollsters (and MSM) suffering from TDS doomed themselves in the past election cycle, and their credibility has completely collapsed. As a result, Polymarket and other betting platforms are poised to dominate in upcoming elections.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 12:15

Trump Faces An Economic Catch-22 His First Day In Office... What Can He Do About It?

Trump Faces An Economic Catch-22 His First Day In Office... What Can He Do About It?

Authored by Brandon Smith

For the past several months I've been discussing the high probability of Donald Trump's return to the White House. Specifically, I have warned that the Biden/Harris Administration along with the Democrats have been using data manipulation to hide the growing threat of a stagflationary collapse within the U.S. within the next couple of years.

In my article Smoke and Mirrors: What Happens After Biden’s Economic Manipulations Disappear? published in September, I outlined the specific tricks Biden's team has been using to obscure the decline in the labor market, hide the true inflation problem, marginalize the exploding national debt issue and manipulate the CPI while artificially propping up GDP with government spending. In that article I noted:

If someone was to ask me what I predict, I would have to say Trump will be president again. From all the evidence I’ve seen the Harris campaign is an astroturf movement with a limited voter base. She’s obviously not very bright and I don’t think the theatrical “joy” strategy is convincing very many people of her competency. Her economic policies (including price controls) are full bore communist and would be devastating to any form of U.S. recovery. Her fiscal plan will be even worse than Bidenomics has been...

I suspect that if Trump enters office once again there will be a multitude of changes to our economic data and they will happen quickly. Some of the rigging is already being exposed, just not on a level where the majority of the populace is aware of it...

Now that the election outcome has been decided and Trump is the clear winner by a landslide in the electoral college and the popular vote, we should keep in mind that the real fight for the future of America starts in 2025. We should also consider the fact that the fate of the conservative ideal (and perhaps the ideals of all western civilization) are now inexorably tied to the success or failure of the Trump Administration.

Meaning, when Trump enter office again the establishment will seek to blame every negative event not just on Trump, but on ALL conservative and liberty minded principles. This is a problem because Trump is about to inherit perhaps the worst economic time bomb in American history.

I call it a Catch-22 trap and I predicted this dangerous outcome back in 2021. Here's how it works:

Because of dollar overprinting and government overspending the U.S. is now in a stagflationary death spiral. It took decades to produce this financial singularity, but it is finally upon U.S. and it will be very difficult to reverse.

When the government and the Federal Reserve were finally forced to acknowledge the stagflation crisis in 2022, the Fed had to be seen as at least trying to stop the bleeding. So, they launched interest rate hikes. The problem is, the U.S. is also suffering from exponential national debt and each rate hike greatly increases the amount of interest the nation has to pay per year. For now, the U.S. pays around $1 trillion in gross interest every three months. This means our national debt will skyrocket while rates are high.

But the Fed has entered a process of rate cuts, you say? Inflation is defeated, you say?

The whole calamity has been conveniently solved by Joe Biden and friends right before Trump takes over, you say?

No.

Inflation is still a problem (concealed by statistics)

The problem is that the inflation threat has not been solved, it has been hidden. CPI is not a measure of cumulative inflation, it is a measure of monthly inflation diluted by tens of thousands of goods and services, most of them not necessities. For the past couple years Biden has been dumping U.S. strategic oil reserves on the market in order to bring energy prices down and artificially reduce CPI, but this has not lowered cumulative inflation.

As the Fed cuts rates through 2025, the inflation panic will return.

And if the Fed keeps rates high to counter inflation, the national debt climbs to disastrous levels.

If they cut rates, then inflation returns and price increases will continue to spiral.

Damned if we do and damned if we don't, and guess who gets the blame? That's right, Trump and his cabinet.

And for those who argue that Americans won't blame Trump because they'll know that the decline was caused by Biden, I would note that public patience shrinks as quickly as their bank accounts. They will blame whoever is in power now, when the bomb goes off, regardless of who lit the fuse.

The Democrats already tried to blame Trump for the majority of the stagflation crisis and the covid crisis (even though it was Democrat states that attempted to keep lockdowns in place permanently). You know they'll keep the propaganda pumping constantly for the next four years.

But what can the Trump Administration do to defuse the situation? I could write an entire book on this but here are the first few actions I would take if I were in his shoes:

#1 - Expose Biden’s data manipulation

The first thing Trump needs to do is set up an economic advisory board (Ron Paul would be a great candidate to lead such a project) and one of their primary tasks should be to expose how the Biden Admin has been hiding the real economic data from the nation at large.

The temptation will be to keep this data under wraps for fear that it will destroy the country should everyone know the facts. I think the country has voted in great numbers for an end to the status quo and that they want transparency. We can handle the truth.

If Trump doesn't educate the public on how the Democrats and the establishment have been rigging the numbers, then the public will ultimately blame conservatives for any eventual crash. Also, when the public knows the truth, they will also understand why dramatic changes to policy need to be made.

#2 - Offset tariffs with incentives for domestic industry and manufacturing

A major pillar of Trump's economic plan includes tariffs on foreign goods as a way to pay off the national debt, reduce taxes and fund the government. Leftists claim tariffs are actually a “tax on the American consumer” and will end in disaster as prices rise. They're ignoring the fundamental point.

Tariffs cause an increase in prices on foreign-made goods, not American made products. We simply need to manufacture more in the U.S. Why does the U.S. need to remain stuck as a consumer country only? Why can't we also produce?

First, tariffs are not just a tax, they are leverage. Europe is already talking about buying more commodities and goods from the U.S. so they can avoid high tariffs. China is likely to do the same. The U.S. is the biggest consumer market in the world with 30% of global share. No other nation comes close. Producer nations would face economic disaster without access to U.S. customers.

That said, it's not enough. There needs to be a backstop of domestic production and I think this could also help reduce price increases. How? If the U.S. focuses on what I call the “quality economy” then prices will be higher for a time, but in the long run inflation will drop significantly. The key is that we produce goods with a high quality standard – products that last for many years and have a significant warranty attached.

If our goods are better than foreign products and they last longer, then people will buy less stuff over time. This means reduced spending, more savings, lower demand and ultimately lower prices.

There's a number of ways Trump could subsidize this domestic manufacturing boom while also greatly increasing American wages and the standard of living. Biden pretended he was going to do this with his so-called Inflation Reduction Act and his green energy programs.

Trump could do it for real.

#3 - Issue government debt backed by gold or silver (and precious metals savings accounts)

Currently, the U.S. is facing rising costs on debt with declining foreign interest in “investing” in federal IOUs. In order to stop the death plunge of national debt and the explosion of debt service payments, radical measures need to be taken.

The inflation and debt issues are not going to solve themselves. The Federal Reserve does not have the tools to fix the situation even if they wanted to. However, Trump does have the power to issue special debt backed by the gold and silver reserves of the U.S. government. This allows him to bypass the Fed.

A maturity of around 5 years or more would be ideal to fund his short-term initiatives. He could set the payoff at maturity according to the true market price of gold and silver. (First, a federal investigation into gold and silver price manipulation by major banks would need to be pursued concluded.) At maturity, they’d be redeemable in dollars or physical gold or silver. That’s always been the #1 method of instilling trust in assets.

A similar idea would be to create a savings account backed by U.S. gold and silver reserves. Make a term deposit of currency and, upon maturity, the account can be exchanged for physical gold and silver metals or dollars. Or a debit card, or even cryptocurrency could be issued for those savings.

I believe this could solve the national debt issue by reviving foreign enthusiasm for federal government debt. Furthermore, this would alleviate the inflation problem by offering all Americans easy access to inflation-resistant gold and silver to protect their savings from inflation (and making a little extra money on the side). The more people who participate, the higher the value of metals will go.

Americans can and should buy physical precious metals, but let’s be honest, gold coins and silver bars don't spend easily in everyday transactions. We need an intermediary system that offers people liquidity. Shifting directly back to a gold standard would cause significant chaos in U.S. and global financial systems.

Let’s face it – we can't go cold turkey on the Federal Reserve note. We need to wean the nation off unbacked, intrinsically-worthless currency. Opening up access to our nation’s gold reserves is a starting point.

I'm also sure there's plenty of Keynesians out there that will claim that giving citizens access to gold and silver is impossible and it will destroy the economy. I tell you it’s Keynesian thinking that got us here in the first place.

What I'm proposing here is a middle ground option that could lead to a commodity backed currency system in the future. We must deal with our immediate debt crisis and inflation crisis, but it's not impossible.

#4 - A moratorium on debt ceiling increases

The gold and silver savings account program and tariffs would allow the federal government to continue funding itself while also cutting taxes and putting a stop to deficit spending by cutting out waste.

Every time there's a debate over the debt ceiling and conservatives call for a stop to the madness, Democrats (and neocons) accuse them of putting the country in peril. They hold the country hostage with tales of collapse until fiscal conservatives inevitably give in and the debt continues to rise.

No more.

We cannot keep consuming debt poison and expect our national health to improve.

When Elon Musk took on the ownership of Twitter he fired over 80% of the existing workforce. Leftists said the website would implode within months. They were wrong (again) and the site now functions better than ever despite far higher user traffic. The federal government is a lot like the old Twitter – It's a bloated and obese bureaucracy loaded with self-serving dead weight that needs to be torched before it causes a systemic heart attack.

This is the only way things will get better, not just for us, but for our children and their children.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 11:40

Who Really Profits From The Ukraine War?

Who Really Profits From The Ukraine War?

Authored by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog,

Few people understand what the war in Ukraine means for big business - namely, opportunity. It’s not just the weapons and reconstruction contracts. Ukraine’s vast agricultural lands - among the most fertile in the world - are up for grabs, and American companies like BlackRock are at the front of the line. RFK Jr. Deftly and clearly explains.

JP Morgan and BlackRock — From Financiers of Destruction to Half-Trillion Dollar ‘Heroes’ of Reconstruction – The Hypocrisy of Reconstruction of Ukraine by the Same Corporations that Profited from the War

JP Morgan and BlackRock, along with consultancy McKinsey & Company, are collaborating with the Ukrainian government to establish a reconstruction fund. The objective of this fund is to attract significant investments for the country’s reconstruction, which could cost between $400 billion and $1 trillion, depending on estimates. This fund, known as the Fund for the Development of Ukraine, will use a “blended finance” approach to mobilize both public and private capital, targeting priority sectors such as infrastructure, climate and agriculture.

BlackRock and JP Morgan offered their services pro bono to manage this fund, leveraging their expertise in financial markets and debt management. The intention is that this fund can begin to operate fully once the war ends, although planning is already underway and has been discussed at recent international conferences.

The recent partnership between JP Morgan, BlackRock and McKinsey & Company to rebuild Ukraine highlights the bitter irony of the current geopolitical situation. In a deal that aims to raise hundreds of billions of dollars for the reconstruction of war-torn Ukraine, these American financial giants now position themselves as the economic saviors of a country whose destruction, in part, was facilitated by policies and actions in financial markets that they themselves dominated and shaped.

The United States, through its foreign policies and interventions, has a long history of fomenting instability in various regions of the world. In the case of Ukraine, the situation is no different. From the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis, American interests were clear: to weaken Russia and expand the Western sphere of influence. The irony becomes even more evident when we consider that many of the same financial institutions now being called upon to rebuild Ukraine are those that have profited immensely from armed conflicts and the destabilization of global markets.

JP Morgan and BlackRock are entities deeply rooted in the global financial system, and both have a history of financing military industries and governments that perpetuate conflict. JP Morgan, for example, has a long history of involvement in financing wars and authoritarian regimes around the world. BlackRock, in turn, as the largest asset manager in the world, has stakes in practically all major defense companies, which profit directly from the manufacture of weapons used in conflicts such as Ukraine.

This dichotomy is alarming: the same institutions that financed destruction are now celebrated as leaders of reconstruction. The “fund of reconstruction” proposed for Ukraine is not just a humanitarian effort; it is also a strategic maneuver to ensure that Western capital has control over the country’s future assets and economic infrastructure. The reconstruction of Ukraine, costing up to a trillion dollars, presents a lucrative opportunity for these companies, which are now seen as saviors.

Furthermore, McKinsey & Company’s presence on the project adds an additional layer of criticism, as the consulting firm has frequently been accused of unethical practices and collusion with corrupt regimes. McKinsey’s lack of transparency and controversial practices call into question the integrity of the reconstruction process.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 09:20

Climate Summits "No Longer Fit For Purpose", Experts Say

Climate Summits "No Longer Fit For Purpose", Experts Say

It looks like experts are starting to realize that the litany of global 'climate summits', where participants fly in on private jets to wax poetic about the virtues of attempting to change thousand-year cooling and warming cycles on Earth, could need some reform.

Leading climate experts, including Ban Ki-moon, Mary Robinson, Christiana Figueres, and Johan Rockström, are calling for significant changes to UN climate summits, according to a new report from The Guardian.

They argue future conferences should only be hosted by nations demonstrating strong climate action and advocate for stricter controls on fossil fuel lobbyists. Over 1,700 industry lobbyists attended Cop29, raising concerns about undue influence.  

The group has urged the UN to streamline the annual summits, amplify the voices of developing countries, and increase meeting frequency to better address the climate crisis.

“It is now clear that the Cop is no longer fit for purpose. We need a shift from negotiation to implementation,” they wrote. 

“We need strict eligibility criteria to exclude countries who do not support the phase-out/transition away from fossil energy. Host countries must demonstrate their high level of ambition to uphold the goals of the Paris agreement,” they said. 

Cop29, held in Baku, Azerbaijan, is nearing its halfway point amid controversy. Azerbaijan, a major fossil fuel producer with oil and gas comprising half its exports, follows last year’s host, the UAE—a petrostate led by Sultan Al Jaber, who retained his role as head of Adnoc during the conference.

At Cop29 in Baku, controversy surrounds the presence of 1,773 fossil fuel lobbyists, more than any nation except Azerbaijan, Brazil, and Turkey, and far exceeding the 1,033 delegates from the 10 most climate-vulnerable nations.

The Guardian wrote that former U.S. Vice President Al Gore criticized the fossil fuel industry's influence and called for reforms in choosing host countries. Talks center on securing $1 trillion annually by 2030 to help poorer nations address climate challenges, but progress is slow, with disagreements over contributions from developed nations and emerging economies like China.

Campaigners demand polluters pay, while a report suggests innovative funding options, including levies on cryptocurrencies, plastics, and air travel, or a 2% wealth tax, to bridge finance gaps. Negotiations will continue into next week.

Recall, just days ago we wrote about a how a senior COP29 official in Azerbaijan reportedly used his role as heading up the fight on climate change...to secure meetings with potential investors in the country’s oil and gas sectors.

Energy production drives 60% of Azerbaijan's economy. Elnur Soltanov, Azerbaijan’s deputy energy minister and COP29 chief, was covertly recorded discussing investment opportunities in the state-owned SOCAR, according to PJ Media.

"SOCAR Trading is trading oil and gas all over the world, including in Asia. To me, these are the possibilities to explore. But in any case this is something that you need to be talking to SOCAR, and I would be happy to create a contact between yourself and them," he was caught on tape saying. 

He added: "We have a lot of gas fields that are to be developed."

The PJ Media report says that SOCAR, Azerbaijan’s state oil company, reportedly responded to a fake investment group, indicating interest in meeting, according to Global Witness.

In the meeting, COP29 head and Azerbaijan's Deputy Energy Minister Elnur Soltanov discussed the event’s goals, stating that COP aims to “solve the climate crisis” by “transitioning away from hydrocarbons.”

Still, he expressed openness to oil and gas investments, pointing to Azerbaijan’s gas expansion plans and new pipeline infrastructure. This marks the second year a petro-state has used its COP presidency to promote fossil fuel interests, raising questions for the UN on oversight.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 08:45

Visualizing How Trump Realigned The Political Landscape

Visualizing How Trump Realigned The Political Landscape

Authored by Joseph Lord and Terri Wu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election was the result of demographic shifts that benefited Republicans.

Exit polling by Edison showed that Americans were more similar in their voting patterns this cycle than they were divided—the expected wide gaps based on gender, education, age, and race between Republicans and Democrats failed to materialize.

Trump ultimately was able to narrow these gaps vastly compared to 2020, concentrating on economic messaging that was compelling to a broad cross section of American political society.

Currently, the president-elect is projected to have carried all seven of the core swing states, bringing him up to a total of 312 electoral votes to Vice President Kamala Harris’s 226.

These charts show the shifts that gave Trump a second, nonconsecutive term in the White House.

Gender

This campaign season was unusually gendered in each campaign’s strategy.

Harris sought to target female voters, using the issue of abortion as a rallying point. Trump focused more on male voters, particularly young men, and appeared on podcasts popular with the demographic.

Thus, observers expected a substantial gender divergence that, ultimately, didn’t materialize.

In reality, Trump outperformed among both men and women, winning white men, white women, and Hispanic men outright and increasing

Education

Democrats have gained ground among wealthy, white, college-educated voters in recent years, and those trends continued in 2024.

This cycle, Harris gained among white college-educated voters, winning 17.2 percent of total votes cast for the presidential election from the group. President Joe Biden received 16.3 percent of his votes from the group in 2020, a 0.8 point shift. That’s unsurprising, as Harris targeted these voters.

Trump has also made gains for the GOP among non-college educated voters across racial groups.

Technically, Trump also lost a point of support from white non-college educated voters compared to 2020, though that’s within the exit poll’s margin of error.

But where he lost some among white voters, he gained among minority voters, including both those with and without college degrees.

Age

Traditionally, young people tend toward Democrats and older people veer more Republican.

That standard wisdom, however, was flipped on its head in this election: Harris underperformed with young voters, meaning those aged 18 to 29.

While Trump managed to win 18- to 24-year-old voters outright, 25- to 29-year-olds slightly favored Harris, bringing Trump’s total with the group to 43 percent—an increase of 7 percent compared to 2020.

At the same time, Harris made gains with older voters, winning voters aged 65 and older outright. The oldest voters reduced their support for Trump by around 3 percent, with 45 percent supporting the president-elect this cycle.

Race

Likewise, the Democratic coalition has historically relied on minority voters as a counterbalance to Republican-leaning white voters.

In this election, Trump again won among white voters outright, which was crucial to his sweeping victory, as the group made up nearly 71 percent of the electorate. White voters backing Trump accounted for 40.5 percent of the electorate versus Harris’s 29.1 percent.

However, Trump also made crucial inroads with other racial groups.

His vote share among blacks nudged up 1 percent in 2024 versus 2020, driven largely by shifts among black men.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 08:10

G7 Vows To Keep Imposing 'Severe Costs' On Russia As War Reaches 1,000 Days

G7 Vows To Keep Imposing 'Severe Costs' On Russia As War Reaches 1,000 Days

Leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) have issued a Saturday statement vowing to support Ukraine as long as it takes to defeat Russia, vowing to impose severe costs on Moscow, in line with prior Washington statements vowing to 'weaken' Russia.

This comes amid growing Western behind the scenes action to engage Putin on the diplomatic front, in response to President-elect Donald Trump preparing to enter the White House, where a top priority is to negotiate a swift end to the war in Ukraine. This coming Tuesday will mark 1,000 days since Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022.

"Russia remains the sole obstacle to just and lasting peace," the new joint statement says. It pledges to support more measures "in support of Kyiv as the thousandth day of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine approaches."

The group major industrial countries consists of the US, France, Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the UK. Currently Italy holds to the rotating presidency.

"The G7 confirms its commitment to imposing severe costs on Russia through sanctions, export controls and other effective measures. We stand united with Ukraine," the statement added.

The European Union is a ‘non-enumerated’ member of the G7. The European Commission’s chief Ursula von der Leyen issued a simultaneous statement on X saying the "G7 reiterates its unflinching support to Ukraine."

"G7 partners stand with the brave Ukrainian nation," von der Leyen concluded, at a moment there is widespread recognition that Russia is steadily advancing in the east, and will soon solidify control over the whole of the Donbass.

On the nuclear front, the Pentagon has issued a more measured and somewhat conciliatory statement in a report to Congress:

"The United States will abide by the central limits of the New START Treaty for the duration of the Treaty as long as it assesses that Russia continues to do so," the Pentagon said in the report on the nuclear weapons employment strategy of the United States.

The US is also committed to future arms control with its nuclear-armed competitors, but any future accords will "need to account for US deterrence requirements and other strategic threats globally," the report said.

Since Trump's election the ratcheting nuclear rhetoric and warnings from the Russian side appear to have cooled. A key rationale of Trump's team in making the case for a necessary and quick winding down of the war is that the West must avoid nuclear confrontation or a WW3 scenario with Russia at all costs.

War-weary populations across Europe and the West are also in favor of peace, all recent polling shows, and Trump has been given a clear mandate by US voters to seek a diplomatic end to the war.

President Zelensky has also admitted this past week that the war will likely end sooner under Trump. He is pressing for a "just peace" - but is unlikely to assent to anything without firm security guarantees from NATO countries. Still, Zelensky is warning allies not to appease Putin by hasty engagement on the diplomatic front. "What is needed are concrete, strong actions that will force him to peace, not persuasion and attempts at appeasement, which he sees as a sign of weakness and uses to his advantage," a statement from Zelensky's office said Friday.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 07:35

Beyond Victory And Defeat: A Vision For National Unity

Beyond Victory And Defeat: A Vision For National Unity

Authored by Allen Zeng via The Epoch Times,

The election is finally over, marking a stunning victory for former President Trump, who not only won all swing states but also, for the first time in 20 years, secured the popular vote. This required changing the opinions of 7 percent of all voters—a whopping 10 million people! With the Senate and the House on his side, Trump now has a free hand to implement his policies.

However, the nation remains deeply divided, with no signs of healing. Media platforms like YouTube, cable TV, and TikTok are filled with attacks and counter-attacks. While Republicans have indeed won the majority, they are unable to reach out to the other 48 percent of voters who chose differently. The election still feels like an “I can overpower you” contest.

Does it have to be this way? Is there anything that can pull our nation together after such a bitterly fought election?

I still remember the moment former President Trump announced his presidential campaign at Mar-a-Lago in November 2022, just one week after the midterm election. It was a subdued event, a low point for Trump and his supporters, as they had just lost most of their battles—except for victories by J.D. Vance and Ron DeSantis, the latter of whom soon became Trump’s next political headache.

When Gov. DeSantis announced his own campaign four months later, touting his impressive midterm election results, Trump’s path back to the White House grew even murkier.

From then on, however, a stunning sequence of events unfolded.

In March 2023, Trump was indicted by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg for alleged hush money payments to an adult film star. Outraged, Trump’s supporters rallied, and his poll numbers surged by five percentage points.

Next came the classified documents indictment in June, followed by the Jan. 6 election interference indictment, the Georgia election interference case, the high-profile Mar-a-Lago raid in August, and the New York bank fraud case in October. Yet each of these misfortunes turned into blessings, raising Trump’s poll numbers by five percentage points each time. Soon, DeSantis found himself unable to keep up, trailing in Trump’s wake.

When Trump lost his bank fraud case and was hit with a nearly $500 million penalty, many thought it would bankrupt him. However, his Digital World Acquisition Corp. shareholders voted to acquire his Truth Social company and take it public, giving Trump a financial lifeline with nearly $2 billion in new wealth. Trump avoided a fall into the abyss and instead reached new heights.

The miracle continued. When he was shot at a rally in Butler in July 2024 but survived miraculously, rising to shout “Fight!” more than half the nation was awed by him, including former critics and foes like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. It was another instance of misfortune transforming into fortune.

Over the past two years, Donald Trump has repeatedly risen from the ashes, culminating in his landslide victory in November.

What does this unbelievable sequence of events tell us?

Now that the election is over, should it be reduced to the winning side laughing at the losing side and enjoying a four-year victory? What message might these sequence of events be trying to convey?

I believe that, at this moment, conservatives should reach deeper into the issues that divide us and seek common ground that can unify the nation. That common ground lies in the values and principles of this country.

These values and principles are embodied in the Constitution and, more importantly, in the vision of the Founding Fathers who crafted it. Despite the divisions in our country, the Constitution still holds a place of reverence. Why don’t we engage in dialogue within the framework established by the Constitution to address our profound differences?

One major issue of debate is inflation and how we should run our economy. Trump advocates for reducing business taxes, while Harris wants to increase them. Harris also wants to use federal funds to subsidize small businesses and support first-time home buyers.

The Founding Fathers believed in leaving the economy alone. They argued that the government should not attempt to “improve” the economy except to maintain market order. The free market itself is the most powerful force, knowing how to reward successful businesses and eliminate inefficient ones to achieve optimal outcomes. The Founding Fathers also warned against the federal government taking from the rich to give to the poor, as this would demotivate people from creating wealth and jobs, ultimately leading to widespread poverty. They even opposed a tiered tax system, as they saw it as the government taking on the role of a robber.

Another major issue concerns the border. Allowing an influx of illegal immigrants essentially changes our immigration policy—a mandate that belongs to Congress alone. The executive branch should faithfully enforce laws set by Congress and should never overstep its authority by using executive orders to rewrite laws.

Regarding the debate on abortion rights, the Founding Fathers clarified that the federal government was only granted 20 powers by the Constitution, which include maintaining national security, regulating international and interstate trade, overseeing immigration and naturalization, coining money, protecting patents, providing bankruptcy provisions, and running postal services, among others. These powers do not include dictating people’s personal choices, such as whether to practice abortion. When the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade two years ago, it wasn’t ruling against abortion per se. The high court was upholding the Constitution by relinquishing its power to make rulings on people’s personal lives and returning that authority to states and local governments. This principle is clear and should not even be a point of debate in a presidential election. If we examine our founding history, we’ll see this truth.

The Constitution also tells us that all of these principles are rooted in morality, faith, and natural law—the same foundations that have guided America through nearly 250 years to become the most successful and prosperous nation on Earth.

If we recognize that the Constitution remains the supreme law of this land, then we should explore it deeply enough to find the common ground established by the Founding Fathers for all of us today.

Conservatives, at this particular moment, are in a unique position to reconnect with our country’s roots—the founding principles—relearn them, and communicate them to the other side. In doing so, they could initiate a new way of thinking and begin healing our nation. I truly believe this is what God wants us to do, as demonstrated by the miracles seen in this election process.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sun, 11/17/2024 - 07:00

Trump Can Help A New Generation Learn To Appreciate Our Veterans

Trump Can Help A New Generation Learn To Appreciate Our Veterans

Authored by Tom Ruck via RealClearDefense,

Following President Donald Trump’s extraordinary victory over Kamala Harris, President Joe Biden addressed the nation. His message was simple: “setbacks are unavoidable, but giving up is unforgivable,” and he concluded by saying, “may God protect our troops.”

Unfortunately for President Biden, however, many people in his party have given up on fighting for America and have even given up on supporting our troops. Indeed, this anti-American and anti-military sentiment in the Democratic party undoubtedly contributed to President Trump’s victory.

This is a shame because veterans represent the very best of America. From the sandy beaches of Normandy and the wet jungles of Vietnam to the hot deserts of Iraq and harsh mountains of Afghanistan, they have fought and died for our freedom. Their courage, honor, and selflessness are unmatched, and they should serve as an example for every American today, especially young people. 

With that in mind, in light of this recent Veteran’s Day, it is worth asking what our new president can do to restore a sense of gratitude in all Americans for our military servicemen and women.

There are many answers to that question, of course. For example, his administration could put a stop to the politicization of the military through wokeness, which would ensure that our veterans can be proud of the branches they served. Likewise, President Trump could use his bully pulpit to remind the American people of the virtues of our military men and women. This White House could also revisit its previous plans to build the National Garden of American Heroes, and honor some of our country’s greatest veterans there.

These are all excellent initiatives, but one of the simplest — and subtlest — ways that President Trump can restore respect for our troops and veterans is by preserving and enhancing the beauty of our national cemeteries. The United States and its territories contain 164 national cemeteries. Some are well-known, such as the Arlington National Cemetery and Gettysburg National Cemetery, and others are more inconspicuous, but each cemetery is — in the words of President Lincoln — “hallowed ground.”

My father is buried at Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery in St. Louis, Missouri, so I know from the personal experience of many visits that these cemeteries are more than places of rest — they are the final resting place of our country’s heroes and sacred symbols of American freedom.

We must never forget these men and women. We must also introduce a new generation of Americans to these cemeteries, as I am convinced that walking through those beautiful, straight, uniform rows of fallen soldiers is such a powerful experience that it could make any American grateful for our veterans.

To do this, President Trump cannot only ensure that these cemeteries are well maintained, he can promote programming that introduces Americans — especially young Americans — to the profound sacrifices that sustain our liberty. Hosting more roll-call events, concerts, and other community initiatives can help keep the spirt of service alive in the hearts of all Americans and change the minds of this new generation.

Doing so will not only give veterans the respect and honor they so thoroughly deserve, but it will also make our country better. Gratitude is the character trait that seems to be desperately missing from our national dialogue, but it doesn’t have to be this way. The first step to making America great again is remembering the greatest people in our country’s past: our veterans.

Preserving and enhancing our national cemeteries is an excellent way to do that. Next Veteran’s Day, visit a cemetery near you and say a prayer of thanks for the men and women that gave everything for our freedom.

Tom Ruck is the award-winning author of “Sacred Ground: A Tribute to America’s Veterans.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 23:20

IRS Watchdog Nominee Pledges To Investigate Allegations Of Agency Misconduct

IRS Watchdog Nominee Pledges To Investigate Allegations Of Agency Misconduct

President Biden’s nominee for Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), David Johnson, promised to tackle allegations of IRS misconduct, including politically motivated audits and unfair targeting of small businesses, during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee on Nov. 14. Johnson vowed to hold the IRS accountable for any abuse of power, ensuring that taxpayers are treated fairly.

At the hearing, Johnson addressed bipartisan concerns about the misuse of IRS authority, with lawmakers pressing him on the agency’s practices and adherence to directives aimed at protecting small businesses and low-income taxpayers from increased audit rates.

Political Targeting: A Top Priority

Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) kicked off the hearing by demanding to know how Johnson would address concerns about politically driven IRS actions.

"If you’re confirmed as Inspector General, what actions will you lead at TIGTA to ensure that Americans are not being targeted for audit or investigation based on their political affiliation?" Wyden asked.

Johnson pledged to investigate such allegations thoroughly, emphasizing the seriousness of any attempt to weaponize the IRS.

"I believe that one of the core responsibilities of any Inspector General, by statute, is to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse, and targeting of any American based on their political affiliation, to me, would be an extreme level of abuse," Johnson replied. "Anybody ordering the IRS or asking the IRS to target political opponents or take action based on political identity would be an abuse of power and would be something that TIGTA would play a role in preventing."

Johnson assured the committee that TIGTA would play a crucial role in preventing such practices, vowing to report findings to Congress and the public.

Small Business Owners Feeling the Squeeze

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) raised the alarm over IRS audit practices affecting small businesses, particularly those earning less than $400,000 annually. Citing a 2022 directive from Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen promising not to increase audits for small businesses and lower-income households, Blackburn said her constituents remain skeptical.

"Several times on this committee, I’ve talked about the concerns that I hear from small businesses in Tennessee, and a lot of times this has to do with being wrongfully targeted by the IRS," Blackburn said - pointing to a recent TIGTA report revealing that the IRS has yet to finalize key definitions, such as what qualifies as a "small business," raising fears that audit rates could still rise. Blackburn pressed Johnson for a commitment to further review these audit processes.

"If you’re confirmed, will you commit to further reviewing these IRS audit processes to ensure compliance with that 2022 directive?" she asked.

Johnson agreed, pledging to follow up on TIGTA’s findings and brief Blackburn and other stakeholders on the results.

TIGTA Report Highlights Gaps in IRS Compliance

The TIGTA report referenced during the hearing painted a worrying picture of the IRS’s progress. While the agency has promised to shield small businesses from increased audits, delays in defining key terms and establishing a methodology jeopardize its ability to meet the directive’s requirements by fiscal year 2025.

The IRS has proposed defining small businesses as those with less than $10 million in assets, but this definition remains under discussion with no timeline for completion. TIGTA has urged the IRS to accelerate its efforts, warning that delays could lead to non-compliance with the 2022 directive.

In response, IRS Deputy Commissioner Douglas O’Donnell reaffirmed the agency’s commitment to the directive, noting steps to shift audit focus to high-income earners and large corporations.

"'The Commissioner has publicly committed that the IRS will comply with the Secretary’s directive not to increase audit rates above historic levels for small businesses or households earning less than $400,000," O’Donnell wrote in a July memorandum to TIGTA, adding that the IRS is working with Treasury to finalize the formal methodology for implementing the directive.

Small Businesses Still on Edge

Despite these assurances, Blackburn said small business owners remain uneasy. She highlighted constituents’ fears of being "entrapped" by the IRS amid concerns that increased funding for the agency—part of the Biden administration’s $80 billion IRS boost—has enabled the hiring of thousands of new tax enforcers.

Johnson acknowledged these fears, reiterating that TIGTA would ensure the IRS adheres to its promises. "Given that TIGTA has already issued a report on this very issue, it does seem appropriate for a follow-up," he said.

As Johnson’s confirmation process continues, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle will be watching closely to see whether his tenure at TIGTA can restore confidence in an agency increasingly under scrutiny. With audit fears looming large over small businesses, Johnson’s pledge to safeguard taxpayers may be put to the test sooner rather than later.

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 22:45

The Second Trump Administration Will Benefit The Environment

The Second Trump Administration Will Benefit The Environment

Authored by Diana Furchtgott-Roth via RealClearEnergy,

At the 29th Conference of the Parties (COP29) in Azerbaijan, attendees are full of dire predictions that the world’s climate will worsen under President-elect Trump. But when Trump fulfills his campaign promises to increase U.S. oil and gas production and removes President Biden’s pause on new liquid natural gas exports, global emissions will likely decline rather than rise.

This is because exports of U.S. natural gas generally displace coal, reducing global CO2 emissions. Even Germany, Europe’s largest manufacturer, is using lignite coal (rather than the less-polluting bituminous coal) to deal with shortages of renewables now that it has closed its nuclear power plants and Russian gas is no longer available.

About 3 billion people in emerging economies lack electricity and running water, and cook over wood and dung. Natural gas power plants would reduce particulates from wood and dung and make the air cleaner. Under President Biden, the World Bank does not make loans for fossil fuel power plants.

More U.S. gas for export will lower prices of Russian and Qatari gas, harming countries that are invading Ukraine and tied to Iran. Prices are set based on future production, and even announcements of energy production will weaken America’s enemies.

Natural gas production has lowered U.S. emissions of CO2, which have declined by a billion metric tons over the past 16 years as natural gas has substituted for coal use in the generation of electricity. Over the same period, CO2 emissions in China have risen by 5 billion metric tons.

Between 2022 and 2023 US coal exports to Europe increased by 22% compared with the prior year. Because coal has more emissions than natural gas, it is surprising that Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm has not asked for a pause in coal exports, only on natural gas exports.

America’s natural gas exports to Europe have been soaring since 2022, when Russia decreased the flow of natural gas. According to the Energy Information Administration, America exported an average of almost 12 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas in 2023, more than any other country.

Europe is America’s biggest customer, and in a phone call to President-elect Trump, European Union President Ursula von der Leyen suggested that US natural gas could replace Russian gas.

But even if America stopped all use of fossil fuels immediately, global temperatures would only be two-tenths of 1 degree Celsius by the year 2100, according to government models. This is because China, India, Africa, and Latin America are ramping up their use of coal to reach Western standards of living. China is home to large supplies of coal, but little natural gas, and uses its domestic coal supplies for generating electricity to power its global manufacturing capacity.

A second Trump administration will not only encourage production of natural gas but also faster permitting of pipelines and LNG terminals to move the natural gas from the interior of the country to the ports, and into export terminals to be shipped to Europe and Asia.

America’s natural gas production, at over 100 billion cubic feet per day, is greater than pre-pandemic levels, but production is primarily on private lands. It could have been even higher if Biden had not restricted leases on federal land and if pipeline approval were faster.

Trump’s energy plan includes permitting reform, allowing different sources of energy to compete on a level playing field, opening more lands to natural gas development, reversing Biden’s climate agenda, expediting nuclear technology, and protecting the energy grid.

Trump, unlike Biden, will not instruct the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to slow down pipeline and liquid natural gas export terminal construction in the name of a transition to renewables. Nor will Trump instruct the Securities and Exchange Commission to discourage investment in pipelines, or the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to discourage loans for fossil fuel projects.

The more natural gas is exported, the lower are global emissions. With Trump’s changes, natural gas will be able to travel to where it is needed due to faster infrastructure permitting.

As the northern hemisphere moves into its winter season, the need for more energy for warming homes and businesses becomes even more pressing, and natural gas is cleaner than coal. COP29 attendees have no reason to demonize Trump’s energy agenda, which will be a boon to the environment.

Diana Furchtgott-Roth serves as the Director of the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment and The Herbert and Joyce Morgan Fellow in Energy and Environmental Policy at The Heritage Foundation. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 22:10

Bessent Vs. Lutnick: Musk & RFK Push For Pro-Crypto Treasury Secretary While Bass Backs Rumored Favorite

Bessent Vs. Lutnick: Musk & RFK Push For Pro-Crypto Treasury Secretary While Bass Backs Rumored Favorite

Two camps have emerged between top contenders for President-elect Donald Trump's next Treasury secretary.

Scott Bessent, left, and Howard Lutnick 
Photographer: Vincent Alban, Christopher Goodney/Bloomberg

On one side, Elon Musk and RFK Jr. are pushing for Howard Lutnick, with Musk praising the Cantor FItzgerald CEO as a disruptor compared to Key Square Group (and George Soros protégé) Scott Bessent - the latter of whom met with Trump on Friday, and has the backing of many including noted investor Kyle Bass.

"Scott Bessent is eminently more qualified than Howard Lutnick to run the U.S. Treasury," said Bass in a Wednesday post on X. "Scott understands markets, economics, people, and geopolitics better than anyone I’ve ever interacted with. Markets have already anticipated a Bessent choice. Lutnick is not Trump’s answer."

In response, RFK Jr. suggested that Lutnick - who is currently working as co-chair of Trump's transition team, would be a strong advocate for Bitcoin - which he described as "a hedge against inflation for middle class Americans,a remedy against the dollar’s downgrade from the world’s reserve currency, and the offramp from a ruinous national debt."

Musk suggested more people weigh in on the decision, but said he views Bessent as "a business-as-usual choice," while Lutnick "will actually enact change."

According to Bloomberg, the choice is 'creating tension and increasing the chance that another candidate rises up,' citing anonymous people familiar with the decision making.

Trump himself has appeared frustrated with the infighting and staff are looking for alternatives, with Robert Lighthizer, Senator William Hagerty and Apollo Global Management Inc. Chief Executive Officer Marc Rowan among the names in the mix.

Lutnick was a key support to Trump’s fundraising in the final months of the campaign and he has helped lead the team’s transition to the presidency. Because of that, some key advisers are looking at what else Lutnick might take — if not Treasury — such as a plum ambassadorship, according to people familiar with the decision. -Bloomberg

That said, Lutnick previously donated to both Hillary Clinton in 2015 and Kamala Harris' Senate campaign in 2016, among others.

Ultimately, the choice is up to Trump - who hasn't shared his opinion in public.

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 21:35

Hundreds Of New UFO Sightings Reported To Pentagon

Hundreds Of New UFO Sightings Reported To Pentagon

Authored by Rudy Blalock via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

There were 757 reports of unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) accounted for between May 2023 and June 2024, according to an unclassified Department of Defense (DoD) report released Thursday.

A photo from the Department of Defense shows an "unidentified aerial phenomena." Department of Defense

Congress mandated the annual report by the DoD’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), which is tasked with studying and cataloging reports of UAPs, formerly referred to as UFOs.

The report said that AARO received 757 UAP reports from May 1, 2023, to June 1, 2024, of which “485 of these reports featured UAP incidents that occurred during the reporting period. The remaining 272 reports featured UAP incidents that occurred between 2021 and 2022 but were not reported to AARO until this reporting period and consequently were not included in previous annual UAP reports.”

The new findings bring the total number of UAP cases under AARO review to more than 1,600 as of June.

AARO Director Dr. Jon Kosloski said at a Nov. 14 media briefing the findings have left investigators puzzled.

“There are interesting cases that I, with my physics and engineering background and time in the IC [intelligence community], I do not understand. And I don’t know anybody else who understands them either,” Kosloski said.

Some cases were later resolved, with 49 determined to be common objects like balloons, birds, and unmanned aerial systems. Another 243, also found to be ordinary objects, were recommended for closure by June. However, 444 were deemed inexplicable and lacking sufficient data, so they were archived for future investigation.

Notably, 21 cases were considered to “merit further analysis” due to anomalous characteristics and behaviors, unlike typical sightings.

Despite the unexplained incidents, the office noted that it “has discovered no evidence of extraterrestrial beings, activity, or technology.”

The report said UAP cases often had consistent patterns, described with unidentified lights and round, spherical, or orb-shaped objects with distinct visual traits.

Of the new cases, 81 were reported in U.S. military operating areas, and three reports from military aircrews described “pilots being trailed or shadowed by UAP”.

The Federal Aviation Administration reported 392 unexplained sightings of the 757 reports since 2021.

In one such case, the AARO resolved a commercial pilot’s sighting of white flashing lights as a Starlink satellite launched from Cape Canaveral, Florida.

“AARO is investigating if other unresolved cases may be attributed to the expansion of the Starlink and other mega-constellations in low earth orbit,” the report states.

The AARO report maintains that none of the resolved cases have substantiated “advanced foreign adversarial capabilities or breakthrough aerospace technologies.” The document also states that the AARO will immediately notify Congress if any cases indicate such, which could suggest extraterrestrial involvement.

The report emphasized the AARO’s “rigorous scientific framework and a data-driven approach” and safety measures while investigating these phenomena.

UAP Hearing

The report was released a day after a House Oversight Committee hearing titled “Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Exposing the Truth,” during which witnesses alleged government secrecy surrounding the phenomenon.

During the hearing, a former DoD official, Luis Elizondo, said UAPs are real.

“Advanced technologies not made by our government or any other government are monitoring sensitive military installations around the globe,” he said.

Elizondo testified that the government has operated secret programs to retrieve UAP crash materials to identify and reverse-engineer alien technology.

“Furthermore, the U.S. is in possession of UAP technologies, as are some of our adversaries. I believe we are in the midst of a multi-decade secretive arms race, one funded by misallocated taxpayer dollars and hidden from our elected representatives and oversight bodies,” he said.

“Although much of my government work on the UAP subject still remains classified, excessive secrecy has led to grave misdeeds against loyal civil servants, military personnel, and the public, all to hide the fact that we are not alone in the cosmos.

“A small cadre within our own government involved in the UAP topic has created a culture of suppression and intimidation that I have personally been victim to, along with many of my former colleagues.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 21:00

Trump Picks Fracking Boss As Next Energy Secretary

Trump Picks Fracking Boss As Next Energy Secretary

Donald Trump has nominated Chris Wright, who runs the Colorado-based oil and natural gas fracking services company, Liberty Energy, to lead the Energy Department. Like many other Trump picks, Wright, LIberty's CEO, has no previous Washington experience, and instead has made a name for himself as a vocal proponent of oil and gas, saying fossil fuels are crucial for spreading prosperity and lifting people from poverty. And in news that will surely infuriate the green lobby and brainwashed progressives everywhere, Wright has said that the threat of global warming is exaggerated.

“Chris has been a leading technologist and entrepreneur in Energy,” Trump said in a statement Saturday. “He has worked in Nuclear, Solar, Geothermal, and Oil and Gas. Most significantly, Chris was one of the pioneers who helped launch the American Shale Revolution that fueled American Energy Independence, and transformed the Global Energy Markets and Geopolitics.”

In response to the nomination, Wright said on X that "my dedication to bettering human lives remains steadfast, with a focus on making American energy more affordable, reliable, and secure. Energy is the lifeblood that makes everything in life possible. Energy matters.  I am looking forward to getting to work." He is spot on.

Trump said Wright, if confirmed, would also sit on the newly formed Council of National Energy that will be chaired by Doug Burgum, Trump’s nominee to lead the Interior Department.

The Energy Department has a multi-faceted mission that includes helping to maintain the nation’s nuclear warheads, studying supercomputers and maintaining the US’s several hundred million-barrel stockpile of crude oil (his appointment likely means that the US will aggressively ramp up its refilling of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve). The DOE also plays a key role in approving projects to export liquefied natural gas, something that was paused during Biden’s administration. Trump has vowed to undo the pause.

While the department has little authority over oil and gas development, Wright will play a leading role in helping Trump carry out his energy priorities.

Trump’s selection of Wright, whose company is among the largest providers of fracking services globally, is a show of support for the hot-button oil and gas extraction method that Trump frequently touted during the campaign to attack his Democratic opponent Kamala Harris who had previously vowed to ban fracking, even if she subsequently flip-flopped on the issue, just like on every other hot topic.

Elsewhere, Bloomberg points out that Wright’s company published a 180-page paper this year that concluded climate change “is far from the world’s greatest threat to human life,” and that “hydrocarbons are essential to improving the wealth, health, and life opportunities for the less energized.”

“There is no climate crisis. And we are not in the midst of an energy transition either,” Wright said in a video posted on his LinkedIn page. “Humans, and all complex life on earth, is simply impossible without carbon dioxide — hence the term carbon pollution is outrageous.”

Wright holds engineering degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California at Berkeley. He describes himself on his Denver-based company’s website as a “tech nerd turned entrepreneur and a dedicated humanitarian.”

Trump named Wright with backing from Continental Resources Chairman Harold Hamm, a Trump energy adviser and donor. Hamm said in an interview with the Houston-based trade publication Hart Energy that Wright was his choice for the job.

If confirmed by Congress, Wright would play a leading role in Trump carrying out his campaign pledge to declare a national emergency on energy. Trump has cast such a declaration as helping increase domestic energy production — including for electricity — which he says is needed to help meet booming power needs for artificial intelligence.

Under the first Trump administration, the Energy Department played a critical role in the president-elect’s efforts to revive US coal power, an initiative he’s hinted he may attempt again.

Wright would also oversee Trump’s promise to refill the nation’s emergency cache of crude oil. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which has a capacity of more than 700 million barrels, reached lows not seen since the 1980s following the Biden administration’s unprecedented drawdown of a record 180 million barrels in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

While Wright has warned that subsidies for wind and solar drive up power prices and increase grid instability, he does support alternative energy.

“I’m not here to protect market share for oil gas,” he said during a 2022 interview with Bloomberg Television. “We should do credible things, mostly driven by market forces. But shoveling subsidies at wind and solar, which are 3% of global energy, that’s not meaningfully going to change greenhouse gas emissions. But it is going to drive electricity prices up.”

Wright is on the board EMX Royalty Corp., a global mining royalties firm, according to his company bio, and his company is an investor in geothermal energy and sodium-ion battery technology. More importantly, Wright serves on the board of small modular reactor developer Oklo, which we first recommended to our premium subscribers back in May and have pushed aggressively every since as a long-term investment.

We have feeling that the record number of OKLO shorts that has been built up in recent weeks amid the stock's unprecedented meltup will be hurting very badly come Monday.

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 19:15

What Happens To Jan. 6 Defendants After Trump's Election Win?

What Happens To Jan. 6 Defendants After Trump's Election Win?

Authored by Sam Dorman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

After President-elect Donald Trump won a second term, multiple defendants charged for their roles in the events of Jan. 6, 2021, asked to delay their cases because they anticipate pardons from Trump.

Supporters of President Donald Trump protest at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images

Many were denied, but each nonetheless raised questions about how Trump will handle the cases.

According to data collected by NPR, more than 1,500 people have been charged in relation to Jan. 6, with nearly 1,000 pleading guilty.

At least a dozen cases have been dismissed, while plenty remain with changes following Trump’s election. At the beginning of November, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia announced multiple sentences and guilty verdicts.

Various factors could determine whether these individuals end up avoiding jail time, but perhaps the most important is Trump’s eventual control of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and who will lead that department.

On Nov. 13, Trump announced Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) as his pick for attorney general. Gaetz has been critical of the prosecutions and introduced a bill in July that was intended to prevent prosecutors from retaliating against Jan. 6 defendants for seeking resentencing. Gaetz has also questioned federal involvement, stating that Jan. 6 “wasn’t an insurrection” but that it “very well may have been a fedsurrection.”

Assuming the presidency also grants Trump substantial pardon power under the Constitution: Trump has indicated that he’s open to pardoning those charged but left open the possibility that some would face punishment.

“We will treat them fairly,” he said in January 2022. “And if it requires pardons, we will give them pardons, because they are being treated so unfairly.”

More recently, during an event in July, he was asked about individuals who assaulted officers. He said he would “absolutely” pardon the defendants “if they’re innocent” and added that “they were convicted by a very tough system.”

More than 70 defendants have received a mixed verdict, and so far, more than 1,000 people have been sentenced, with 64 percent receiving prison time, according to NPR data. Some defendants have also taken plea deals.

“I think there’s going to be a complete second look at all of the prosecutions,” Robert Ray, a former Trump impeachment attorney, told The Epoch Times, while noting the large number of cases brought. He added that a second look wouldn’t “necessarily yield a favorable result with regard to each and every defendant, but I think there’s going to be a pretty strenuous exercise of the pardon and commutation power to deal with overreaching [by prosecutors].”

John Pierce, an attorney who has represented Jan. 6 defendants, told The Epoch Times he expects a “blanket pardon,” while Trump–Vance transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said the president-elect “will make pardon decisions on a case-by-case basis.”

Politics of Pardons

It’s unclear which individuals Trump will consider for pardon.

“That’s the million-dollar question,” Lori Ulrich, an attorney with the public defender’s office, told The Epoch Times. She is currently representing Joseph Fischer, whose case made it to the Supreme Court this year.

Fischer and other defendants face a myriad of charges, including an obstruction charge the Supreme Court addressed this summer in Fischer v. United States. It’s unclear how Trump’s DOJ will apply that ruling, but the president-elect’s pardons could be influenced by factors such as the politics surrounding his pardons.

“If President Biden either pardons or commutes the sentences for Hunter Biden, that gives President Trump political cover to either pardon or commute the non-violent J6 offenders, [as well as] Peter Navarro, and Steve Bannon, if he chooses to,” John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both Bush administrations, told The Epoch Times.

Shu was referring to President Joe Biden’s son, who was convicted in September of various tax offenses. Both of Trump’s former White House advisers, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, could be pardoned after each served a four month sentences for defying subpoenas from the House committee that investigated Jan. 6.

A CBS poll found that three years after the events of Jan. 6, 78 percent of Americans expressed disapproval toward “actions of those who forced their way into the Capitol.”

William Shipley, an attorney for one of the defendants, suggested in a motion on Nov. 10 that the election didn’t reflect well on the DOJ’s efforts.

“Defendant Baker would point out that the ‘people’ on behalf of whom the Government purports to speak made themselves heard clearly on November 5, and that should mean something to the Department of Justice without regard to what Administration is now in charge,” Shipley said in a motion for defendant Stephen Michael Baker.

That motion, which asked for a delay in proceedings, was quickly rejected by U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper this month.

Upon entering office, Trump’s pardon power would allow him to commute sentences and pardon convicts who have already served time, such as Ulrich’s client, Riley Williams. Williams was accused of helping to steal then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s laptop. She was found guilty on two felony counts, but the jury was unable to reach a verdict on two other counts, including aiding and abetting theft of government property.

Non-Violent Offenders

Shu told The Epoch Times that pardons for non-violent offenders were more politically palatable.

In August, the DOJ said that approximately 140 police officers were assaulted on Jan. 6, while more than 500 people have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers or employees. It added that “approximately 163 individuals … have been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer.”

Among those are Daniel Ball, who pleaded not guilty but whom the DOJ accused of, among other things, “throwing an explosive device that detonated upon at least 25 officers.” Others included a father-son pair who pleaded guilty in January, and Zachary Alam, who was found guilty last year.

David Gelman, an attorney and former Trump campaign surrogate, told The Epoch Times that re-examining the Jan. 6 prosecutions would have to occur on a “case-by-case basis” but indicated that Trump could consider violence in choosing how to exercise his pardon power.

Trump said at a town hall in 2023 that he was “inclined to pardon many of” the defendants who had been convicted. “I can’t say for every single one because a couple of them, probably, they got out of control,” he said.

Earlier this year, he started one of his rallies with a recording of the national anthem sung by Jan. 6 prisoners. He also vowed in March that his “first acts” as president would be to “Free the January 6 Hostages being wrongfully imprisoned,” he wrote on his Truth Social account.

In a motion filed just after the election, one of the Jan. 6 defendants, Anna Lichnowski, asked her judge to postpone sentencing partly on the basis that her offenses were non-violent, making her “a good candidate for a pardon,” according to her attorney.

Lichnowski was one of a series of defendants who filed motions for some kind of delay in their cases after Trump’s victory. Many of them have been denied, including by U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who said that Trump’s potential pardon was “irrelevant” to Lichnowski’s case.

“The potential future exercise of the discretionary pardon power, an Executive Branch authority, is irrelevant to the Court’s obligation to carry out the legal responsibilities of the Judicial Branch,” Walton said in a Nov. 7 court order.

Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, similarly resisted the motions while arguing that the public is interested in a quick administration of justice.

Graves will likely exit the DOJ in Trump’s second term, experts speculated—something that is expected for many prosecutors at the beginning of a new administration. During Trump’s and Biden’s first terms, dozens of prosecutors were asked to leave.

The vast majority of defendants have been charged with a trespassing offense, the use of which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld in October. Defendant Couy Griffin, founder of Cowboys for Trump and a former county commissioner from New Mexico, had asked the court to review the DOJ’s use of this charge against him.

In a 2–1 decision, the court held that the DOJ could apply the trespassing law without proving that he was aware that former Vice President Mike Pence’s presence on the Capitol grounds was the reason for restricting that area.

Obstruction Charge

In June, the Supreme Court held in a 6–3 decision that the DOJ had misinterpreted a financial reform law in attempting to accuse the Jan. 6 defendants of obstructing an official proceeding.

The majority opinion in that case, Fischer v. United States, held that the DOJ erred in its attempt to disentangle two portions of the Sarbanes–Oxley financial reform law (Section 1512(c)(1) and (c)(2)).

The DOJ had argued that the law allowed prosecutions that targeted obstructive conduct in a catch-all way that included methods other than those mentioned at the beginning of the section.

A majority of the Supreme Court, including Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, disagreed and held: “To prove a violation of §1512(c)(2), the Government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so.”

It’s unclear how Trump and his DOJ will apply the Fischer decision to the defendants’ unique circumstances. It carries a 20-year maximum sentence.

In November, the DOJ said that “approximately 259 defendants who, at the time Fischer was decided, were charged with or convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1512 to determine whether the charge should continue to be prosecuted.”

The DOJ said that after Fischer, the government “decided to forgo the Section 1512(c)(2) charge for approximately 96 defendants, will continue to pursue the charge for approximately 13 defendants, and continues to assess the remaining defendants.”

Approximately 133 were sentenced, and more than half were convicted of that offense and other felonies, according to DOJ data from August.

Austin Alonzo contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 18:40

"We Don't Have Enough...": Russia Temporarily Limits Exports Of Enriched Uranium To U.S.

"We Don't Have Enough...": Russia Temporarily Limits Exports Of Enriched Uranium To U.S.

In news that will act as a headwind for the U.S.'s re-emerging nuclear industry, it was reported last week that Russia is temporarily restricting enriched uranium exports to the U.S., raising supply concerns for reactors that produce nearly 20% of the nation's electricity.

Russia provided no details or timeline for its uranium export restrictions in a Friday Telegram statement, though utilities' advance purchasing likely mitigates immediate effects, Bloomberg wrote in a report on Friday.

Amid global backlash over its war in Ukraine, Russia continues leveraging energy as a geopolitical tool, also cutting gas supplies to Austria—ending a 60-year agreement that fulfills 80% of its demand—citing a legal dispute.

Bloomberg noted that Russia's move targets a key U.S. vulnerability in the nuclear fuel cycle, as it controls nearly half of global uranium enrichment capacity and supplied over a quarter of U.S. enriched fuel last year.

Chris Gadomski, head nuclear analyst for BloombergNEF commented: “We don’t have enough enriched uranium here. They should have been stockpiling enriched uranium in anticipation of this happening.”

While 2023 deliveries are largely complete, a prolonged ban could affect reactor operators by 2025, leaving some without alternative suppliers.

Jonathan Hinze, president of UxC, which tracks uranium-fuel markets, told Bloomberg: “There would be some utilities maybe that would be expecting that material and now might not get it.”

Cameco spokeswoman Veronica Baker added: “To break the dependence on Russia and other state-owned enterprises, coordinated western responses are required.”

The Biden administration has launched a multibillion-dollar initiative to revive domestic uranium enrichment, but progress is limited, with only one U.S. commercial facility, owned by Urenco Ltd., supplying about a third of the enriched uranium for American reactors. U

renco plans a 15% capacity increase by 2027, citing the urgency of reducing reliance on unstable foreign sources.

Major U.S. nuclear operators, including Constellation Energy and Centrus Energy, have waivers to import Russian fuel, but Centrus, the top U.S. trader of Russian uranium, is exploring alternatives in case Russia's supplier, Tenex, fails to meet its obligations.

Russia says the restrictions respond to a U.S. ban on Russian enriched uranium, signed by President Biden in May but allowing shipments until 2028 through waivers.

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 18:05

BCA: Bitcoin Closes In On $100,000, But The Ultimate Destination Is Over $200,000+

BCA: Bitcoin Closes In On $100,000, But The Ultimate Destination Is Over $200,000+

By Dhaval Joshi of BCA Research

Executive Summary

  • The value of both gold and bitcoin comes from their so-called ‘network effect’.

  • The network effect of both gold and bitcoin comes from the collective belief that they are the non-confiscatable assets to own in a fiat monetary system, as an insurance against hyperinflation, banking system failure, or state expropriation.

  • As global wealth rises, the value of the network effect of both gold and bitcoin will also rise.

  • But as bitcoin takes market share from gold, bitcoin has considerably more upside than gold.

  • Despite bitcoin’s election-fuelled rally, its 260-day complexity is not yet close to the 1.2 level that would signal the start of another crypto winter.

  • Hence, while we should expect a near-term retracement, bitcoin’s structural uptrend is intact with an ultimate destination of $200,000+

  • 10-year T-bonds and Portuguese stocks are tactically oversold.

Back in 2021, I penned a report explaining why bitcoin was headed to $100,000+. Suffice to say, my $100,000+ forecast stirred a hornets’ nest, even here at BCA. The naysayers pushed back hard, claiming that bitcoin was a ‘Ponzi scheme’ or, at the very least, a dangerous bubble.

Yet three years on, my prediction has been vindicated both for its price forecast and its underlying justification. Now, with the bitcoin price closing in on $100,000, is it time to take profits? The answer depends on whether you are a trader or a long-term holder.

Bitcoin’s progress has always been two steps forward, one step back. After its recent surge, premised on the more ‘bitcoin friendly’ candidate winning the US presidency, we can expect some near-term retracement – as was the case in April this year. On a multiyear horizon though, bitcoin’s structural uptrend is intact and will ultimately take it to $200,000+ (Chart 1).

The Value Of Gold And Bitcoin Come From Their ‘Non-Confiscatability’

To understand the value of bitcoin we must understand the value of gold. With gold predominantly used as jewellery, many people think that the value of gold comes from its properties as a precious metal, especially the chemical inertness that keeps it eternally beautiful. But this is a misunderstanding.

The other precious metals that are gold’s neighbours in groups 10 and 11 of the periodic table – silver, platinum, and palladium – possess identical properties to gold. This means that we can quantify gold’s value as a precious metal as being gold’s relative scarcity versus, say, silver multiplied by the price of silver.

Today, gold is roughly eight times as scarce as silver, so gold’s value as a precious metal is the price of silver, $30/oz, times eight, which equals $240/oz. This comprises just 10 percent of gold’s current market price of $2550/oz (Chart 2).

Yet for centuries, the gold price did just equal its scarcity versus silver multiplied by the silver price. The relationship ended only when the world moved to a fiat monetary system in 1931, and then again in 1971. In a fiat monetary system, the gold price surges to many multiples of its scarcity versus silver (Chart 3).

This provides the compelling proof that in a fiat monetary system, most of gold’s value comes not from its use as a precious metal. Most of gold’s value comes from the network of marginal buyers who are holding it for what I call its ‘non-confiscability’. Unlike financial assets, bank deposits, or cash, the state cannot confiscate gold via fiat monetary inflation. This is ensured by gold’s limited supply. Nor can gold be confiscated by the higher risk of a banking system failure that a fiat monetary system aggravates.

Can we justify the price of gold instead by the high cost of mining it? No, the causality runs the other way. The cost of mining gold is driven by its market price, as miners grab the largest share of its selling price that they can.

What about central bank purchases of gold? Central bank reserves also hold gold rather than foreign fiat currencies for gold’s non-confiscatability. A foreign fiat currency can be confiscated via devaluation by its government or central bank, but gold cannot.

All of which brings us to two key points:

First, given that gold’s above-ground market value is $19 trillion,1 the majority, around $17 trillion comes from the network of holders who value gold for its non-confiscatability.

Second, just like gold, bitcoin cannot be confiscated by monetary inflation or banking system failure (Chart 4). Additionally, and
unlike gold, it is difficult for the state to confiscate it by outright expropriation. Yet bitcoin, with a market value of $1.5 trillion comprises less than 10 percent of the total market for non-confiscatable assets. As bitcoin’s share of this market increases, and the supply of bitcoins reaches its upper limit, bitcoin’s price has substantial upside.

The Value Of Bitcoin’s ‘Network Effect’ Has Substantial Upside

In essence, the value of both gold and bitcoin comes from their so-called ‘network effect’. A network effect creates a self-reinforcing cycle of value where each new user makes the network more valuable for everyone.

In the case of both gold and bitcoin, their network effect come from the collective belief that they are the non-confiscatable assets to own in a fiat monetary system. And that a certain proportion of total wealth must be held in these non-confiscatable assets as an insurance against hyperinflation, banking system failure, or state expropriation.

You might ask, what is the difference between a network effect based on collective belief and a Ponzi Scheme? The answer is that a Ponzi Scheme relies on an exponential growth of its network on a promise to get-rich-quick. Once that exponential growth ends, as it must, the value of the network collapses.

By contrast, gold’s network effect has existed in relatively stable form since 1971, and bitcoin’s network effect has existed for over ten years. And their entire raison d’être is an insurance against the get-poor-quick that comes from hyperinflation, banking system failure, or state expropriation.

The upshot is that we can value the gold and bitcoin networks as the product of three terms:

  1. Global wealth

  2. Global wealth share held in the non-confiscatable asset-class

  3. Non-confiscatable asset-class share held in gold/bitcoin

For gold, this means that if global wealth rose by say, 20 percent in the coming 2-3 years and the global wealth share held in the non-confiscatable asset-class held constant, while bitcoin eroded the non-confiscatable asset-class share held in gold from 90 to 80 percent, then the gold price would nevertheless increase by about 7 percent. Under the same premise though, the bitcoin price would increase by about 140 percent3 to $200,000+.

What does our proprietary analysis of price trend complexity reveal for gold and bitcoin? Gold’s 260-day price rally complexity (fractal dimension) recently reached the point of collapse that has reliably signalled tactical retracements. This justifies our  current tactical short position in gold (Chart 5).

In the case of bitcoin, its major structural downtrends – so-called ‘crypto winters’ – have started when the preceding rally’s 260-day complexity collapsed to a level of 1.2 (Chart 6).

Despite bitcoin’s election-fuelled rally, its long-term complexity has not collapsed to the level that would signal the start of another crypto winter. Hence, while we should expect a near-term retracement, bitcoin’s structural uptrend is still intact with an ultimate  destination of $200,000+.

Tyler Durden Sat, 11/16/2024 - 17:30

Pages