40.4 F
Chicago
Sunday, November 8, 2026
type here...
Home Blog Page 1791

Communist Revolutionary Arrested In Connection With Vegas Tesla Firebombing Attack

survivalnomics
-
0
Communist Revolutionary Arrested In Connection With Vegas Tesla Firebombing Attack

The Democratic Party nurtures Communist revolutionaries like 36-year-old Paul Kim, who was arrested this week after shooting and firebombing a Tesla collision center in Las Vegas, Nevada.

LVMPD officers arrested Paul Kim on Wednesday night on charges including arson and possessing an explosive device. LVMPD announced the arrest at a press conference on Thursday afternoon.

LVMPD told reporters that a review of Kim’s social media profiles indicates the suspect has ties to radical extremist groups, including the Communist Party USA, Revolutionary Communist International, Hidden Palestine & Palestine Action. 

Libs of TikTok found Kim’s social media posts from the early BLM riot days, voicing his support for the Democratic Party’s NGOs that facilitated the color revolution of destruction across the nation in 2020. 

Attorney General Pamela Bondi released a statement shortly after Kim was arrested and charged in the connect with the Tesla attack:

“The Department of Justice has been clear: anyone who participates in the wave of domestic terrorism targeting Tesla properties will suffer severe legal consequences. We will continue to find, arrest, and prosecute these attackers until the lesson is learned.”

FBI Director Kash Patel stated:

“As promised, acts of violence and vandalism will not be tolerated, and today law enforcement personnel acted quickly to arrest an individual on charges including arson. Under Attorney General Bondi’s leadership, we will continue to pursue these investigations with the full force of law and will bring to justice anyone responsible for these attacks.”

There’s a race against time to defund and dismantle the Democratic Party’s rogue network of NGOs that plan an imminent color revolution to “kill” the Tesla brand and send the market capitalization of the American company into a “death spiral.”

The wave of violence and destruction by Democrats nationwide—targeting Tesla, much of it caught on camera—comes as the party’s poll numbers plunge to record lows.

Even CNN had to admit that its own party had imploded. 

What the party of revolutionary activists fails to realize is that the Overton Window shifted last year – so burning and destroying buildings, cars, and city blocks – like BLM riots – is no longer the socially acceptable norm. Doubling down on hate and violence will haunt the party in the next election cycle. 

Like this:

. . . 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 15:00

Rickards: Trump & The Fate Of The Dollar

survivalnomics
-
0
Rickards: Trump & The Fate Of The Dollar

Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

What is the Mar-a-Lago Accord? And what would a Mar-a-Lago Accord mean for the value of the U.S. dollar?

We begin our analysis with the name itself. Mar-a-Lago Accord is an echo of the three major international currency accords since the original Bretton Woods Agreements reached in 1944.

Accords Through The Years

The first was the Smithsonian Agreement in December 1971. This came in the aftermath of President Nixon’s decision on August 15, 1971, to end the convertibility of U.S. dollars into physical gold by U.S. trading partners at the fixed rate of $35.00 per ounce. The major countries in the global system (U.S., UK, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, Belgium, and Netherlands) met at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC to decide how to reopen the gold window.

The main U.S. goal was to devalue the dollar. In the end, the price of gold was increased by 8.5% to $38.00 per ounce (revalued to $42.22 per ounce in 1973), which equaled a 7.9% dollar devaluation. Other currencies were revalued against the dollar, including a 16.9% upward revaluation of the Japanese yen.

The effort to reopen the gold window failed. Instead, major countries moved to floating exchange rates, which remains the norm to this day. Gold moved to free market trading and is currently about $3,050 per ounce. That gold price represents a 98.8% devaluation of the dollar measured by weight of gold since 1971.

The period from 1971 to 1985 was tumultuous in foreign exchange markets including the Petrodollar agreement (1974), the Herstatt Bank collapse (1974), the sterling crisis (1976), U.S. hyperinflation (50% from 1977-1981), a gold price super-spike (1980), and a major global recession (1981-1982). By 1983, inflation was subdued, the dollar was gaining strength, and strong economic growth was achieved in the U.S. under Ronald Reagan.

The next major economic gathering on foreign exchange was the Plaza Accord in September 1985. This was convened by U.S. Treasury Secretary James Baker at the Plaza Hotel in New York and included the U.S., Germany, the UK, Japan and France. At the time, the dollar was at an all-time high relative to other currencies. The dollar had even strengthened against gold, which had dropped in price from $800.00 per ounce in January 1980 to around $320.00 per ounce in 1985.

The purpose of the meeting was to devalue the dollar in stages. In this respect, the meeting was a success. Importantly, the method of devaluation was to be gradual and it was to be accomplished by central bank and finance ministry interventions in the foreign exchange markets. It was not a fiat devaluation; it was a finesse.

In practice, the market interventions were quite few. Once foreign exchange traders got the message, they took the dollar where it needed to go on their own. No foreign exchange dealer wanted to be on the wrong side of the trade if the central banks decided to intervene on any particular day.

The Louvre Accord, signed on February 22, 1987, among the U.S., UK, Canada, France, Japan and Germany was, in effect, a victory lap following the Plaza Accord. Between 1985 and 1987, the dollar did devalue against other currencies. The dollar also fell against gold, which rose from $320 per ounce to $445 per ounce by the time of the meeting. It was mission accomplished for Treasury Secretary James Baker. The purpose of the Louvre Accord was to lock down the accomplishments of the Plaza Accord, stop further dollar depreciation, and return to a period of relative stability in foreign exchange markets.

This accord was also a success. The dollar was mostly stable after 1987, despite the introduction of the euro in 2000 (the euro bounced between $0.80 and $1.60 in the early 2000s. Today it’s $1.09, which is not far from its original valuation of $1.16).

The other wild card was gold. After hitting bottom at around $250 per ounce in 1999, gold surged to $1,900 per ounce in 2011, a 670% gain for gold and a de facto devaluation of the dollar when measured by weight of gold. The period of relative stability in foreign exchange markets lasted until 2010 when a new currency war was unleashed by President Obama.

A New Mar-A-Lago Accord

Which brings us to discussion of a possible new international monetary conference in the chain of conferences from the Smithsonian Agreement to the Plaza Accord to the Louvre Accord. Given Donald Trump’s dominance on the world economic scene today and his love of ornate architecture of the kind seen at the Plaza Hotel and the Louvre (Trump owned the Plaza Hotel from 1988 to 1995),it’s not a stretch to expect that Trump would convene any new world monetary conference at his equally ornate Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida.

The first discussion of a Mar-a-Lago Accord appears in Chapter Six of my book Aftermath (2019), published six years ahead of current attention to the topic. That chapter is titled “The Mar-a-Lago Accord” and contains extensive discussion of the evolution of the international monetary system starting in 1870, including the more recent accords noted above.

It then moves through my private meetings with IMF head John Lipsky and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner with a focus on a possible new gold standard and the attempted replacement of gold by the Special Drawing Right (SDR), created in 1969 and used among IMF members ever since. It ends with the classic 1912 quote from Pierpont Morgan that, “Money is gold, and nothing else.” and recommends that investors acquire physical gold for their portfolios. The dollar price of gold has risen 120% since that recommendation.

Today’s vogue in Mar-a-Lago Accord research began with a November 2024 paper written by Stephan Miran titled “A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System”, published by Hudson Bay Capital. Although the title refers to the trading system, it explains how currency devaluation can be used to offset the impact of tariffs and refers to “persistent dollar overvaluation.”

From there, it’s a short leap to the ghost of the Plaza Accord and the need for a new Mar-a-Lago Accord. (Shortly after the paper was published, Trump appointed Miran as Chair of his Council of Economic Advisors, which gives his views added weight).

Issuance of 100-Year Bonds

In the currency section of the paper (pages 27-34), Miran not only suggests a devaluation of the dollar; he proposes that the U.S. issue 100-year bonds. In Miran’s view, 100-year bonds will be attractive to foreign reserve managers and will reduce any dollar selling needed to prop up their own currencies. Those long-term dollar holdings will mitigate short-term dollar devaluation in a way that moves the entire international monetary system toward a desirable equilibrium. Miran specifically uses the term Mar-a-Lago Accord to describe his proposed system.

There are many more technical details in Miran’s plan that we don’t have room to discuss in this article. These include use of the Treasury’s Exchange Stabilization Fund, the Fed’s Bank Term Funding Program, and Fed currency swap lines. Miran also suggests using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) to impose withholding taxes on interest payments to foreign holders of Treasury securities (a form of capital controls) as a way to discourage trading partners from holding Treasuries and therefore a way to devalue the dollar.

Trading partners would be evaluated using a traffic-light system. Countries would be ranked green (friendly), yellow (neutral) and red (adversary). Green countries would get U.S. military protection and the most favorable tariffs, yellow would get reciprocal tariffs, and red countries would get no security help, punitive tariffs and possible capital controls.

A Financial Catastrophe in the Making

In effect, Miran is trying to have it both ways. He wants to devalue the dollar and at the same time keep the dollar at the center of the International Monetary System. Nixon did this in 1971 and Baker did it in 1985. With regard to Miran, one cannot resist a paraphrase of Lloyd Bensen – “Stephan, you’re no Jim Baker.” The success of the Plaza Accord depended entirely on close cooperation of the major country finance ministries. No such cooperation exists today given sanctions on Russia, tariffs on China and the U.S. isolation of the EU with respect to the War in Ukraine.

Since Miran’s paper, the topic has spun completely out of control. A recent MarketWatch headline says “Wall Street can’t stop talking about the ‘Mar-a-Lago Accord.’”Some analysts propose that gold on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet (actually a gold certificate) would be revalued from $42.22 per ounce to the market price (now $3,050 per ounce) with the “profit” added to the Treasury General Account. Another idea is to use U.S. assets such as land and mineral rights to collateralize U.S. debt.

As of now, no one knows what a Mar-a-Lago Accord would actually be or whether it will even happen, so it’s impossible to describe the impact. Still, the best-known version of the plan would have unintended consequences that could lead to a global financial catastrophe.

There’s no need to force holders to swap short-term debt for long-term debt. You simply let the short-term debt mature and replace it with new 100-year bond issues through the existing primary dealer underwriting system. No coercion is needed; there would be huge demand for 100-year debt.

Dollar devaluation does not fight potential inflation from tariffs (there isn’t any). It actually causes inflation by increasing the cost of imported goods. Any gold price mark-up on the Fed’s books is simply an accounting entry. The suggested “audit” of Fort Knox by Trump and Elon Musk (if it happens) will be nothing more than a staged photo-op. Gold has a world price entirely unaffected by accounting games between the Treasury and the Fed.

Again, the Mar-a-Lago Accord as it’s envisioned today would cause a global financial crisis. That’s because it fails to understand the importance of short-term Treasury debt as collateral for inter-bank lending and derivatives. Substituting 100-year Treasury debt for short-term Treasury bills would make those bills scarce. Treasury bills are the most liquid collateral in the world and are at the root of the Eurodollar system and the $1 quadrillion derivatives market. Scarcity of Treasury bills would implode bank balance sheets and lead to the greatest banking crisis in history.

The big winner in this context is gold. The BRICS are moving toward gold as fast as they can. Investors can do the same. Don’t be left behind.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 14:40

Trump Says Call With Carney “Extremely Productive”, Says They Will Meet After Election

survivalnomics
-
0
Trump Says Call With Carney “Extremely Productive”, Says They Will Meet After Election

Authored by Matthew Horwood via The Epoch Times,

U.S. President Donald Trump said he spoke with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney over the phone, and that the two leaders plan to meet “immediately” after the federal election. 

“It was an extremely productive call, we agree on many things,” Trump said on Truth Social on March 28, adding that the two would meet “immediately after Canada’s upcoming Election to work on elements of Politics, Business, and all other factors.”

Trump added that the discussion between the two leaders will “end up being great for both the United States of America and Canada.”

Carney has not yet commented on the call, and no readout has been issued by the Prime Minister’s Office. Carney is scheduled to meet with provincial and territorial leaders this afternoon.

On March 26, Trump announced he would put 25 percent tariffs on all vehicles and some car parts imported into the United States. 

The automobile tariffs are set to kick in on April 3, a day after the U.S. will impose reciprocal tariffs on all its trading partners. Tariffs on auto parts will take effect on May 3.

Trump also placed 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico on March 4, but soon after, announced a one-month tariff pause on all products compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Trump also imposed 25 percent tariffs on all imports of steel and aluminum, including from Canada, on March 12.

Following a U.S.-Canada cabinet commitee meeting on March 27, Carney announced he would hold a phone call with Trump in the coming days, where he said he would make clear that the two countries are “best served by cooperation and mutual respect.”

During that press conference, the prime minister said his government was considering “many options” to retaliate against the latest tariffs, and that these measures would have “maximum impact in the United States and minimum impacts here in Canada.”

Carney previously said on March 24 that a phone call with Trump would not happen until after the next Canadian election on April 28, as he said he thinks the U.S. president is “waiting for the outcome of the election“ before talks, to ”see who has a strong mandate from Canadians.”

Carney, who was sworn in as prime minister on March 14 after winning the Liberal leadership race, said that call would need to happen “on our terms as a sovereign country, not as what he pretends we are,” in reference to Trump’s repeated remarks that Canada should merge with the United States.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 12:40

CK Hutchison Deal Derailed After CCP In Beijing Launches Antitrust Probe

survivalnomics
-
0
CK Hutchison Deal Derailed After CCP In Beijing Launches Antitrust Probe

The Chinese Communist Party has been furious over Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing’s deal to sell Panama Canal ports to a consortium of investors that includes BlackRock, following pressure from President Trump as the US moves to bolster hemispheric defense—a massive security effort in which Panama plays a critical role. 

A new report from the South China Morning Post said Friday morning that Li’s flagship CK Hutchison Holdings, “will not go ahead with the expected signing of a deal next week to sell its two strategic ports at the Panama Canal … with Beijing saying it will launch an antitrust probe into the sale.”

There were multiple reports this week that Beijing was tightening the screws on Li’s CK Hutchison to stop the sale to BlackRock next week.

In one such report, The Telegraph noted, “Chinese authorities have effectively blacklisted CK Hutchison and the business interests of the Li family by telling Chinese state-backed firms they will struggle to get regulatory approval for any work involving the group.”

Here’s more from SCMP’s report:

Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing’s CK Hutchison Holdings will not go ahead with the expected signing of a deal next week to sell its two strategic ports at the Panama Canal, the Post has learned, with Beijing saying it will launch an antitrust probe into the sale.

The State Administration for Market Regulation said on Friday it was looking into CK Hutchison’s US$23 billion deal to sell 45 ports spread over 23 countries to a consortium led by United States investment firm BlackRock.

The investigation was announced after pro-Beijing media Wen Wei Po and Ta Kung Pao asked whether the deal required approval from the country’s antitrust review.

“We have noticed this transaction, and will review it in accordance with the law to ensure fair competition in the market and safeguard the public interest,” a spokesman from the anti-monopoly department under market regulator said in a written reply.

The watchdog did not reveal when the investigation would be launched.

The department is responsible for conducting antitrust reviews and providing guidance to companies over their response to mitigate risk and ensure compliance overseas.

What’s evident is that the sale of the Panama ports, including Balboa and Cristobal on either side of the canal, to the consortium that includes BlackRock has put the HK billionaire in the direct firing line of the CCP. 

In a separate report on the temporarily derailed deal, the Wall Street Journal cited sources familiar with the negotiations who said the April 2nd deadline will not be met.

Here’s more color on what sources are saying:

Some of the people said the delay in signing the documents and Beijing’s regulatory review didn’t mean that the deal would be called off—only that a little more time was needed. Others said Beijing believed it might be able to force a more substantial delay or rethinking of the deal.

People involved in the negotiations and outside analysts have said they expect the deal would ultimately go through. They pointed to the risks for Beijing if it appeared to block a commercial transaction that doesn’t involve ports in mainland China or Hong Kong.

. . . 

Chinese officials have telegraphed to Hutchison that they would call in BlackRock for a regulatory review if the parties went ahead with the transaction, people familiar with the matter said. Antitrust officials have started examining BlackRock’s businesses, especially its investments in China, some of the people said.

CK Hutchison has denied the sale was politically motivated, while HK newspapers slammed the deal, calling it “a spineless kneeling, profit-seeking and unrighteous act, ignoring national interests and national justice, and betraying and selling out all Chinese people.” 

The HK paper Ta Kung Pao warned that BlackRock could charge “special docking fees” to Chinese commercial ships and “suppress China’s development” in the region. 

More broadly, the CCP is expected to fight tooth and nail to block Trump’s hemispheric strategy in the Americas—from Canada to Greenland to Panama. But this will only push Trump to escalate the trade war until the communists in Beijing say “uncle.”

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 12:20

VDH: The Passing Signal Psychodrama

survivalnomics
-
0
VDH: The Passing Signal Psychodrama

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

When we finally learn the full melodrama of the so-called Signal 1-2 day “scandal” of inviting a leftwing, Trump-despising, Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg onto a supposedly secure conference list, involving most of the top Trump security officials, lots of questions need asking and answering.

Most importantly, who exactly had Goldberg’s private number, and ostensibly (in error [?]) could have possibly inserted it into the cleared list of participants in the discussions? Why Goldberg, rather than some random person of some 345 million Americans? 

So why in the world would any top Trump officials or their staffers ever even have Goldberg’s private contact information—given his quite public record of a) fabricating stories with unnamed sources, and b) suffering from a decade of chronic Trump derangement syndrome? 

Did Goldberg know the mechanisms that had prompted and continued his stealthy presence on the secure discussions? 

Why did citizen Goldberg not simply come clean on day one that he realized he was mistakenly included in key national security conference communications, to which he did not belong, and thus should be obviously excluded immediately? Why stealthily listen in for eleven some days? Was the idea of informing his hosts of his own improper presence too old-fashioned morality? 

Did Goldberg’s publicizing these discreet discussions really affect in any way at all the otherwise completely successful mission to neutralize years of appeased Houthis aggression and begin to end their veritable destruction of Red Sea international maritime commerce? 

How did this blunder rank with prior diplomatic and military screw-ups? 

Did it rate with the indiscretion of Secretary of State Dean Acheson’s January 1950 Press Club speech de facto excluding South Korea from the American defense umbrella—an omission that may or may not have contributed to the June 1950 North Korean invasion of the South? 

Was it comparable to Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie’s assurance to Saddam Hussein, “We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait”— a needless remark that may have mistakenly green-lighted his 1990 invasion of Kuwait? 

Was it comparable to Barack Obama’s March 2012 “hot mic” quid-pro-quo assurance to Russian president Medvedev? Obama got caught in front of the world promising Putin that he would have “flexibility” on American-Eastern European missile defense—if Putin gave him “space” during his “last” election. 

And indeed, it is forgotten that both kept their promises: Obama foolishly dismantled American-sponsored Eastern European plans for missile defense, and Putin stayed put for Obama, perhaps empowering Obama’s successful election cycle—postponing his preplanned invasions of Ukraine until 2014. Careerism at the expense of national security? 

Did it rank with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Mark Milley, stealthily contacting his Chinese communist counterpart Chinese Gen. Li Zuocheng, to warn him that he would likely prewarn the People’s Liberation Army leader, if he, Milley, had self-diagnosed his Commander-in-Chief Donald Trump as supposedly dangerously likely to trigger an existential war? 

Why would Hillary Clinton weigh in given her illegal use of a private server to transmit classified State Department information and her subsequent destruction of subpoenaed communication devices? 

Why would the serial fabulist Susan Rice weigh in, given in the election-year 2012 she flat-out lied to the nation on five Sunday news shows, claiming preposterously that the deadly preplanned terrorist attacks on the American consulate in Benghazi were actually unexpected “spontaneous” demonstrations incited by anger over an anti-Muslim video? Ditto her fallacious Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl “honor” narrative or her lie about the removal of Syrian WMD. 

Why would Leon Panetta weigh in, when he was one of the supposed “51 intelligence authorities” in 2020 who ridiculously claimed Hunter Biden’s FBI-authenticated laptop had all the hallmarks of a Russian intelligence disinformation effort—a lie designed to arm Joe Biden before the last 2020 debate, and which might well have affected the 2020 election and for which Panetta has never apologized? 

In the end, this was a blunder, but also what the left calls a “teachable moment”, in which a) all future similar conferences should be either held in person or its participants triple-checked on a secure line; and b) all Trump high appointees and their staffers should know enough to have nothing to do with those who wake up each morning wishing to destroy them – and go to bed each night lamenting that they have not done enough to advance that destruction.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 12:00

Trump Asks Supreme Court To Allow Venezuelan Deportations To Proceed During Legal Challenge

survivalnomics
-
0
Trump Asks Supreme Court To Allow Venezuelan Deportations To Proceed During Legal Challenge

The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to step in and allow the deportation of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador while a legal battle plays out in lower courts.

Alleged Tren de Aragua gang members are processed at the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in El Salvador

The move comes two days after an appeals court upheld a temporary block on the Trump administration’s ability to deport illegal migrants under the Alien Enemies Act.

In their request, the DOJ argued that federal courts should not be allowed to interfere with diplomatic matters, the Associated Press reports.

“The Constitution supplies a clear answer: the President,” Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris wrote in the request. “The republic cannot afford a different choice.”

Earlier this month US District Judge James Boasberg paused the flights by ruling that alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua deserve a hearing to deny they belong to the gang. Boasberg also demanded details on two flights on March 15 to determine whether the administration defied his oral and written orders to block them.

The Trump administration also asked the Supreme Court to overturn Boasberg’s order pausing flights, and to put that order on hold while they consider that request.

“Those orders – which are likely to extend additional weeks – now jeopardize sensitive diplomatic negotiations and delicate national-security operations, which were designed to extirpate TdA’s presence in our country before it gains a greater foothold,” wrote Harris.

The Supreme Court has asked lawyers for some of the deported Venezuelans to respond by 10am Tuesday to the Trump admin request.

The DOJ has argued that Trump had the authority to declare TdA a foreign terrorist organization and deport them without hearings. Government lawyers also refused to release flight information on the deportations, arguing that it would reveal sources and methods behind the deportations.

“Once that secondary disclosure occurred, any opportunity for appellate review would be moot; the damage would be done, and the effect on United States foreign policy could be catastrophic,” the DOJ wrote.

The DOJ insists that the government obeyed Boasberg’s written order blocking the flights, but says that his earlier oral order while the flights were in the air weren’t enforceable. Government lawyers also contend that Trump had the authority to conduct the flights as commander-in-chief of the US military and the country’s head of foreign affairs.

Trump, meanwhile, has called for Boasberg’s impeachment – saying that the lifetime Obama-appointee is “a troublemaker and agitator.”

*  *  *

Grow your own food with HEIRLOOM SEEDS (39 varieties – 4,500 seeds) from ZH Store!  Free shipping in the USA.

Click pic… buy seeds… take food supply into your own hands…

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 11:40

Is UMich Trying To Tank Trump’s Stock Market?

survivalnomics
-
0
Is UMich Trying To Tank Trump’s Stock Market?

Are Democrats trying to spark a recession by crashing the stock market with their insanely partisan and outlier-ish survey responses?

Since President Trump was elected, ‘hard’ data – that is actual economic values – has been steady (strengthening recently). On the other hand, over the last three months, ‘Soft’ data – driven by surveys of Americans (left, right, and center) – has plunged…

Source: Bloomberg

One of the major drivers of that collapse in ‘soft’ data has been the University of Michigan sentiment survey, which has seen an unprecedented partisan divide of delusion send sentiment down (Democrats have NEVER been more fearful of the future) and inflation fears up (32 year highs thanks to Democrats)…

Source: Bloomberg

And while we have done our best, along with Goldman Sachs and Fed Chair Jay Powell, to urge investors to recognize the outlier (and partisan) nature of the UMich survey…

First, inflation expectations in the survey have become extremely partisan. 

Second, the share of respondents in the Michigan survey who are Democrats has always been consistently higher than the share of respondents who are Republicans

Third, switching from a phone-based to an online-based data collection process has led to more extreme answers on inflation expectations.

These three issues together have boosted short-term inflation expectations in the Michigan survey by about 1.3pp and long-term inflation expectations by 0.5pp since 2024Q4. In particular, the change in distribution across political parties and increased partisanship together generated an outsized 1.0pp boost to the 1-year inflation expectation in February.

…the reaction has been the same every time – stocks puked…

Every single University of Michigan survey since Trump became president has slammed the market as a result of outsized inflation expectations driven by Democrat responses. 

The S&P was down in kneejerk reaction after all six UMich reports this year (Prelim and Final).

Six out of six is not a bad track record – almost as if it was done on purpose to drag stocks down and trigger a recession (something that Trump likely would not want but wouldn’t mind the lower yields that would infer). If traders believe the Democrats’ inflation fears, why are they buying bonds?

Of course, with ‘Liberation Day’ imminent, will it be different this time?

Source: Bloomberg

Will we bounce here? Europe just folded – offering concessions – and for now, Canada is all talk.

For the traders amongst us, the next UMich print is on April 11 (prelim) and April 25 (final).

Vol markets are already looking forward to it.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 11:20

Trump Issues Pardon To Nikola Founder Trevor Milton

survivalnomics
-
0
Trump Issues Pardon To Nikola Founder Trevor Milton

Update (1030ET):

There was widespread speculation over whether President Trump had actually pardoned Trevor Milton, the former founder and CEO of the now-bankrupt Nikola.

But according to CNBC, citing a White House official, that now appears to be true.

Found the reason…​

Did anyone have “Trump pardons Trevor Milton” in their 2025 bingo card stack? ​

*   *   *

 

Trevor Milton—founder and former CEO of the now-bankrupt Nikola—claimed on X late Thursday that President Trump had issued him a “full and unconditional pardon” and said the president “called me personally.”

Quick refresher on Milton: In 2023, a jury found him guilty of lying to investors about Nikola’s electric and fuel cell semi-truck technology and sentenced him to four years in prison. 

Nikola was first exposed by short seller Nathan Anderson, founder of Hindenburg Research, after the startup released a 2020 promotional video, which showed its Nikola One truck rolling down a hill to simulate full functionality.

Last month, Nikola filed for Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. The defunct-startup also filed a motion seeking permission to pursue an auction and sale process under Section 363 of the US Bankruptcy Code. 

Back to Milton, he wrote on X:

“This pardon is not just about me—it’s about every American who has been railroaded by the government, and unfortunately, that’s a lot of people. It is no wonder why trust and confidence in the Justice Department has eroded to nothing… I saw firsthand the tactics they use to guarantee convictions. I am incredibly grateful to President Trump for his courage in standing up for what is right and for granting me this sacred pardon of innocence.” 

Milton’s video was immediately fact-checked by Community Notes, which pointed out that multiple U.S. government databases did not show evidence of a pardon.

“There is no mention of the pardon on the White House Website, or a Department of Justice catalog of presidential pardons.” 

Separately, Milton’s media team released a press release through PR Newswire, declaring:

“Founder of Nikola Motor Company, Trevor Milton, Pardoned by President Trump.” 

Here’s EV blog Electrek’s take on the situation:

So, despite us seeing no evidence yet that this pardon is actually real, maybe it’s an attempt to incept the idea of a pardon into the empty headcase of a vain ignoramus who for some reason has access to the pardon pen (despite there being a clear Constitutional remedy keeping insurrectionists like himself away from it).

It also seems quite similar to a proposed tactic by another corporate criminal, Sam Bankman-Fried. Fried had planned to “Go on Tucker Carlsen [sic], come out as a republican” in an attempt to angle for a pardon, again playing on the vanity, credulousness and love of fraud shown by the idiot-in-chief.

But then, in the last line of the press release, we get to what is perhaps the real point of this stunt – it ends with a link to a trailer for a documentary which purports to exonerate Milton. Kind of strange that someone would need to release a documentary making the case for exoneration when one has already been exonerated, isn’t it?

So, for these reasons, we think that this pardon didn’t actually happen.

. . . 

*  *   *

After selling out quickly, 25 of these just showed up! Free Shipping. (click pic)

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 10:30

In Hot Water: YETI Bars Conservative Group from Customizing Cups

survivalnomics
-
0
In Hot Water: YETI Bars Conservative Group from Customizing Cups

Authored by Jonathan Turley via jonathanturley.org,

YETI is under fire this week after barring a conservative group from buying its product in a raw political stance. Clare Boothe Luce Center for Conservative Women (CBL) previously had cups made with its logo, but YETI now says that it was a mistake.

Kimberly Begg, the president of the northern Virginia-based women’s organization told Fox Business that YETI suddenly cancelled its order for its signature seafoam mugs after the order was placed and after they paid $1,608.

She said that the use of the the phrase “conservative women” was on the “political aisle.”

A YETI spokesperson told Fox Business:

“Starting with our first customized Rambler® Drinkware in 2015, we’ve used our best efforts to create and adhere to a policy that prevents customizing products aligned with any political affiliations or organizations in addition to content that could be considered obscene, vulgar, profane, discriminatory, defamatory, or hateful.”

It is not clear how this policy has been applied and whether CBL was barred as political or hateful or other criteria. I am assuming that the word “conservative” triggered the response.

Even assuming that this is evenly applied, how is “political” defined? Does this mean that the Democratic party or pro-choice groups also are stuck with cold coffee?

There are plenty of “political” groups that buy YETIs that do not have “liberal” or “conservative” in their names. Many contribute to elections or engage in lobbying. A wide range of groups have “political affiliations or organizations.” These are generally non-for-profits engaged in free speech activities. Selling them a YETI cup is no more of an endorsement than their buying hats made by Custom Ink.

The YETI policy seems hopelessly subjective and potentially . . . you guessed it . . . political.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 10:20

UMich Inflation Expectations Surge Even Higher As Democrats Freak Out

survivalnomics
-
0
UMich Inflation Expectations Surge Even Higher As Democrats Freak Out

Having been widely mocked – and quantitatvely denigrated by Goldman Sachs – this morning’s final print for UMich consumer sentiment for March is now a must watch.

As a reminder, Goldman explained that the Michigan measure has been especially susceptible to the tariff news recently for three reasons.

First, inflation expectations in the survey have become extremely partisan. 

Second, the share of respondents in the Michigan survey who are Democrats has always been consistently higher than the share of respondents who are Republicans

Third, switching from a phone-based to an online-based data collection process has led to more extreme answers on inflation expectations.

These three issues together have boosted short-term inflation expectations in the Michigan survey by about 1.3pp and long-term inflation expectations by 0.5pp since 2024Q4. In particular, the change in distribution across political parties and increased partisanship together generated an outsized 1.0pp boost to the 1-year inflation expectation in February.

So, with all that in mind, let’s see what the final data looks like – did it get even crazier?

The short answer is – YES!

UMich 1Yr inflation expectations rose to 5.0% (from 4.9% preliminary) while the 5-10Y expectations jumped to 4.1% (from 3.9% flash) – the highest since August 1992…

Source: Bloomberg

The gaping chasm of propaganda-driven fear is evident below the surface with Republicans expected 0.1% inflation while Democrats expect – wait for it – 6.5% price rises in the next year…

Source: Bloomberg

Source: Bloomberg

Bear in mind that Democrat’s 1Yr inflation expectations are now more than 2 times higher than they were in June 2021 when inflation would actually rise to 9%. Back then the Democrats were only off by a factor of 3x.

The final March sentiment index declined to 57 from 64.7 a month earlier. The latest reading was below both the 57.9 preliminary number and the median estimate in a Bloomberg survey of economists.

“Consumers continue to worry about the potential for pain amid ongoing economic policy developments,’’ Joanne Hsu, director of the survey, said in a statement. 

“Notably, two-thirds of consumers expect unemployment to rise in the year ahead, the highest reading since 2009.’’

The survey showed the expectations index plunged 11.4 points, the sharpest drop since 2021, to 52.6 this month. The current conditions gauge decreased to a six-month low of 63.8.

Source: Bloomberg

And the political divergence is exploding there too…

Source: Bloomberg

Labor market expectations worsened considerably across demographic and political groups in a sign of subdued spending over the coming months, the report showed. Moreover, expectations among high-income consumers sank.

“This trend reveals a key vulnerability for consumers, given that strong labor markets and incomes have been the primary source of strength supporting consumer spending in recent years,’’ Hsu said.

According to Democrats, the US outlook has literally NEVER been worse: worse than the global financial crisis, worse than covid, worse than ever.

One thing we note is that if Democrats are so terrified about the loss of purchasing power in the next year, why (based on the slowing spending data this morning) are they not rushing out to buy any and everything they can before Trump’s terrible tariff tax trashes their wealth? Unless – of course – they are just making up their UMich responses as part of the #Resistance?

Finally, even Fed Chair Jerome Powell largely dismissed the Michigan survey as an outlier for longer-run expectations, and other policymakers have since echoed his remarks.

Which data series do you trust?

Tyler Durden
Fri, 03/28/2025 – 10:12

1...1,7901,7911,792...4,601Page 1,791 of 4,601

About Us

Popular Category

Editor Picks