Authored by Tsvetana Parskova via OilPrice.com,

• Lithium prices have dropped sharply, prompting production curtailments in Australia and China but not in Africa, where Chinese-owned mines maintain output.

• The global lithium market remains oversupplied, with UBS forecasting imbalances until at least 2027 despite recent production cuts.

• China’s strategic focus on EVs and low-cost lithium ensures continued mining, while a potential restocking phase could eventually boost prices.

This year’s plunge in lithium prices has forced curtailments in production in China and Western Australia as lithium miners look to limit losses and reduce the oversupply hanging over the market and prices. 

However, the lithium glut has not gone away and the market could remain oversupplied until 2027, analysts say. 

One of the reasons for a persistent glut could be the fact that while producers in Australia and, to some extent, in China, are curtailing output and delaying project ramp-ups, lithium mines in Africa owned by Chinese battery makers are not reducing supply. 

The mines, especially those in Zimbabwe, continue to operate as Chinese battery makers continue mining operations to have low-cost lithium supply and maintain market share, industry insiders and analysts have told Reuters. 

As a result, the market will continue to be oversupplied for the next two years, and not find balance until 2027, according to UBS. 

The bank still expects lithium supply to have increased by 25% this year and to rise by 15% next year, according to its estimates cited by Reuters.

The supply boost is expected despite the recent curtailments at lithium mines in Australia.

Global lithium miners have moved to curtail production and shrink their workforce—at least until market conditions improve.

Last month, Australian miner Mineral Resources said it was shutting down its Bald Hill lithium mine amid a crash in lithium prices in another project curtailment in the industry.

The low lithium prices have hit other producers and projects, too.

Australia’s Liontown Resources said it would reduce production from its Kathleen Valley lithium project, “to prioritise higher margin ore at reduced costs to adapt to the low-price lithium environment.”

Pilbara Minerals has also announced a suspension of a lithium processing plant in Western Australia.

The world’s largest lithium producer, North Carolina-based Albemarle, booked a net loss of $1.1 billion for the third quarter amid lower pricing in the lithium value chain.

As part of measures to reduce costs and operations, Albemarle will be reducing its global workforce by an expected 6-7% and is slashing its 2025 capital expenditures by around 50% versus 2024 to an anticipated range of $800 million to $900 million.

The reduction in some Chinese lithium supply is being replaced by output in Africa, which is serving the growing Chinese market, Albemarle’s chief commercial officer, Eric Norris, said on the company’s Q3 earnings call last month.

“It is a fragmented market. It is a market with significant Chinese presence today. And it’s a market where you have a lot of young companies whose sole reason for existing is to raise a lithium project,” Norris said, commenting on why more supply hasn’t been curtailed.

It could take longer for this market to rebalance, he added. 

Many mines supplying Chinese battery makers wouldn’t close amid the price plunge because they are integrated into downstream supply chains, analysts told Reuters.  

EV manufacturing and sales is a strategic priority for China’s government, which would like to have cheap lithium supply flowing.  

And China’s electric vehicle sales are surging. November marked the fifth consecutive month in which battery electric vehicles and plug-in vehicles outsold gasoline passenger cars.

China’s most recent rebound in demand has pushed local lithium prices higher. But the fundamentals of the global lithium market haven’t changed much—supply continues to outpace demand, setting the stage for at least another year of oversupply and depressed prices, analysts say.

However, an expected phase of restocking of processed lithium for batteries could rebalance the market faster, according to Will Adams, head of base metals research at Fastmarkets, a commodity price reporting agency.

“We’re probably going to be stepping in and out of deficits for a while, but as the deficits get closer, look out for the restocking phase as that can really give prices a boost,” Adams said on a recent webinar on the global outlook for the battery raw materials market in 2025. 

In yet another diplomatic tit-for-tat move as relations with Washington spiral, Russia has warned its citizens to avoid all travel to the United States, saying they could face arrest.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova laid out in a briefing Wednesday that “Traveling to the United States privately or on official business is fraught with serious risks.”

While it at first sounds like Moscow is doing a bit of trolling here, the Kremlin seems genuinely concerned over individual Russians being contacted or “lured” by US intelligence operatives.

Zakharova continued, “In this regard, we urge [Russians] to avoid non-emergency travel to the U.S. and its allied satellite states, including primarily Canada and, with a few exceptions, EU countries, for these upcoming holidays and in the future.”

While the message raised the possibility of potential prosecution from US authorities, she also emphasized the following:

“Our compatriots have long been hunted in the direct sense of the word by U.S. intelligence services,” she said.

And more:

Russians already in the U.S. should avoid situations where they could become “victims of provocations” and face arrest under the pretext of violating local laws. 

“If the attention shown to Russian citizens by Americans is becoming suspicious and intrusive, it may make sense to cut off these contacts and reconsider travel plans,” she said.

Interestingly, orchestrating ‘provocations’ is precisely what the State Department has long accused Russia of doing with Americans traveling in Russia, with the most famous recent case being the imprisonment of Brittney Griner (later released in a prison swap with Victor Bout).

The US Embassy in Moscow has in turned warned all US citizens that arbitrary detention could come if they travel through Russia. This has tensions have sourced between the two countries since the Feb. 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Authored by Chase Smith via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Homeland Security this week announced a new rule making it easier and more reliable for certain noncitizen workers to keep their jobs while waiting for their work permit renewals to be processed.

Starting Jan. 13, eligible applicants who file for their employment authorization documents (EADs) on time will automatically have their work authorization extended for up to 540 days, nearly three times longer than the previous 180-day maximum.

The change will retroactively apply to applications filed on or after May 4, 2022, the agency said.

DHS said the need for the rule change is “clear” as the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency in charge of processing these requests, “received and processed a record number of EAD applications this year.”

This permanent change is expected to help workers avoid forced job breaks caused by processing delays and give employers more certainty when planning their staffing needs, DHS said in announcing the changes on Dec. 10.

Federal officials say this decision is a direct response to business communities that have called for more efficient ways to keep valued employees on the job.

“Increasing the automatic extension period for certain employment authorization documents will help eliminate red tape that burdens employers, ensure hundreds of thousands of individuals eligible for employment can continue to contribute to our communities, and further strengthen our nation’s robust economy,” Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement.

For many applicants, navigating the work permit renewal process can be challenging, DHS said.

Lengthy waits sometimes force employers to temporarily lose trained staff while applications wind through the system. USCIS has taken steps to reduce wait times to address this, the announcement said.

“USCIS is committed to reducing unnecessary barriers and burdens in the immigration system to support our nation’s economy,” said USCIS Director Ur M. Jaddou.

“This final rule will help U.S. employers better retain their workers and help prevent workers with timely-filed EAD renewal applications from experiencing lapses in their employment authorization and employment authorization documentation through no fault of their own.”

DHS said the new rule will ensure a more stable employment environment for everyone involved.

The move is part of a broader push to streamline the immigration system and bolster the nation’s economy, DHS said.

Other efforts to cut processing times include extending validity periods from two to five years in some cases, improving how refugee permits are handled, and offering easier online filing options, the agency said.

Authored by Soham Patil via The Mises Institute,

One of the most popular economic fallacies of our time is the belief that the absence of a minimum wage would lead to limitless exploitation of employees in the economy. Minimum wage legislation prevents employees from being hired at pay rates below the mandated amount. Proponents of minimum wage laws claim that not having a minimum wage would lead to employees being paid very little for the amount of work they do. They also claim that everyone ought to be entitled to some standard of living and that minimum wages are instrumental in ensuring better conditions for everyone. Ultimately, arguments for minimum wage laws do not stand up to scrutiny.

The most important reason to oppose minimum wage laws is that they violate freedom of association and freedom of contract. It prevents two willing and able parties from coming to a voluntary contractual agreement if the wages are below the legally-mandated minimum. While minimum wage limits are often relatively low, their imposition entails that legislators believe some wages are too low and that they must take measures to prevent work being done for “exploitative wages.” Naturally, this means that some jobs will cease to exist since jobs that pay below the legally-mandated amount will no longer be worthwhile for the firms. As a result, minimum wage laws necessarily destroy some jobs in the economy.

Arguments for minimum wages rest on economic fallacies.

One of the most popular ones is that minimum wage laws prevent exploitation by setting a standard limit under which firms cannot go. A key, but mistaken, assumption in this line of thought is that without minimum wages firms would simply drive wage rates lower and lower and employees would have no choice other than to accept whatever they are given. This ignores the fact that all agreements require at least two consenting parties.

Hardly anyone would agree to work a job which pays nothing or pays a disproportionately low amount for the amount of effort and skill required.

Employees set the floor in negotiations as they would not work for too low an amount while firms set the ceiling as they wouldn’t pay exorbitant amounts which would cause them to be unprofitable. If the lack of minimum wage legislation allows firms to drive wage rates low, we must ask ourselves why certain jobs that pay much more than the minimum wage exist. Clearly there must be other factors that impact wages which would invalidate the talking point of limitless exploitation.

Employees also do not have the right to a minimum wage. Their work is only as valuable as what they can fetch on the free market. I might believe that the work I can do is worth a thousand dollars an hour, but if no firm is willing to offer me that much money, I don’t have an entitlement to it. The same is true at any wage rate, even the minimum wage rate. Many seem not to grasp this fact as advocates for a minimum wage often state that no work is worth lower than the minimum wage amount. This ignores the nature of work and that work itself does not have intrinsic value.

While minimum wage laws fail to deliver on their benefits, their consequences are more potent. Since minimum wage laws destroy some jobs, there exists a percentage of the workforce which would have had employment in the absence of these laws. Businesses are also forced to operate either on higher costs or with a lower workforce which either raises costs for consumers or leads to lower productivity. While the advocates of minimum wage legislation believe they operate from a higher ground of morality, their policies only hurt the ones whom they wish to help the most.

Repealing these laws can only lead to a better economy.

Russia on Wednesday blasted the US disbursing a $20 billion loan to Ukraine backed by frozen Russian assets as “theft” and “simply robbery” while vowing that retaliation will soon come.

On Tuesday, the Biden administration announced it disbursed the $20 billion loan for Ukraine, to eventually be paid back using interest earned on frozen Russian Central Bank assets, which has been a controversial plan long in preparation.

Washington said it issued the funds as part of the bigger total $50 billion loan being provided by the Group of Seven (G7) nations.

Russia’s foreign ministry on Wednesday further said the move “will not go answered”. It warned that it has “sufficient capacity and leverage to retaliate by seizing Western assets under its jurisdiction”.

In announcing the major action, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen had described the following:

“These funds — paid for by the windfall proceeds earned from Russia’s own immobilized assets — will provide Ukraine a critical infusion of support as it defends its country against an unprovoked war of aggression.”

“The $50 billion collectively being provided by the G7 through this initiative will help ensure Ukraine has the resources it needs to sustain emergency services, hospitals, and other foundations of its brave resistance,” she added.

This is all part of Biden and NATO allies’ efforts to ‘Trump proof’ future aid and support to Ukraine for years to come. Trump is expected to ‘probably’ reduce US defense aid to Ukraine. Trump officials have warned that Kiev would see funding greatly reduced or even pulled if it is unwilling to engage Moscow seriously at the negotiating table.

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.

Zelensky has in response said: “What is needed are concrete, strong actions that will force him [Putin] to peace, not persuasion and attempts at appeasement, which he sees as a sign of weakness and uses to his advantage.”

Authored by Melanie Sun and Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President-elect Donald Trump named attorney Harmeet Dhillon as assistant attorney general for civil rights at the U.S. Department of Justice in a post on Truth Social on Dec. 9.

“Throughout her career, Harmeet has stood up consistently to protect our cherished Civil Liberties, including taking on Big Tech for censoring our Free Speech, representing Christians who were prevented from praying together during COVID, and suing corporations who use woke policies to discriminate against their workers,” Trump said.

“In her new role at the DOJ, Harmeet will be a tireless defender of our Constitutional Rights, and will enforce our Civil Rights and Election Laws fairly and firmly. Congratulations, Harmeet!”

The Department of Justice will be headed by U.S. Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi, pending confirmation by the Senate.

Dhillon has clerked in the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Dartmouth College and University of Virginia Law School graduate, who is a member of the Sikh religious community, thanked Trump for the nomination and her family for their support.

In a post on X, she said she is “extremely honored by President Trump’s nomination to assist with our nation’s civil rights agenda.”

I’m extremely honored by President Trump’s nomination to assist with our nation’s civil rights agenda. It has been my dream to be able to serve our great country, and I am so excited to be part of an incredible team of lawyers led by @PamBondi. I cannot wait to get to work!

I… pic.twitter.com/L2NCA9m987

— Harmeet K. Dhillon (@pnjaban) December 10, 2024

“It has been my dream to be able to serve our great country, and I am so excited to be part of an incredible team of lawyers led by Pam Bondi. I cannot wait to get to work!” she wrote.

Dhillon’s appointment happened after Trump named another partner in her law firm, Dhillon Law Group, to a key position.

On Dec. 4, he announced he was selecting David Warrington as his White House counsel. Warrington replaced Trump’s previous pick for the position, William McGinley, who was moved into the role of counsel for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) commission.

Dhillon, a Republican National Committeewoman for California, previously contested then-Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel for that post. McDaniel, who ultimately won, stepped down earlier this year. Former North Carolina Republican Party Chair Michael Whatley received Trump’s endorsement and stepped into the role. Trump recently endorsed Whatley’s continuation as committee chair.

Against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, Dhillon filed numerous lawsuits challenging California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s measures, including his mask order.

Trump Names General Counsel of the OMB

In another post, Trump also announced that he was appointing Mark Paoletta to return to serve in the second Trump administration as General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

“Mark will work closely with our DOGE team to cut the size of our bloated Government bureaucracy, and root out wasteful and anti-American spending,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Paoletta, a partner at the Law Firm, Schaerr Jaffe, and a senior fellow at the Center for Renewing America, was part of the first Trump administration and an ally in advancing Trump’s American First agenda. Alongside then-OMB Director Russ Vought, who has also been asked by Trump to head the OMB again, Paoletta arranged federal funding to build Trump’s border wall facing Mexico.

“Mark is a conservative warrior who knows the ‘ins and outs’ of Government – He will help us, Make America Great Again!” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

The president-elect also endorsed K.C. Crosbie for the next co-chair of the Republican National Committee (RNC).

The position became open after Lara Trump announced on Dec. 8 that she would be stepping down and was considering a possible Senate appointment in the incoming administration as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has been named by Trump to be the next secretary of state.

Crosbie previously served as the RNC’s treasurer and the national committeewoman representing Kentucky.

“KC has been with me from the very beginning, helping real Republicans get elected across the Country, and would be a tremendous Co-Chair of the RNC! KC will work on continuing to ensure a highly functioning, fiscally responsible, and effective RNC that makes Election Integrity a highest priority,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The San Diego County Sheriff’s office is refusing to comply with the County Board of Supervisors’ vote to turn the county into a “super” sanctuary by preventing local law enforcement from complying with federal immigration enforcement efforts.

With the return of Trump to the White House, the board on Tuesday approved the measure in a 3-1 vote, prohibiting the use of its resources to help ICE, and limiting the use of its jails, county buildings and personnel in assisting federal immigration enforcement agents.

BREAKING: The San Diego County Board of Supervisors just voted 3-1 to turn the county into a “super” sanctuary county by shielding illegals from deportation and preventing police from notifying ICE about dangerous illegals in custody.pic.twitter.com/ApINL5CtRy

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) December 11, 2024

“San Diego County has always been a place where communities are valued, not divided and as a County Supervisor, I’m committed to leading a local government that promotes unity, equity, and justice for all, while upholding the law,” said County Chairwoman Nora Vargas, adding “We will not allow our local resources to be used for actions that separate families, harm community trust, or divert critical local resources away from addressing our most pressing challenges. Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and our County will not be a tool for policies that hurt our residents.”

Of course. That’s a sure sign that the woke mind virus controls her brain.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 11, 2024

Not So Fast

In response, the San Diego County Sheriff says they will ignore the Board’s resolution.

“The Sheriff’s Office will not change its practices based on the Board resolution and policy that was passed at today’s meeting,” adding that “The Board of Supervisors does not set policy for the Sheriff’s Office.

“The Sheriff as an independently elected official, sets the policy for the Sheriff’s Office. California law prohibits the Board of Supervisors from interfering with the independent, constitutionally and statutorily designated investigative functions of the Sheriff.”

Read @SDSheriff statement on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors’ vote on immigration enforcement. You can also read the full statement here: https://t.co/PSGANIABaf. pic.twitter.com/5y7I5rMeud

— San Diego Sheriff (@SDSheriff) December 11, 2024

Vargas doesn’t know what to do!

Update (1638ET): The House on Wednesday passed the sweeping $895 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which cleared the chamber in a bipartisan 281-140 vote.

200 Republicans and 81 Democrats joined together to push it over the finish line, while Senate GOP Whip John Thune (SD) said he expects the package to hit the other chamber early next week.

The House has easily approved the 2025 NDAA – a major defense policy bill. The vote came after a dustup over a transgender treatment provision added in by Speaker Mike Johnson and opposed by Democrats. The bill now goes to the Senate. pic.twitter.com/fWScowN8cP

— Jamie Dupree (@jamiedupree) December 11, 2024

The package includes a 14.5% pay raise for junior enlisted service members, as well as a 4.5% increase for all other members.

*  *  *

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The House of Representatives could vote this week on a compromise version of the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with up to $895.2 billion in defense discretionary spending.

This latest version of the NDAA, coming in at 1,813 pages, is a compromise between earlier House and Senate proposals for the annual defense bill.

The House and Senate Armed Services Committees released the new compromise bill on Dec. 7.

It allocates $849.9 billion for programs under the Department of Defense (DOD), another $33.3 billion for defense programs run through the Department of Energy and its Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and $512.4 million for defense-related activities.

The NDAA allows for up to $11.5 billion in discretionary spending adjustments, bringing the potential total to $895.2 billion.

Another $26.5 billion is tied to mandatory programs.

The new version includes increased funding to bolster U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific region with $15.6 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, a program focused on bolstering the U.S. military’s China-facing capabilities.

The spending allocation is $5.7 billion higher than the DOD requested.

Other provisions are aimed at reducing the risk of Chinese actors being able to access sensitive U.S. information.

Numerous measures bar the DOD from buying certain equipment or contracting for specific services from China.

The compromise NDAA also provides funding for seven new warships, including one Virginia-class submarine and supplemental funding for a second; an amphibious transport dock ship; and one medium landing ship.

It also authorizes funding for three new Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers; one more than the DOD requested.

The new NDAA fully funds the new Columbia-class submarine and B-21 Raider stealth bomber programs.

Included in the Act, is a 4.5 percent pay raise for all U.S. troops across the board, with enlisted ranks E-4 and below to receive a 14.5 percent pay boost.

Allowances are increased for both the cost of living and basic needs for servicemembers.

The bill also bolsters family support by funding childcare programs and new facilities, as well as expanding military spouse employment support.

“Servicemember quality of life concerns are a major cause of low morale and family stress, which are undermining recruitment, retention, and military readiness,” the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee said in a summary.

“The 2025 NDAA will improve the quality of life for servicemembers and their families.”

Culture War Riders

Cultural controversies have posed a hurdle for the Democrat-led Senate and the Republican-led House to reconcile their differing defense plans.

The version of the NDAA that the House passed in June included provisions to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) positions within the DOD and freeze new DEI hires.

Other measures in the House version of the bill stripped funds from abortion-related travel, barred funding for the teaching of “gender ideology” in DOD-funded schools, and barred defense spending on gender transition services.

The compromise NDAA version maintains the DEI hiring freeze but drops the House provisions to outright eliminate DEI programs and positions.

It also drops the efforts to block funding for abortion-related travel and eliminates money for materials promoting gender ideology in DOD-funded schools.

The compromise bill does bar the DOD’s health care program, Tricare, from covering gender-transitioning treatments for children under the age of 18.

Another House NDAA provision, that would bar the DOD from knowingly contracting with entities that engage in the boycotts of Israel, carried over into the compromise bill.

Republicans and Democrats both claimed some victories in the cultural battles.

“The FY25 NDAA builds upon the gains made in the FY24 NDAA to end the radical woke ideology being forced on our servicemen and women and restores the focus of our military on lethality,” the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee said in its assessment of the compromise bill.

By contrast, House Armed Services Democrats said they “were successful in blocking provisions that attacked DEI programs, the LGBT community, and women’s access to reproductive health care.”

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, still hopes to change the final bill, to eliminate the provision barring Tricare coverage for gender-transitioning treatment for minor children.

“Blanketly denying health care to people who clearly need it, just because of a biased notion against transgender people, is wrong,” Smith said in a Dec. 8 press statement.

“This provision injected a level of partisanship not traditionally seen in defense bills.”

Smith accused House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) of using the provision to appeal to extreme elements within his party and urged Johnson to abandon the provision.

Provisions Not Adopted

The new bill drops hundreds of additional legislative provisions lawmakers in the House and Senate had sought.

The Senate Armed Services Committee had proposed S. Amdt. 3290 as an omnibus amendment encompassing 93 other changes and legislative provisions.

One would have required U.S. individuals and business entities to notify the Treasury Department of outbound investments in critical technology sectors in China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.

This notification provision would have covered a range of sensitive technology investments, including advanced semiconductors and microelectronics, hypersonic, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence systems.

The compromise NDAA proposal went forward without adopting many provisions laid out in amendment 3290, including the outbound investment notification measure.

The House had hoped to include a provision codifying a drone corps as a basic component of the U.S. Army, but that measure didn’t make it into the new bill.

Another provision in the House NDAA called on the DOD to prepare a report on plans for defeating Mexican drug cartels.

This provision did not make it into the compromise bill.

However, it directs the secretary of defense to prepare an assessment of the Mexican military’s capabilities for countering transnational criminal organizations, and of the DOD’s counternarcotics support for Mexican forces by April 1, 2025.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

As Democratic politicians and pundits rush to defend President Joe Biden’s unethical pardon of his son, Hunter, the public is expressing overwhelming opposition to his abuse of office.

The latest poll, by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, found that only two out of ten Americans support the pardon despite weeks of media spin.

The poll shows that Biden is no longer even garnering a majority among Democrats. Only 38 percent sought the pardon.

As discussed in my New York Post column this week, there was an embarrassing moment recently at the White House when Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre claimed that a poll showed “64% of the American people agree with the pardon — 64% of the American people. So, we get a sense of where the American people are on this.”

That poll actually showed the majority of Americans opposed the pardon. Yet, it was 64 percent of Democrats who favored a president giving his own son a pardon.

It now turns out that that poll was likely wrong and that, even among Democrats, less than 40 percent support the pardon. Jean-Pierre is unlikely to use today’s press conference to highlight this poll, as she erroneously used the prior poll.

This has not stopped Democratic figures in Congress and the media fighting to excuse a grossly unethical and corrupt use of pardon authority.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate majority whip, even called it a “labor of love.”

Indeed, much of the corruption in Washington is a labor of love, from nepotism to influence peddling to corrupt pardons.

Indeed, faced with overwhelming opposition from the public to the Biden pardon, Democratic members are now “Prisoners of Love” in fighting to rationalize a blatantly unethical act.

This may or may not be a video of the choreographed response at the DNC with the members and media figures:

*  *  *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Two days ago, when China reported another month of dismal import and export activity, with both missing estimates…

… we reminded readers that at a time when China is scrambling – and failing – to convince the world that it will unleash a historic fiscal and monetary stimulus (just not right now, and not tomorrow, but maybe some time next year so start buying Chinese stonks or something), it will also have to devalue the yuan if it hopes to actually kickstart its mercantlist economy.

One day later:

Yuan Slides on Report China Considering Weaker Currency in 2025: BBG https://t.co/bILDeGQxhJ

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 11, 2024

Turns out we were right once again because just under a decade since China’s infamous 2015 yuan devaluation, Beijing is getting ready for round two.

According to Reuters, Beijing policymakers are mulling letting the yuan depreciate, possibly to around 7.5 per dollar, in response to the threat of a trade war with the US.

Letting the yuan , depreciate could make Chinese exports cheaper, blunting the impact of tariffs, and creating looser monetary settings in mainland China.

Reuters spoke to three people who have knowledge of the discussions about letting the yuan depreciate but requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

Following the news, which had been rumored both here and elsewhere in recent weeks, the China’s yuan slid the most in a week, while regional peers also slumped, with the New Zealand dollar falling to the weakest in more than two years, while the Australian dollar hit levels last seen in November last year.

Pressure on the yuan had intensified since the re-election of Donald Trump, who has threatened to impose tariffs on China and other countries, and many investors have already speculated Beijing will abandon its current policy of maintaining a stable currency to compensate for any impact this could have on its economy.

“There is a compelling logic embedded in these comments,” said Jane Foley, head of FX strategy at Rabobank in London. “China’s economy is already weak, inflation is low, and it will have to position itself for Trump tariffs.”

Of course, a yuan devaluation will carry huge costs. A rapid depreciation could lead to aggressive capital outflows, triggering even more currency declines, and a surge in bitcion similar to the one observed in 2016 when, in response to China’s 2015 devaluation, the crypto currency saw its first dramatic explosion higher and has never looked back. The downward spiral tends to dent appetite for China stocks and bonds, risks destabilizing financial markets and hurting growth, while sending gold and bitcoin to new all time highs.

On the other hand, it’s not like mercantilist China, whose economy was and remains entirely dependent on exports, has much of a chance. The world’s second largest economy has long been hammered by a prolonged property crisis and souring consumer sentiment. To rejuvenate growth, China earlier this week signaled bolder economic support next year, embracing a “moderately loose” monetary policy and pledging “more proactive” fiscal policy.

The yawning yield gap between Chinese sovereign bonds and Treasuries is also putting pressure on the yuan. China’s 10-year benchmark yield fell to a fresh record low this week, below 1.9%, amid bets on more interest-rate cuts from the PBOC.

Even before the Retuers report, strategists at BNP Paribas saw the yuan falling to 7.45 by the end of 2025, according to a note this week, while Nomura said this month the currency can drop to 7.6 in offshore trading by May. Similarly, JPMorgan expects the offshore yuan to weaken to 7.5 in the second quarter.

“For any macro trader, this is a case of when and by how much yuan weakens in the first half of next year — and not so much if,” said Viraj Patel, strategist at Vanda Research in London. “When Chinese authorities start ‘mulling’ things over, we all know what comes next.”

Still, economists including Karsten Junius, chief economist at Bank J Safra Sarasin, said that it was “too early” for China to step into the market to weaken the yuan before the US announces any trade restrictions.

The Reuters report also refocused trader attention on China’s daily reference rate for the managed currency — Beijing’s preferred tool to guide yuan expectations. That’s the gauge around which the yuan is allowed to trade in a 2% range.

The PBOC has consistently set the so-called fixing stronger than 7.2 since the US election, despite wild swings in the greenback and increasing predictions by analysts that the central bank would buckle. Allowing a breach risks sending a signal to traders that the PBOC is comfortable with further yuan weakness, while holding the line suggests it may dig in for a fight.

“A moderate depreciation is an increasingly likely scenario as long as the move is not excessive versus non-greenback currencies,” said Gary Ng, senior economist at Natixis. “However, the market should still be wary of sudden intervention if the move is too big within a short period of time.”

Khoon Goh, head of Asia Research at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group, said that while authorities in Beijing may be open to allowing the yuan to be flexible, they may not want a premature over-reaction based on speculation.

This will not be the first time that policymakers face the question of whether to prioritize currency stability or boost exports. During the last China-US trade war under Trump’s first administration, Beijing allowed the yuan to weaken past the psychological milestone of 7 for the first time since the global financial crisis.

Of course, it all started in August 2015, when amid a collapse in exports, Beijing devalued the yuan in a shocking move to aid growth and reform its foreign-exchange market. That quickly backfired with capital outflows surging, prompting the central bank to burn through its reserves to stabilize the currency, and also sparked the first big move higher in bitcoin, as we observed at the time.

This time, Beijing would be mindful of creating too much weakness and volatility in the currency at a time when it wants to increase the yuan’s reserve status, said Foley at Rabobank. “The authorities would be looking for some equilibrium between these factors.”

And sure enough, news of a potentially weaker yuan triggered a knee-jerk risk-off reaction across markets, from FX to commodities. European stocks also fell in early trade, with energy and miners among the worst performers, although once the US tech bubble got running much of this initial skepticism was promptly forgotten. Oil prices trimmed gains as a depreciating yuan raises concerns about China’s ability to sustain crude demand that’s already weak, given the likely added cost of oil imports priced in dollars. Copper and gold also fell but have since recovered.  Meanwhile, the euro also dropped, indicating traders may be developing the Trump trade into a tariff-risk hedging trade. The dollar gained.