Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurants in Ontario are all now “Muslim-friendly”, with halal chicken and no pork on their menus, according to a new report from True North. 

Halal refers to what is permissible or lawful in traditional Islamic law, particularly regarding food and drink. It dictates that foods must be prepared and processed according to specific guidelines, such as the humane slaughter of animals and the prohibition of certain substances like alcohol and pork.

Nearly all chains in Ontario have implemented the changes, taking bacon off their menus. 

In a May letter to Muslim community leaders, KFC wrote it has “ensured all chicken products are Halal Certified including but not limited to chicken.”

“This initiative is a testament to our commitment to providing diverse and inclusive menu options for all our customers,” the letter continued, promising the changes would take place by the end of the year. 

“Everything in the store is halal,” True North confirmed after calling multiple stores in Ontario.

KFC partners with halal suppliers like Maple Lodge Farms, owner of Zabiha Halal, Canada’s top halal food brand. Zabiha Halal ensures each bird is alive before slaughter, using automated blades to cut specific channels while a Muslim recites the blessing: “In the name of Allah, Allah is the greatest!” 

Zabiha Halal’s website says: “We employ more than 25 Muslim blessers to ensure that the chickens are properly blessed on the slaughtering line.”

“Our halal slaughter is a continuous process. The Muslim blessers recite Tasmiah at the time each bird comes under the rotary blade. We understand that it is not possible for a person to continuously recite Tasmiah, over long periods, at the same rate.”

“To keep the speed consistent, the blessers at the slaughter station are rotated with other blessers to prevent fatigue. This rotation continues for the duration of the slaughter process.”

KFC in Canada is requiring all of their Ontario stores to serve Halal chicken exclusively.

They are also discontinuing pork products.

Truly insane times.

I have been warning the West about this for a long time. pic.twitter.com/Ae66Gai6TZ

— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) July 7, 2024

Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,

• Saudi Arabia aims to become a major gas exporter by 2030, as part of its ‘Vision 2030’ plan.

• Saudi Aramco announced over $25 billion in contracts for gas sector expansion.

• Despite these efforts, Saudi Arabia’s projected gas output by 2030 may still fall short of covering its own power needs.

Saudi Arabia may be the third largest producer of crude oil in the world, after the U.S. and Russia, but its gas output has struggled over the years to make much of a mark in the global market. Currently, it produces around 4.2 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) a year – making it the ninth biggest producer in the world – but this goes to meeting domestic consumption needs. Associated (with oil drilling) gas accounts for around half of the Kingdom’s present production, although the non-associated percentage has more than doubled since 2012. However, last week saw twin announcements that might begin to change that, in line with Saudi Arabia’s target of becoming a major gas exporter by 2030 as part of its ‘Vision 2030’ plan.

The two announcements came as part of the statement from the country’s flagship hydrocarbons firm, Saudi Aramco, that it has signed over US$25 billion in contracts to undertake major new gas sector expansion projects.

• The first of these, according to the firm’s chief executive officer, Amin Nasser, is that US$8.8 billion is to be spent to increase the scale and scope of the Kingdom’s gas network, in particular through the third phase development of its MGS. In addition to new rigs and ongoing capacity maintenance expenditure, the money is to fund the addition of around 4,000 kilometres of pipelines to the current infrastructure and 17 new gas compression trains. These are aimed at boosting capacity by about 3.15 billion standard cubic feet per day and connecting several more cities to the network. As part of its plans to substitute gas for oil in local power generation, domestic demand for natural gas in the country is expected to grow by 3.7% each year from now to 2030, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA).

• The second announcement was that a further $12.4 billion will be invested in the second phase of Saudi Aramco’s expansion of the much-vaunted Jafurah unconventional gas field. The money is split across 16 new contracts, including the construction of gas compression facilities and associated pipelines, and the expansion of the Jafurah Gas Plant to incorporate the building of new gas processing trains, and utilities, and export facilities. It will also include construction of Saudi Aramco’s new Riyas Natural Gas Liquids (NGL) fractionation facilities in Jubail, which is designed to process NGLs received from Jafurah. This increased gas output would provide very welcome export dollars for a country that has struggled to recover fully from the Oil Price Wars of 2014-2016 and 2020, as analysed in full in my new book on the new global oil market order. It could also replace some of the oil used in domestic power generation, so freeing up more high-value crude for export over time. Last year, Saudi Arabia generated slightly less than 70 percent of its electricity from gas, with the vast bulk of the remainder from oil. The key question for this gas field, then, is will it achieve what it is meant to?

March this year saw an unexpected sudden increase of 15 Tcf in the level of gas deposits apparently now contained in the field. If true, this would take the total reserves in the eastern Saudi field – which is the largest unconventional non-oil associated gas field in the country, and potentially the biggest shale gas development outside the U.S. – up to about 229 Tcf, or about 6.5 trillion cubic metres (Tcm). By comparison, total proven gas reserves for Russia stand at around 48 Tcm, for Iran at about 34 Tcm, and for Qatar over 24 Tcm. At the same time, the amount of crude oil being burned for domestic energy consumption has risen in the past few years to well over 500,000 barrels per day. In the extreme temperatures of the summer months, this rises to around 900,000 bpd as air conditioners remain on full for much of the period.

The longstanding plan was that production from Jafurah should reach 2.2 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) of gas production by 2036. The new plan is for sales gas (gas at the outlet of a plant that is primarily methane) production to reach 2 bcf/d by 2030 instead, allowing room for considerable exports to be undertaken. That said, all other factors remaining equal, one billion cubic feet of gas equals 0.167 million barrels of oil equivalent, so 2 bcf/d (Jafurah’s estimated 2030 output) equals 0.3340 million barrels of oil equivalent, or 334,000 barrels. Therefore, the total projected new amount of gas to come from the unconventional gas field by 2030 is around 334,000 barrels per day, which is not even enough to cover the current amount of oil – 500,000 bpd to 600,000 bpd – being burned for power generation in Saudi Arabia, never mind any increase in demand between now and 2030. Moreover, based on independent industry estimates of the changing demographics of Saudi Arabia and the corollary changing power demand patterns, the Kingdom will probably need gas production of around 23-25 bcf/d within the next 15 years just to cover its own power and industrial demand. In sum, then, even if the quality of the Jafurah find is unparalleled in the history of Saudi gas finds, the Kingdom would still be in deficit in its power generation sector if there was a straight switch from crude oil burning to gas-only burning.

Over and above the practical shortcomings of these announcements, certainly in Jafurah’s case, they do highlight an increasing awareness by the Saudis that gas, especially LNG, has been the key emergency energy source since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, and is likely to remain so in an increasingly dangerous world. It is readily available in the spot markets and can be moved quickly to anywhere required, unlike gas or oil sent through pipelines. Unlike pipelined energy as well, the movement of LNG does not require the build-out of vast acreage of pipelines across varying terrains and the associated heavy infrastructure that supports it. They also highlight that the Kingdom understands that the U.S. led the way in engineering a massive increase in LNG availability for it and its key allies with the express intention of making its NATO partners less vulnerable to Russian threats to remove gas and oil supplies from them. The U.S.’s success in doing this remains the key reason why Russia did not go unpunished for yet another invasion of a European sovereign state – as it did with Ukraine in 2014, and Georgia in 2008, as detailed in my latest book on the new global oil market order. Indeed, the U.S. went from zero LNG exports before 2016, to become the world’s biggest exporter of the gas, with around 86 million metric tonnes of LNG shipped in 2022. And around two-thirds of all the U.S.’s LNG exports since Russia invaded Ukraine have gone to Europe.  

Given the U.S.’s dominance in this field, and Saudi Arabia’s awareness that it has fallen behind in this sector, these two announcements from Riyadh may signal new opportunities for Washington to restore a beneficial relationship for it with the Kingdom. The very recent signing of a landmark 20-year deal for the U.S.’s NextDecade Corporation to sell LNG to Saudi Aramco may well end up having a significance way beyond the confines of the energy market.

This summer, Interpol ranked Canada among the top 10 worst countries for car thefts out of 137, a “remarkable” achievement given Canada’s data integration with Interpol only began in February, according to the BBC. 

After the cars are stolen, they are “either used to carry out other violent crimes, sold domestically to other unsuspecting Canadians, or shipped overseas to be resold,” the BBC wrote. 

Since integrating the Canadian Police Information Centre’s stolen vehicle data with INTERPOL’s database in February 2024, over 1,500 stolen Canadian vehicles have been detected globally, Interpol wrote in May. 

The RCMP’s database, which tracks around 150,000 stolen vehicles, now helps identify over 200 stolen cars weekly, primarily at international entry ports.

The BBC noted that the Insurance Bureau of Canada declared car theft a “national crisis” after insurers paid out over C$1.5bn in vehicle theft claims last year. Police have issued public bulletins on preventing theft, while some Canadians are installing trackers and private security measures, such as retractable bollards.

Mississauga resident Nauman Khan, who started a bollard-installation business after experiencing theft, reports high demand for his services due to widespread car thefts. 

He told the BBC: “It’s been very busy. We had one client whose street had so many home invasions that he’d hired a security guard every night outside his house because he just didn’t feel safe.”

Despite its smaller population, Canada’s car theft rate (262.5 per 100,000) surpasses that of England and Wales (220 per 100,000) and is close to the US rate (300 per 100,000). The rise in thefts is partly due to a pandemic-driven car shortage and a strong international market for certain models, making auto theft lucrative for organized crime. Canada’s port system, which focuses more on imports than exports, also contributes to the problem.

In a press release, INTERPOL Secretary General Jürgen Stock said: “Stolen vehicles are international criminal currency. Not only are they used to traffic drugs, but also as payment to other criminal networks as well as fueling activities from human trafficking to terrorism.

“Sometimes overlooked, a stolen car is not just car theft. It is part of a major revenue stream for transnational organized crime. Through increased data sharing at the global level, we can better screen vehicles at border points, identify trafficking routes and arrest the perpetrators.”

Authored by Edward Ring via American Greatness,

As President Biden’s age threatens to derail his reelection campaign, waiting in the wings and trying not to appear too eager is Gavin Newsom. It’s not easy. Wanting to be president with an intensity that might make Gollum’s lust for the One Ring appear prosaic, California’s governor knows that if Biden drops out, he’s the oddsmakers’ favorite.

But there is absolutely nothing Gavin Newsom has ever done that qualifies him to be president of the United States. If Newsom becomes the next U.S. president, he will accelerate a process that is already well underway and must be stopped at all costs: turning all of America into California.

There are glaring examples of California’s over-the-top embrace of progressive extremism. Identity politics. Race and gender “equity.” Decriminalizing crime and hard drugs. A complete failure to manage the state’s homeless, much less help them. An obsession with climate change that has inspired laws that reach into virtually every facet of life. Shortages of energy, water, and housing. And prices for goods and services so punitive that millions have fled.

Under Gavin Newsom’s watch, the state is devolving into feudalism: a massive underclass that can’t survive without government assistance, supervised by an elite minority that will retain political power by continuing to dole out that assistance. The formula is simple: make life progressively more difficult for ordinary Californians, tell them their travails are the result of bigotry and climate change, then secure their votes by offering them more government benefits.

And herein lies Newsom’s biggest crime, one shared by the progressive elites that run California and intend to take over the world. It is the biggest lie of modern progressivism—the corrupt foundation of their power. Newsom and his ilk are telling California’s middle class that what they have attained is socially unjust and ecologically unsustainable. They tell us that the ideals of equity and environmentalism compel us to live in high-density, low-impact housing, utilize shared transportation, and limit our consumption of anything that elevates our “carbon footprint.” And they are telling us that our taxes must be utilized to offer these same limited amenities to anyone who is “underserved,” “historically disadvantaged,” “unhoused,” or in any way a victim of “systemic discrimination.”

All of these assertions are monstrous lies. California is unaffordable because of decades of political choices, escalating every year, that have created high prices for everything. And more to the point, the elites that Newsom is part of and represents are themselves profiting from all of these policies that have condemned most Californians to lives of constant work and constant economic struggle. Which is to say that Newsom’s lies about the “climate crisis” and the alleged pervasive ongoing scourge of bigotry are not even noble lies in the service of achieving a better future for all. They are lies in the service of corruption, a con job designed to further enrich and empower a small elite.

Newsom is unqualified to be president of the United States for the same reason he is unfit to be governor of California. His entire public policy agenda is a rhetorical farce, existing only to fool voters, while across every major industry, politically connected players consolidate their power and their profits. Examples of this are comprehensive.

Across every business sector, owners and executives face cruel choices: fight a losing battle to preserve competition and manage costs, or stop doing business in California entirely, or join the cabal. Some still fight. Countless businesses have left. And a growing number choose to accommodate. They accept stifling regulations, knowing they have reduced the number of competitors. They accept higher costs and pass them on to increasingly captive customers with fewer and fewer options. They become bloated with attorneys and bureaucrats to deal with myriad government agencies, and for whatever the customer cannot bear, they collect in government subsidies. It’s a vicious circle, and as California spirals into feudalism, it’s taking America with it.

There is the homeless industrial complex, a consortium of government bureaucracies, “nonprofit” developers and operators, and for-profit vendors that have consumed tens of billions over just the past few years to house a laughably small fraction of California’s homeless, while simple shelters where sobriety was enforced would get them safe and on a path to recovery for a fraction of the cost.

There is Environmentalism Inc., unifying ambitious and zealous government agencies with powerful environmentalist nonprofit advocacy groups, trial lawyers, “renewables” importers, manufacturers and systems integrators, joined with utilities that love high energy prices because their profit is held to a fixed percentage of revenue. Higher costs per kilowatt-hour or therm of natural gas equal more absolute profit.

There are public sector unions—perhaps the most powerful special interest in the state—committed to the growth of government because it grows their membership dues. And the worse things get in California, the more unionized government employees are necessary to deal with crime, the homeless, and poverty. Societal failure is public sector success.

Not least, of course, are the tech billionaires, who to date have used their personal wealth and the unprecedented influence of their companies to manipulate state and national politics according to their agenda. As described, that agenda checks all the rhetorical boxes but obscures raw ambition. History provides no comparable example of wealth and power this concentrated, and they want more.

In every sphere, creating scarcity and shortages enriches the elites in California. Setting land aside to be preserved as “open space,” cordoning off urban areas and preventing expansion, is a perfect way to ensure that real estate investment portfolios—often held by huge hedge funds and public employee pension funds—continue to appreciate. And as ordinary Californians are priced out of owning homes, investment banks gobble up the inventory and rent the properties back to the plebes.

This is what Gavin Newsom offers America.

This is the scam—the historic, tragic, malevolent agenda that Newsom and the people he represents have resolved to inflict on the world.

The alternative is not a mystery. Spend government money on practical infrastructure that yields long-term benefits instead of squandering hundreds of billions on absurd make-work projects like high-speed rail and floating offshore wind, which will be permanent drains on the economy. While recognizing reasonable environmental concerns, deregulate energy, mining, timber, water, transportation and housing so millions of Californians can be employed in high-paying jobs instead of collecting government benefits. And most of all, by restoring competition in all sectors of California’s economy, we can lower the cost of living.

Gavin Newsom is smart enough to know this solution would work. But the people who donate to his campaigns, and who donate to the campaigns of the supermajority of progressives who are party to the same fraud, have no intention of ever permitting this solution to again become reality. That is why Newsom—and any politician like Newsom—can never be allowed to become U.S. president.

US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who has prioritized combating systemic racism as the center point of his role in overseeing the federal transportation system, should really get back to basics and ensure taxpayers the aviation industry is safe once again following a series of mid-air mishaps with commercial jets this year. 

The latest incident occurred early Wednesday morning when an American Airlines 737-800 aborted takeoff at Tampa International Airport due to a tire failure. Captain Steven Markovich posted footage of the incident online: 

Video captures moment American Airlines 737-800 tire fails during takeoff from Tampa Airport. The crew of AA590 safely aborted the takeoff and vacated the runway.

📹 CaptainStevenMarkovich
🔗 https://t.co/LjaQRouvIA pic.twitter.com/FafAcgzSVE

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) July 10, 2024

American Airlines acknowledged the mechanical issue with American Airlines Flight 590: 

“American Airlines flight 590 with service from Tampa (TPA) to Phoenix (PHX) experienced a mechanical issue on the runway prior to taking off. Customers safely deplaned and were bussed to the terminal.”

The airline said in a statement, “American Airlines flight 590 with service from Tampa (TPA) to Phoenix (PHX) experienced a mechanical issue on the runway prior to taking off. Customers safely deplaned and were bussed to the terminal.” The FAA said they will investigate the…

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) July 10, 2024

Earlier this week, on Monday, United Flight 1001, a Boeing 757-200, lost a main landing gear wheel while taking off from Los Angeles International Airport. A video of the incident was posted on X.  

United Airlines 757 loses a wheel during takeoff from Los Angeles International Airport. United Airlines Flight 1001 continued to Denver Airport where it landed safely. pic.twitter.com/jFDJmQpBKs

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) July 9, 2024

Also on Monday, a Delta Connection flight nearly collided with an American Eagle flight at Syracuse Hancock International Airport. Fox News said the two planes came about “700 to 1,000 feet from each other vertically.” 

Video circulating on social media showing a near-miss at Syracuse Hancock International Airport on Monday is not being classified as a “close call” by the FAA. pic.twitter.com/RCbyoqhLmT

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) July 10, 2024

And there’s this. 

Meanwhile in Vancouver 👀✈️ pic.twitter.com/DzkElldXEP

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) July 10, 2024

Come on, ‘Mayor Pete,’ do better. 

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

Buying a home in California slid further out of reach for many residents in 2023, especially in larger metropolitan areas, according to a recent Harvard University housing study.

The report found some of the highest disparity between wages and housing prices in Northern California.

According to the report released June 20, the Silicon Valley cities of San Jose, Sunnyvale, and Santa Clara had a median home sales price 11 times higher than the area’s average annual wage of nearly $113,000 in 2023.

Median home sales prices are determined by finding the midpoint of all sales, where half sold for more and half for less.

The same was found at the coast in Santa Cruz and Watsonville, where 2023 housing prices were also 11 times higher than the average yearly wage of almost $68,000.

In Los Angeles County and Anaheim—in Orange County—the median home sales price was about 10 times more than the average wage of $98,200.

Further south in San Diego and Carlsbad, housing reached nearly nine times more than the average wage of $76,000 last year.

“Both homeowners and renters are struggling with high housing costs,” the authors of the report, called “The State of the Nation’s Housing 2024” wrote in its summary.

Millions of potential homebuyers across the U.S. have been priced out of the market by rising home prices and interest rates. The cost of owning a home is also increasing as insurance and property taxes continue to rise, according to the report.

And single-family home construction is likely limited by ongoing development hurdles and high construction costs, among other restrictions.

California has taken several steps in the past few years, though, to try to make owning a home easier.

San Francisco on Feb. 23, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

State officials have relaxed permitting and environmental review requirements to make projects easier, quicker, and cheaper to build.

The state also rezoned land owned by religious institutions and colleges in 2023 to enable affordable housing development, resulting in 171,000 new developable acres.

California is also offering a new grant program that provides low-income earners with $40,000 in pre-construction costs, as well as down payments in the amount of 20 percent—up to $150,000—for some first-time homebuyers.

Still, the country is facing sharp price increases for rent and housing that started during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Dan McCue, a senior research associate and one of the lead authors of the report.

Prices for homes nationwide are up 46 percent, and rental prices have jumped 26 percent since 2022, Mr. McCue said in a press conference on the report June 20.

“Not only are prices high, but they’re rising once again,” he said. “It’s really adding insult to injury.”

High-rise buildings in downtown San Diego, Calif., on Oct. 4, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

The number of houses on the market nationally is about 30 percent below those available before the pandemic, Mr. McCue added.

Part of the reason for the shortage can be attributed to homeowners who are staying put and not selling while interest rates remain around 7 percent, he said. The combination of high prices and high interest rates has driven housing inventory to its lowest point in 20 years, he said.

Rental growth has also slowed because rents have remained high after the pandemic. Such is a problem for the record number of renters—over 12 million nationally—who pay more than half of their income on housing, which is most common among middle- and low-income earners, according to Mr. McCue.

Rising home insurance costs, which have gone up about 35 percent, are also hurting low-income homeowners, according to the report.

“We are also concerned that homeownership is increasingly out of reach for all but the highest income households,” Mr. McCue said.

“Access to homeownership has really been cut off in over half of the cities.”

The demand for rentals and single-family homes, however, continues to grow, with 1.7 million more households in the U.S. in 2023, according to the report.

Mr. McCue said he expects Gen Z, the generation that is now 12 to 27 years old, has added 8 million more households over the past four years.

Immigration has also put pressure on available housing.

“It’s a big increase, and it’s really propping up demand,” he said.

By Cemeron Arcand of TheCenterSquare

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion efforts in the United States military are ineffective, a new Arizona State University study suggests.

The study done by the university’s Center for American Institutions argued that there is an emphasis on training new soldiers about social issues like “unconscious bias” and “intersectionality” in a way the center says runs contrary to typical American ideals. The study examined DEI plans in different sectors of the military, including DEI office staffing and education at academies like West Point.

“The massive DEI bureaucracy, its training and its pseudo-scientific assessments are at best distractions that absorb valuable time and resources,” the executive summary states. “At worst they communicate the opposite of the military ethos: e.g. that individual demographic differences come before team and mission.”

Donald Critchlow, the director of the center, wrote in the studies introduction that it was focused on looking at the influence of Critical Race Theory in the United States Armed Forces training.

“The Commission on Civic Education in the Military began as a project to review civic education in the military. Our research team did not expect to find Critical Race Theory so embedded and pervasive. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs are found throughout the U.S. Armed Forces and our service academies,” Critchlow wrote. “This year long study documents just how pervasive these training programs are in our Armed Forces and Service Academies and that DEI extends well beyond just formal training programs in the military and service academies.”

“The Founders of our nation understood and feared a politicized military. History had shown them that a politicized army easily became the tool of tyranny. The Armed Forces of the United States has proudly upheld this long tradition of separating mission from politics,” he continued. 

In terms of recommendations, the study suggests that DEI office’s be completely scrapped, but said it may be politically unlikely for the time being.

“The surest way to eliminate the concerning trends we have identified, and the growth of race and sex-based scapegoating and stereotyping in the U.S. military, is to altogether end the DEI bureaucracy there,” the study states. “However, until such a time as the executive or legislative branches of the government choose to end the DEI bureaucracy in our federal agencies and military, we are left to advocate the pursuit of alternative avenues that may affect positive change despite existing policies.” 

They also suggested that the military prioritize civic education with a focus on “America’s commitment to freedom and opportunity.”

The study comes as some branches of the military continue to struggle with recruiting new service members. 

A bipartisan group of senators including Josh Hawley (R-MO) on Wednesday came to an agreement on a renewed effort to ban members of Congress from trading stock.

It’s official.

For the first time ever, a group of Senators have announced a deal to ban congress members from trading stocks

The legislation is scheduled to be discussed on July 24th https://t.co/lL8WZlVm2D pic.twitter.com/DHXigxEbzr

— Nancy Pelosi Stock Tracker ♟ (@PelosiTracker_) July 10, 2024

“Congress should not be here to make a buck,” Hawley said during a Wednesday press conference on Capitol Hill. “There is no reason why members of Congress ought to be profiting off of the information that only they get.”

Senator Josh Hawley:

“There is no reason that Congress ought to be profiting off of information that only they get”

We track politicians’ portfolios.

Several members have already made millions of dollars in the stock market in 2024. pic.twitter.com/vyETY8Cy1d

— Quiver Quantitative (@QuiverQuant) July 10, 2024

The group’s proposal will be the first to actually receive formal consideration by a Senate committee – the Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee, on July 24.

The effort, an amendment to an existing stock trading ban, would immediately forbid members of Congress, the president, and the vice president, from purchasing stocks and other covered investments – and would give lawmakers 90 days to liquidate current stocks.

Sens. Hawley, Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., Jeff Merkley, D-Or., and Gary Peters, D-Mi. negotiated and announced the new details.

If passed, the bill would also prohibit lawmakers’ spouses and dependent children from trading stocks, beginning March 2027. Also starting that year, the U.S. president, vice president and all members of Congress would have to divest from any covered investments. –CNBC

Penalties for violating the ban would be the greater amount of either their monthly salary, or 10% of the value of each covered asset in violation.

In 2021, Ossoff introduced a ban and put his own stock portfolio in a blind trust to lead as an example. The effort gained traction following revelations that several senators made  very profitable trades in as the Covid-19 pandemic unfolded, when members of Congress were receiving classified briefings warning of how disastrous the virus could be for the US economy.

Several insider trading investigations were launched by the FBI – but, surprise! no criminal charges resulted.

Then in 2022 the effort gained more steam after notorious inside trader Nancy Pelosi voiced her opposition – labeling it a misguided effort to prevent lawmakers from participating in the “free market economy.”

The video that started it all

Pelosi being asked about buying pre-IPO Visa $V shares while serving as Speaker of the House pic.twitter.com/vR99cgePst

— Nancy Pelosi Stock Tracker ♟ (@PelosiTracker_) July 9, 2024

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

I have previously written how President Joe Biden is the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. For his part, Biden has continued to double down on his anti-free speech policies with the appointment of figures who have long supported bans and other speech controls. The latest such appointment is Andy Volosky, who was made deputy director of platforms for the White House’s Office of Digital Strategy.

Volosky has been outspoken in support of banning former president Donald Trump from social media platforms.

In my new book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage, I lay out the chilling comparisons between the Adams and Biden Administrations in the crackdown of free speech. For Adams, that led to defeat in 1800 when Jefferson ran in part on restoring free speech. To my surprise, Trump and his fellow challengers in this election have not made free speech a central issue to force Biden to defend the massive censorship system supported by his Administration.

The public does not support censorship.

This is a movement that originated in higher education and has been pushed by the political and media establishment, not the voters.

Volosky will now help direct digital strategies for the White House.

He previously praised the banning of Trump, asking “What took them so long?” in a 2021 blog post.

In Volosky’s blog post, titled “A New, and Hopefully Welcome, Standard,” he warned that:

“Twitter still allows the accounts of various world leaders, governments, and spokespeople, who use Twitter for what one can only describe as propaganda as cover for autocracy, to continue to use their platform.”

He praised how Democrats have “long advocated for regulating the [social media] platforms” and emphasized how active social media users like himself and others can “keep the platforms honest.”

He added that

“we can play a role in keeping the platforms honest and improving the positive role of social in people’s lives…It’s past time for the platforms to take content moderation and user safety seriously; as social media professionals, we should be ready and eager to make that happen, and we hope that [banning Trump] can be a small step in getting that ball rolling.”

Again, with the White House doubling down on censorship, Trump and others need to force him to defend his overwhelmingly anti-free speech record. 

The 2024 election can give voters the same choice that they faced in 1800. 

Democracy is not on the ballot, but free speech is.

One way to describe the recent action in tech stocks (and Mag7 in particular) is one constant, unyielding meltup triggered by a short and gamma squeeze, record stock buybacks and FOMO among the momentum-chasing retail. Another way is to paraphrase what BofA’s derivatives team called it in its latest Equity Volatility note (available to pro subs in the usual place): unprecedented fragility.

As BofA’s Benjamin Bowler writes, large cap tech continues to exhibit fragile price action, as last week saw positive delivery numbers from Tesla power it to a ~25% return in 3 days, which included a 10.2% 1-day rally (4x its trailing 1m realized vol). However, with the move on this known catalyst being twice as large as the straddle cost last week, options drastically underpriced the fragility risk.

This occurrence is not an isolated one, and was only the most recent outlier move in large cap tech, with the likes of Apple, Oracle and Alphabet recently seeing close to their most extreme 1d vol-adjusted moves over the last 5 years.

As BofA further notes, earnings moves in tech within the largest 50 S&P stocks have been more extreme than straddle costs over 60% of the time this year so far, especially so since May (with 8 of 10 earnings straddles breaking even).

This continuation of unstable price action underscores a key observation that the bank’s generally cautious derivatives team has made in recent weeks: single stock fragility is rising, particularly around earnings & other events that provide some degree of forward guidance (see Volatility suggests AI isn’t a bubble…yet and 18-Jun-24 GEVI). Indeed, as the next chart shows, the average magnitude of fragility events in the largest stocks of the S&P is currently at its most extreme since 1992, which means the instability of single-stock dynamics is off the charts and once the current meltup fizzles, the hangover will be brutal.

Aside from this, and despite the repeated signs of fragility, options markets – particularly in large cap tech – continue to underprice fragility risk going into events. In the case of Tesla last week, its move on Tuesday (02-Jul-24) alone was almost twice as big as the cost of its straddles on the day prior to announcement (which was a pre-telegraphed catalyst).

More generally, as noted above, tech companies in the Top 50 largest stocks of the S&P have realized bigger moves on earnings than the cost of their respective weekly straddles more than 60% of the time this year, with the 10 largest tech companies seeing this hit rate reach 70%.  These realized moves have been particularly extreme since May this year, with 8 out of 10 moves being larger than the straddle cost.

Hence, as the next earnings season approaches, and given the tendency to underprice risk, BofA’s derivatives desk is urging clients to use options directionally to navigate single stock risk over coming weeks. The combination of a rise in idiosyncratic risk and the highest large cap stock fragility in 30+ years makes using the limited risk and asymmetric profile of optionality especially prudent, in BofA’s view.

More in the full BofA’s note available to pro subs.