Authored by Ken Silva via Headline USA (emphasis ours),

The Project for Privacy & Surveillance Accountability announced this week that it has obtained records about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ use of stingrays to track Americans.

Stingrays are a relatively new technology that simulate cell towers and collect signals from devices nearby.

PPSA filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the ATF in February 2021, and announced on Wednesday that it had received a batch of documents. According to PPSA, those documents show that the agency uses stingrays.

“The information released by the ATF confirms the agency is indeed utilizing stingray technology,” PPSA said. “Although the agency attempted to minimize the usage of stingrays, it is clear they are being widely used against Americans.”

PPSA has not published the documents it received, but described some of their contents.

“The ATF stressed that stingrays are not precise location trackers like GPS, despite the plethora of information stingrays can still provide,” the organization said. “Answers to questions from the Senate Appropriations Committee about the ATF’s usage of stingrays and license plate reader technology are entirely blacked out in the ATF documents we received.”

PPSA added that ATF policy conceals the use of these devices from their targets, even when relevant to their legal defense.

PPSA said there’s an example of this in the documents it received.

“When an ATF agent interviewed by a defense attorney revealed the use of the equipment, a large group email was sent out saying: ‘This was obviously a mistake and is being handled,’” the privacy watchdog said.

PPSA said it will continue to track stingray usage and report the responses it receives to its FOIA requests with various federal agencies.

Civil liberties activists have noted that the use of stingrays by law enforcement dramatically increased after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Carpenter v. U.S., which found that law enforcement’s warrantless collection of cell phone geolocation data violated the Fourth Amendment. Instead of obtaining warrants, police agencies have used stingrays as a workaround.

Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

The S&P 500, the world’s biggest and most liquid equity index influences the sentiment or price of most global assets. However, as discussed here repeatedly over the past few years, its performance has been skewed by mega-cap growth stocks, i.e., the Generals. Of course, in 2022, they had a very tough time. Tesla (-65.0%), Meta (-64.2%), Amazon (-49.6%), Alphabet (-39.1%), Microsoft (-28.0%), and Apple (-26.4%) all underperformed to sometimes dramatic effect. And given these 6 names alone still comprise around 19% (down from 26% this time last year) of the world’s most important stock index, DB’s Jim Reid notes that even macro-only investors need to pay attention.

Of this list, Tesla has been the most volatile this year falling 12.2% on the first day but having two +5% plus days, including yesterday. It’s -2.8% so far in 2023.

Which brings us to today’s Chart of the Day from Jim Reid, which updates a graph from his “bubble chart book” in January 2021. Back then, he showed that Tesla’s market cap was around as big as the next largest 8 global auto companies. That was obviously a premature concern as at the peak in November 2021 (market cap $1.24tn), it was then worth around the same amount as the next 13 largest – an incredible stat.

Fast forward to today and it’s now back down to being worth a bit more than just the next two largest ($378bn market cap).

While Reid admits that he not is a single-name stock analyst, he says it’s interesting to debate what valuation such a disruptor should have relative to the competition: “After all, non-fossil fuel cars will continue to dominate the roads for some years, but most car companies will also compete for the spoils in the electric market. It is true that Tesla bulls have pointed out for some years that disruptors such as Apple and Amazon have maintained a dominant position in their respective sectors. But it’s not clear if the sectors/products are comparable. The bulls might also point to Tesla still having increased by 5 times since the March 2020 Covid lows. So, the starting point is important.”

In any event, at the peak, we were still in a world of zero yields and expected to stay there in perpetuity by many. As such, companies with an expected high earnings stream in the future were given very high multiples. This wasn’t the fault of those companies impacted.

So for macro, Reid says that “it is interesting to debate how much of the recent fall in such stocks is down to the interest rate environment changing, and how much was a fundamental overvaluation story.” That matters if the interest rate environment changes again (not if but when) and as such is important for macro.

Authored by Kyle Anzalone & Connor Freeman via The Libertarian Institute,

Senator Angus King said the US should not put a timetable on support for Ukraine and remain involved in the war until “Putin is out.” Comparing the current situation with Russia to the Allies’ failure to stop Nazi Germany before World War II, the Maine senator insisted on more Western aid for Kiev.

During a virtual press conference following his recent visit to the Ukrainian capital, King was asked how long the United States should continue its role in the conflict, replying that support for Kiev should be indefinite. “I believe we should remain there until Putin is out,” he said. 

It is unclear if King was calling for Putin’s removal from power in a coup d’etat, or merely for Russian troops to vacate all Ukrainian-claimed territory. The two warring parties maintain conflicting territorial claims and King acknowledged the war is now in a stalemate, but he nonetheless claimed the conflict would not be a “20-year struggle” like America’s experience in Afghanistan.

Throughout the virtual presser, King referenced a historical need to prevail over Russia, saying nothing of the potential for escalation to nuclear war between the world’s largest atomic arsenals. 

The senator noted that he often receives questions from constituents about the wisdom of US involvement in the war, but went on to cite his own version of a Bush-era epithet: ‘We fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.’

“I get letters every now and then, people saying, ‘Why are we doing this? Ukraine’s far away. It’s not our fight.’ Well, it is our fight, because if we don’t fight it now, it will spread,” King said. “And it will become something that we can’t avoid being involved in, just as occurred in the late 1930s at the beginning of World War II.”

He went on to claim that if Putin was not stopped in Ukraine, he would go on to conquer more of Europe, comparing the Russian leader to Adolf Hitler several times. 

King also suggested the US could give additional aid to Ukraine, pointing to allies who are giving more when compared to their overall gross domestic product. “If you measure it in terms of GDP, we’re between fifth and tenth in the world, and other countries are contributing actually larger shares of their GDP to the defense of Ukraine,” he continued, “Why? Because they recognized, as hopefully we will continue to recognize, that this is really a fight for Western values.”

Since Russia’s invasion kicked off last February, Congress has authorized nearly $120 billion in aid for Kiev, including more than $21 billion in direct military assistance and a series of other financial and humanitarian aid packages. King claimed the American tax dollars are being well spent and accounted for, arguing “The software that they’re using, working with Deloitte and SAP, to track everything coming in – every spare part, every dollar.”

Amazing candor from Iran-Contra felon Ollie North:

Ukraine is just like Reagan’s dirty wars in Central America, Africa and Afghanistan

Most of the aid is a kickback to US weapons makers and Beltway contractors

The proxy war is preparation for a larger war w/ China over Taiwan pic.twitter.com/kmKW2JZCH4

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) December 29, 2022

However, CNN has reported that US arms sent to Ukraine quickly fall into a “black hole” and are nearly impossible to track. In October, Finland’s national law enforcement agency warned that weapons being shipped to Ukraine are ending up in the hands of criminal gangs, while Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari warned weeks later that “the situation in the Sahel and the raging war in Ukraine serve as major sources of weapons and fighters that bolster the ranks of the terrorists in the Lake Chad Region.”

King’s latest presser followed a trip to Ukraine last week, where he said he held a “thrilling” meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky and described him as among “the great leaders of the century.”

While the senator claimed Zelensky and Ukraine are champions of democracy, some analysts have argued that Kiev has only continued its transformation into an authoritarian state under his rule. As commentator Ted Galen Carpenter wrote in The American Conservative, “genuine democracies do not ban multiple opposition parties or close opposition media outlets. Nor do they rigorously censor (and put under strict government control) media outlets that they allow to remain open. Genuine democracies do not outlaw churches that advocate policies the government dislikes.” He added, “yet the Ukrainian government has committed not just one or two, but all of those abuses.”

Authored by Chris Morrison via DailySceptic.org,

A damning indictment of the Net Zero political project has been made by one of the world’s leading nuclear physicists.

In a recently published science paper, Dr. Wallace Manheimer said it would be the end of modern civilisation. Writing about wind and solar power he argued it would be especially tragic “when not only will this new infrastructure fail, but will cost trillions, trash large portions of the environment, and be entirely unnecessary”. The stakes, he added, “are enormous”.

Dr. Manheimer holds a physics PhD from MIT and has had a 50-year career in nuclear research, including work at the Plasma Physics Division at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory. He has published over 150 science papers. In his view, there is “certainly no scientific basis” for expecting a climate crisis from too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in the next century or so. He argues that there is no reason why civilisation cannot advance using both fossil fuel power and nuclear power, gradually shifting to more nuclear power.

There is of course a growing body of opinion that points out that the Emperor has no clothes when it comes to all the fashionable green technologies. Electric cars, wind and solar power, hydrogen, battery storage, heat pumps – all have massive disadvantages, and are incapable of replacing existing systems without devastating consequences.

Manheimer points out that before fossil fuel became widely used, energy was provided by people and animals. Because so little energy was produced, “civilisation was a thin veneer atop a vast mountain of human squalor and misery, a veneer maintained by such institutions as slavery, colonialism and tyranny”.

This argument hints at why so many rich, virtue-signalling celebrities argue not just for Net Zero but ‘Real’ Zero, with the banning of all fossil fuel use. King Charles said in 2009 that the age of consumerism and convenience was over, although the multi-mansion owning monarch presumably doesn’t think such desperate restrictions apply to himself. Manheimer notes that fossil fuel has extended the benefits of civilisation to billions, but its job is not yet complete. “To spread the benefits of modern civilisation to the entire human family would require much more energy, as well as newer sources,” he adds.

The author notes that the emphasis on a false climate crisis is becoming a “tragedy for modern civilisation”, which depends on reliable, affordable and environmentally viable energy. “The windmills, solar panels and backup batteries have none of these qualities,” he states. This falsehood has been pushed by what has been termed a climate industrial complex, comprising some scientists, most media, industrialists and legislators. Furthermore, he continues, this grouping has “somehow” managed to convince many that CO2 in the atmosphere, a gas necessary for life on Earth, one which we exhale with every breath, is an environmental poison.

In Manheimer’s view, the partnership among self-interested businesses, grandstanding politicians and alarmist campaigners, “truly is an unholy alliance”. The climate industrial complex does not promote discussion on how to overcome this challenge in a way that will be best for everyone. “We should not be surprised or impressed that those who stand to make a profit are among the loudest calling for politicians to act,” he added.

Perhaps one of the best voices to cast doubt on an approaching climate crisis, suggests the author, is Professor Emeritus Richard Lindzen of MIT, one of the world’s leading authorities on geological fluid motions:

What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous planet-destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.

Much of Dr. Manheimer’s interesting paper debunks many of the fashionable nostrums surrounding politicised ‘settled’ climate science. It is an excellent read. Discussing some of the contrary opinions that debunk obviously false claims, he says it is “particularly disheartening” to see learned societies make definitive claims when so much contrary information is readily available. He points out that over the last 10,000 years, the Earth has almost certainly been warmer. There have been warmer and colder periods, just like today.

To find the off-narrative information, even Google can be used, Manheimer says – though he does note that the company warns it will not provide information on “claims denying that long-term trends show that the global climate is warming”.

The top Marine Corps General for Japan this week issued some very revealing statements in an interview focused on countering China in the Financial Times. Despite Chinese leadership insisting that the Taiwan and Ukraine situations are not comparable, this is precisely how Lieutenant General James Bierman presented the situation, even going so far as to admit the Pentagon is preparing a counter-China “theatre” by cultivating military ties with southeast Asian allies.

“The US and Japanese armed forces are rapidly integrating their command structure and scaling up combined operations as Washington and its Asian allies prepare for a possible conflict with China such as a war over Taiwan, according to the top Marine Corps general in Japan,” the FT report begins.

While it’s no secret that Tokyo has been more and more openly siding with the US stance on arming Taiwan over the past year, also abandoning its historic post-WWII neutrality by drastically ramping up defense spending, Gen. Bierman confirmed “exponential increases” over the past year in joint US-Japan operations. 

The interview itself is explosive enough to provoke the ire of Beijing officials, given how explicit the theme of the ‘Ukraine-ification of Taiwan’ is throughout Bierman’s statements, especially given it’s coming from the commanding general of Third Marine Expeditionary Force (III MEF) and of Marine Forces Japan.

Speaking in an unusually open and detailed manner regarding ongoing preparations to defend Taiwan, the US general said the following:

“Why have we achieved the level of success we’ve achieved in Ukraine? A big part of that has been because after Russian aggression in 2014 and 2015, we earnestly got after preparing for future conflict: training for the Ukrainians, pre-positioning of supplies, identification of sites from which we could operate support, sustain operations,” he said.

“We call that setting the theatre. And we are setting the theatre in Japan, in the Philippines, in other locations.”

Again, this kind of talk itself constitutes a brazen shot across China’s bow. FT admits Bierman’s comments are an “unusually frank comparison” between potential conflict with China and the Ukraine crisis.

Of course, as applied to Ukraine itself the comments are highly revealing, given the casual admission that US defense planners were busy inside Ukraine years ago “earnestly preparing” for war with Russian, even down to the “pre-positioning of supplies” and readying the battle space.

The NDAA that was just signed into law makes clear that the US is rapidly accelerating its Ukraine-ification of Taiwan, including explicitly preparing to wage war against China, but no doubt we’ll be told any action taken in response is “unprovoked” https://t.co/KMTKPcpcKw

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) December 26, 2022

And more frank comments from the top Marine general in Japan, per the interview: 

“When you talk about the complexity, the size of some of the operations they would have to conduct, let’s say [in] an invasion of Taiwan, there will be indications and warnings, and there are specific aspects to that in terms of geography and time, which allow us to posture and be most prepared,” he said. As part of those preparations, the Philippines plan to allow US forces to preposition weapons and other supplies on five more bases in addition to five where the US has already access.

“You gain a leverage point, a base of operations, which allows you to have a tremendous head start in different operational plans,” Bierman said. “As we square off with the Chinese adversary, who is going to own the starting pistol and is going to have the ability potentially to initiate hostilities . . . we can identify decisive key terrain that must be held, secured, defended, leveraged.”

Another interesting part of the interview comes in him cautioning regional US allies, including Taiwan, not to overestimate the Chinese military, asserting that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) should not be fearfully seen as as being “10 feet tall”.

The general’s remarks were published at the very moment China is continuing its threatening drills aimed at Taipei, which since Nancy Pelosi’s provocative August trip to the self-ruled island has featured PLA fighters and navy ships breaching the Taiwan Strait media line on frequent occasions, including dozens of times on Sunday. It was the second major exercise within less than two weeks into 2023, which the PLA Eastern Command described as “joint combat readiness patrols and actual combat drills.”

If Pentagon leadership continues down this path of casting the Taiwan-China standoff in terms directly relatable to the Russian invasion of Ukraine (and correspondingly, the Unites States’ arming of Kiev to the teeth… comparable to arms transfers to Taipei), we can fully expect Beijing to steadily ramp up its aerial and naval threatening drills aimed at Taiwan.

China’s longstanding official policy, including that which is consistently articulated by President Xi, has been that it only seeks peaceful unification, and that it remains only Washington “playing with fire” in falsely stoking pro-independence forces. Yet Beijing is certainly not naïve, and appears busy paving the way of setting its own theatre looking ahead to a potential clash.

For example, a fresh report in South China Morning Post cites evidence of recent PLA Navy maneuvers that strongly suggest it’s seeking to expand warfighting capacity in Pacific waters:

A People’s Liberation Army warship’s solo trip deep into the South Pacific is believed to have been a test of the Chinese navy’s refueling and supply capacity at sea.

The PLA Navy’s guided-missile destroyer Yinchuan (hull number 175) had been sailing near the exclusive economic zone of New Caledonia, a French overseas territory in the South Pacific, about 1,500km east of Australia, according to a French defence ministry tweet on December 29.

French navy jets tracked and photographed the warship’s activities, it said.

The same warship had only last month been spotted sailing close to French Polynesia, causing SCMP to point out that “The area it appeared in was tens of thousands kilometers away from the Chinese coast, and far beyond the range the 7,500-tonne destroyer could sustain without resupply, leaving aside the requirements for the return journey.”

China and Philippines agree on new channels to resolve South China Sea maritime issues, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Xi Jinping also agreed to restart joint oil and gas exploration. pic.twitter.com/VYe7ZKrYyB

— Geopolitics.wiki (@GeopoliticsW) January 5, 2023

Meanwhile, China also necessarily finds itself in a position where it must utilize strong diplomacy – or else soft power – with its neighbors as it seeks to mitigate the effects of America’s significant and growing regional presence. As but the latest clear example, last week Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos visited Beijing. He met with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping on Wednesday, and the two agreed to “friendly consultation to appropriately resolve maritime issues,” according to state media.

* * * 

War-gaming a China-US war over Taiwan: a hypothetical invasion would exact “high costs on the island and the US Navy,” according to a new think tank study…

A hypothetical Chinese invasion of Taiwan “quickly founders” but exacts high costs on the island and the US Navy, according to a Washington think tank’s war games https://t.co/Bc9Hl8zOYM

— Bloomberg (@business) January 9, 2023

It’s that time again when DoubleLine CEO Jeff Gundlach lays out his vision for the full year, and speaks about the economy, markets and his investment outlook in what he dubs his “biggest webcast of the year” called “Just Markets.”

Heading into today’s webcast titled “What’s Going On”, a homage to Marvin Gaye, Gundlach told CNBC in a December interview that he believes the Fed should stop hiking rates, although he thinks the FOMC will increase rates one more time — by 25 bps in February. The DoubleLine CEO also says a recession is imminent, predicting a roughly 75% probability that the economy falls into one.

Additionally,  in the same interview, Gundlach said the inflation rate could fall faster than most believe and may even fall to zero when it drops. Gundlach, one of the biggest names in bond investing, also noted that the bond market has “completely priced in the fact that inflation” has peaked and is receding.

The bond market has begun 2023 very much in rally mode, challenging a Fed looking to push rate policy to at least 5% this year. The market state of play was endorsed by Gundlach, who tweeted this on Friday after jobs and ISM services data:

The highest yield on the US Treasury curve is the six month T-Bill, at 4.8%.

There is no way the Fed is going to 5%.

The Fed is not in control.

The Bond Market is in control.

— Jeffrey Gundlach (@TruthGundlach) January 7, 2023

A quick look back one year ago to his last “Just Markets” presentation in Jan 2020, which was titled “I Feel Young Again”, here are some of his predictions:

• Gundlach focused heavily on signals that the US economy could be weakening, saying that “I do think recessionary pressure is building.”
• He suggested inflation would remain elevated through the first part of 2022 and could “peak out.”
• The Fed “seems pretty far behind the curve when you consider wage growth,” which has risen significantly, he said.
• Gundlach said Fed officials will likely follow the message of two-year Treasury yields and will likely get the federal funds rate to about 1.5% before causing economic pain.
• He reinforced long-term bearish call on the dollar and long-term bullish call on gold. He said he thinks US stocks are highly valued versus overseas stocks.

Looking ahead it will be interesting if, as Bloomberg’s Chris Antsey writes, Gundlach will fall in line with the markets or with the Fed when it comes to whether rate cuts are in the offing later this year. Interest-rate futures reflect expectations for roughly a half percentage point of cuts by year-end once the Fed gets its target to around 5% in the spring.It will also be interesting to get Gundlach’s view on inflation dynamics with China reopening. China’s economy is going through a big negative wave just now as the pandemic imposes a big human toll. But after some time, consumer spending — both at home and abroad through tourism — is bound to soar. How will that reverberate through to US inflation?

With that, readers can join the free webcast by clicking on the chart below.

Gundlach wastes no time to slam 2022 as a miserable year, which he says was the worst year of his career in terms of benchmark returns for fixed income, and then proceeds to immediately lay in to the Fed, saying that the bond market signals  – correctly – that there is no way the Fed will hike to its target above 5%…

… and instead it is the bond market that is in control and always has been: quite simply, “The Fed follows the 2Y Treasury.”

Gundlach then gives a preview of what he thinks the Fed’s next QE will look like (expect it to be much bigger than QE4)…

… if no other reason than it will soon have to monetize not only the debt but the interest on this debt, which he calculates as rising to $1.25 trillion per year if the US deficit rises by $1TN and rates stay at 4%.

Playing devil’s advocate, Gundlach says that he would love to see a Fed that wasn’t doing quantitative easing because it manipulates things, adding that “we’ll see if they can resist the temptation to do quantitative easing yet again.” (spoiler alert: no).

When could QE restart? Well, according to Zoltan, this will happen as soon as this summer (see here) and it will be great news for the tech companies that have been crushed courtesy of their 1.00 correlation to the Fed’s balance sheet.

Speaking of QE, Gundlach says that if they do QE, “my suspicion is the circumstances will be sufficiently dire”, such as a recession, and according to Gundlach one will happen once the unemployment rate crosses above the 12 month moving average of the unemp rate, traditionally a fail-safe recession indicator. At this rate it will be in a few months. 

In any case, the unemployment rate is “the last man standing,” he says. Other more accurate indicators, such as the leading economic indicators index “certainly” has the look of recession in it, he says, as does the  ISM purchasing manager surveys as also suggesting the US is heading into the “front end of a recession.” Also don’t forget the yield curve inversion, that too is screaming recession, Gundlach says.

Thanks to the strong increase in interest rates and widening of spreads in credit products, the bond market is much cheaper than the stock market — even after equities sold off, he says. Eyeing the equity risk premiun, Gundlach says that the bond market is much cheaper than the stock market, he says. It is not rich anymore and “The downside in bonds is less than stocks.”

As a result, instead of a traditional 60/40 portfolio, Gundlach says he recommends a 60% bond allocation, 40% stocks. Or even better, a 60-25-15  portfolio with 15% in “other” investments.

Going back to inflation, or rather disinflation, Gundlach is skeptical that inflation will drop from 9.1% to 2.0% and “magically stop there” – it’s “absurd” he says, and adds that if inflation goes to 2% over the course of 2023, it will turn negative. He also notes that if  the Fed is so aggressive and they do make it happen, the inflation rate will go below 2%. In fact, if the Fed can make this happen in 2023, the rate may go to zero, he added.

Looking at stocks, Gundlach distinguishes between the cap weighted and equal-weighted and recalls when he told markets to get out of the cap-weighted and into the equal-weighted index a year ago, a trade which has done very well now that the gigagap tech “generals” have fallen. “One of the greatest trades was to get out of the market-cap weighted S&P and go to the equal weighted,” he says, referring to a reco he made just to that effect.

A similar trade is going short the Nasdaq a year ago vs the S&P: here the relative value surpassed the dot com bubble levels, but is now rapidly sliding.

Pair trades aside, Gundlach echoes Michael Hartnett who last Friday said “buy the world” (not the US), and Gundlach agrees, saying “I recommend zero US equities” and instead urges listeners to buy ROW, Europe and Emerging Markets over the US: “I prefer emerging market equities” he said, especially if the EM Currency Index can rise above the 200 DMA which would be a “massive tailwind.”

And if the US is set to underperform, so is the dollar: “I think the dollar is headed lower,” he says. “I don’t think it’s heading to 115,” referring to the dollar spot index.”

Looking ahead, Gundlach says that he is “very excited” about 2023 because one year ago, bonds and stocks were “hopeless” and “you knew you were headed into a horror show” but now there is a lot of ways to “risk-mingle and risk-hedge with fixed income.”

Much more in Gundlach’s full presentation below:

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in the New York Post on the new narratives emerging in the media in anticipation of the investigation into Biden influence peddling.

The comments by NBC’s Meet the Press host Chuck Todd capture the ongoing efforts to dismiss the serious allegations raised in the scandal.

Here is the column:

“It does sound personal”: NBC’s “Meet the Press” host’s words Sunday capture the new narrative in Washington as the House readies the long-delayed investigation into the Biden family’s foreign influence peddling.

I previously wrote how the media was preparing to control the damage from the scandal after spending years falsely calling the Hunter Biden laptop “Russian disinformation.” Even after belatedly acknowledging the laptop’s authenticity two years after The Post’s October 2020 reveal, they continue to bury the story involving Russian, Chinese, Ukrainian and other foreign interests, including figures associated with foreign intelligence.

Now the details of one of the largest and most lucrative influence-peddling operations in history could be made public — along with their effort to conceal it.

Even in a city where influence-peddling is a virtual cottage industry, the Bidens took the corrupt practice to a truly Olympian level. The direct references to Joe Biden receiving money and benefits from these contracts should concern any citizen, let alone any journalist. Yet House Democrats blocked efforts to investigate any Biden influence-peddling.

This obstruction was only possible with an enabling and protective media downplaying the scandal. The press continued the effective blackout even as emails showed Biden repeatedly lied about having no knowledge of his son’s foreign business.

Such denials, however, are getting more difficult. The Associated Press had to withdraw its absurd recent claim there’s no evidence of Biden ever discussing his son’s dealings. There’s even audio of him leaving a message for Hunter specifically about coverage of those dealings.

Dozens of emails, pictures and witness accounts prove the president was not just aware but a possible beneficiary of this corruption. His personal interactions with his son’s business associates include at least 19 visits to the White House by Hunter’s partner, Eric Schwerin, alone from 2009 to 2015, when Biden was vice president.

Emails on Hunter’s laptop make repeated reference to not only Joe’s knowledge but efforts to hide his involvement. In one email, Biden associate James Gilliar instructed Tony Bobulinski, then Hunter’s business partner: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.” Bobulinski has given sworn statements that he personally met with Joe Biden to discuss these dealings.

Emails used code names for Joe Biden such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is mentioned as possibly receiving a 10% cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm. There are also references to Hunter paying off his father’s bills from shared accounts.

Code names, cuts for “the big guy” and millions in mysterious foreign transactions would ordinarily send the media into a frenzy. But the Bidens adeptly enlisted the press into suppressing the story. Many in the media became “made men” and women who proved their loyalty. If this is a corruption scandal, there’s little the media can do to spin their own role in concealing it from the public.

For their part, Biden allies are gearing up to attack possible witnesses against the Bidens. For the media, however, it’s hard to acknowledge let alone pursue a scandal that you actively suppressed for years.

That’s what made Chuck Todd’s interview with incoming House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer so revealing. Todd spent most of the interview dismissing the committee’s work as a “political” exercise in targeting opponents. Comer’s efforts to detail the evidence of the president’s role was met by a smirking dismissal from Todd, who ended the interview by saying, “Well, it does sound personal, at that.”

So investigating millions of dollars flowing from foreign interests, including some connected to foreign figures or intelligence operatives, is just a personal attack.

If you’re wondering how the media would have reacted to even a fraction of such concerns being raised about Trump business deals, you don’t have to. They spent years drilling down on every foreign deal, and Todd was one of the most vocal in raising the alarm over foreign influence.

For example, in 2018, Todd doggedly pursued interviews with figures like former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff on Trump foreign deals and bank loans with Russian figures. Schiff declared without contradiction by Todd that “if Trump’s [business dealings] are a form of compromise, it needs to be exposed.”

Todd conducted a similar interview in February 2019 on influence-peddling allegations involving the Trump family. As Neal Katyal, former acting solicitor general, breathlessly announced a Russian-collusion indictment of Trump “could be coming,” Todd asked whether foreign business deals “compromised” the president.

Todd was right to ask if Trump was “compromised” by foreign deals like a Trump Tower in Moscow in 2019. It was neither personal nor political to raise such questions.

But it is now. Totally personal and political. Unlike Schiff, who was heralded for his efforts to uncover evidence of “compromise,” Comer was given only two choices by Todd: Will he “de-partisanize” his investigation or “do you expect it to be partisan?”

The problem is that not only will the details of these dealings be made public; the public wants to see those details. Various polls show Americans want an investigation into the matter and believe Congress should address social-media censorship of such stories.

In other words, it’s not working. The public is not going to dismiss this influence-peddling scandal with a smirk and a shrug. There will be a public accounting, and it will not be confined to the Biden family.

Oil prices eked out gains today (4th straight day higher) with WTI back above $75 as fears of a hawkish Powell speech passed painlessly (despite some hawkish FedSpeak from his underlings) and a flat dollar didn’t impact direction.

“Technically, the energy complex remains stuck in neutral, with a wide range for prices to swing inside of without creating a new trend,” analysts at wholesale-fuel distributor TACenergy wrote in a note to clients.

“Fundamentally, the case for prices bottoming is getting stronger as lingering supply issues coincide with demand picking up both domestically and abroad.”

Will the inventory/supply/demand data offer any more clues for the start of the new year…

API

• Crude +14.865mm (-2.375mm exp) – biggest build since Feb 2021

• Cushing +2.3mm

• Gasoline +1.8mm (+1.3mm exp)

• Distillates +1.1mm (+500k exp)

We suspect the massive 14.865mm barrel crude inventory build (the largest since Feb 2021) is likely driven by the deep freeze shutting in a number of refiners…

Source: Bloomberg

WTI was fading back below $75 ahead of the API data and accelerated lower on the huge build print…

Expectations for higher demand out of China as the country scraps its COVID-19 restrictions continue to provide some support for prices.

“We are confident that oil prices will climb again once the current wave of COVID infections has peaked in China and economic activity picks up,” said Carsten Fritsch, commodity analyst at Commerzbank, in a note.

Still, Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, warned that oil traders are “unlikely to see the explosive economic reopening that oil bulls had hoped for, with the market ignoring case counts in favor of local Chinese activity data.”

Oil prices “should rise tangentially to the increasing mainland mobility pulse,” he said in a market update.

Gas stoves, which are used in about 40% of American homes and are loved for their easy and speedy adjustability, may be banned by the Biden administration over concerns about their production of indoor pollutants.  

“This is a hidden hazard,” U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) commissioner Richard Trumka Jr told Bloomberg. “Any option is on the table,” said the son of the late AFL-CIO president. “Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”  

Gas stoves are even more prevalent in restaurants: 76% of them use gas. “There are certain types of food and certain culinary techniques that really require a flame in some way, shape or form to work and also for consistency and quality purposes,” Mike Whatley of the National Restaurant Association told The Hill.  

A whopping 94% of restaurant owners who use gas say a ban would hurt their business. Some chefs are already rebelling: 

In protest of the suggested ban on gas stoves, I’m staying taped to this stove forever. pic.twitter.com/mytHWml7rl

— Chef Andrew Gruel (@ChefGruel) January 9, 2023

In December, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker and Virginia Rep Don Beyer, both Democrats, wrote a letter to the safety commission urging them to address gas stove emissions, citing their adding to a “cumulative burden” on “Black, Latino and low-income households.” The letter was co-signed by 18 other legislators. 

The EPA and World Health Organization say gas stove emissions are implicated in a variety of maladies, from respiratory illness, cardiovascular problems to cancer. A study last month said 12% of childhood asthma is attributable to the stoves. 

Skeptics say any type of cooking produces potentially harmful emissions. “Ventilation is really where this discussion should be, rather than banning one particular type of technology,” Jill Notini of the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers told Bloomberg. “We may need some behavior change, we may need [people] to turn on their hoods when cooking.”  

In October, Consumer Reports advised readers to consider making their next stove an electric one after the group’s tests detected “high levels of potentially dangerous nitrogen oxide” emitting from gas versions. 

“Our tests found NO₂ at levels above those recommended by some public health organizations for indoors, particularly when the ranges were used without ventilation and when a burner was set on high,” said Consumer Reports’ Ashita Kapoor. “That’s alarming.”

The CPSC’s next step toward prohibition: An open, public-comment period on the dangers of gas stoves is expect to begin later this winter. Short of a ban, the agency could set emission standards. 

Meanwhile, some states and municipalities are already targeting gas stoves. A New York City ban on natural gas lines in new buildings shorter than seven stories will take effect later this year. A ban on such lines in taller buildings will start in 2027. 

If you want to front-run a federal ban — or if you just like free money from the Fed’s printing press — see if you qualify for a cut of the $4.5 billion in electric appliance rebates created by the so-called Inflation Reduction Act.

Qualification will hinge on where you live and your income relative to the median household income (HHI) in your area. For example, if you make up to 80% of the median HHI, you get up to 100% of the cost of the appliance or $840, whichever is less. Between 80% and 150%, you get a 50% rebate. Above that: No rebate for you! 

When you lose power due to a blizzard or hurricane, having a gas stove can save your life.

Naturally, the government wants to ban it. https://t.co/y0bUw3CQyz

— Tom (@RedneckGoalie30) January 9, 2023

Come and f$cking try to take my gas stove!!! I’ll protect it like my child against a pedophile!! 😡😡 https://t.co/E77BWXamwG

— BengalLady (@YvetteBoose) January 10, 2023

My gas stove identifies as an electric stove.

— ₿itcoinization  (@bitcoinisation) January 9, 2023

Authored by Liam Cosgrove via The Epoch Times,

Peter Schiff, chief economist and global strategist of Euro Pacific Asset Management, is famous for his bearish takes. A falling stock market, a deep recession, and a sovereign debt crisis were among his predictions in the past.

As the first trading week in January came to a close, The Epoch Times sat down with  Schiff to get his outlook for the new year. According to the libertarian economist, the outlook is grim and driven by two factors: inflation and the Federal Reserve.

“The last couple of times the Fed was able to orchestrate a pivot, it did it when inflation was 2 percent or less,” he told The Epoch Times. “Pivot” refers to the moment when the Federal Reserve stops hiking interest rates and begins cutting them again, historically done in response to severe financial stress.

Since the mid-1980s, monetary-easing cycles have been in low-inflation environments. With the Consumer Price Index (CPI) still above 7 percent, what happens if the Fed pivots now?

”They are throwing gasoline on the fire,” Schiff warned.

“High inflation gets even higher, and in that environment, I don’t see financial assets as a group doing well.”

“I think bonds get killed.”

In addition, Schiff sees companies with high price-to-earnings (P/E) ratios that do not turn a profit—typically referred to as growth stocks—will not be able to keep up with inflation, given their lack of pricing power.

“That’s important in an inflationary environment. You have to be able to raise your prices without destroying your sales.”

This could spell bad news for many unprofitable tech companies that rely on advertising revenue, because many advertisers will likely slash marketing budgets in the coming recession, Schiff said. Investors may shift their focus to less flashy companies with a steady revenue stream.

“If money is losing value much faster than 2 percent a year, you don’t want to wait 10–20 years to get your money,” he said.

“It’s not companies that are promising earnings in the future. It’s companies that have earnings right now.”

Like Warren Buffett, Schiff considers himself a value investor, meaning he invests in companies with a proven track record of profitability and a robust customer base. High inflation will wear down the consumers’ discretionary income, making it difficult for many businesses to maintain revenue.

“If your customers are spending a lot more money on food, on energy, on insurance, on rent, on taxes, and they have nothing left over, then it doesn’t even matter if you cut your prices. You don’t have any customers.”

Schiff laid the blame for the economic doom to come at the doorstep of the Federal Reserve. By distorting financial markets and the value of money, “the Federal Reserve has turned the market into a casino,” he said.

“It’s really helped undermine the productivity of the American economy, which is one of the reasons we have huge trade deficits.”

Many investors and wealth managers today structure their investment theses around trying to predict the Fed’s monetary policy. According to Schiff, this undermines the purpose of a stock market, which is to provide companies with much needed capital.

“The Fed should be irrelevant. Nobody should be making investment decisions based on the Fed. Right now, the Fed is the only thing anybody cares about. ‘Are they going to raise rates? By how much?’”

“Everything is riding on the decision of a few guys sitting in a room in Washington, D.C. That’s not how capitalism is supposed to work.”

Schiff questioned the sanity of such a system. “They decide the price of money. They decide the quantity of money. Why?”

“That makes no more sense than putting together a bureau to decide the price of oil, or the price of milk, or the price of bread … That’s what the Soviet Union used to do, and it was a disaster.”

…

Read more here…