Authored by Bernie Marcus via RealClear Wire,

For the first time in my 94 years on earth, I fear for the future of our democracy. I see the federal government using its enormous powers with contempt for the governed instead of with the consent of the governed as our founders envisioned.

Fundamental change in America is occurring by executive order or the force of the government’s police powers instead of through the legislative process required by the Constitution. From this, I fear that free market capitalism may be replaced by big government socialism. I also fear the erosion of our rights and freedoms, including parental rights, freedom of speech and religion, and due process.   

In the past, I always had the confidence that a president who was a threat to democracy could be voted out of office in the next election. I am no longer that confident today. My lack of confidence is because the media today is not the watchdog over government that our Founders intended it to be. It is instead the lapdog of government, shielding the public from the entire truth about the policies and actions of the current administration.

One vivid example of this became a meme: the television reporters declaring while doing their standups that the riots in 2020 were “mainly peaceful” as fires raged in the background. I was not surprised earlier this month by the reprise of “Russia collusion.” Nor will I  be surprised if the media soon characterizes a Trump rally as an “insurrection.” The media may be the biggest threat to our democracy since only well-informed voters guarantee the future of it.

There is more on the line in this year’s presidential election than ever before. It is a mistake to assume that this election will be a rerun of 2020. The presumptive nominees and the world have changed since then. President Biden can no longer portray himself as “kindly Uncle Joe” or a moderate Democrat. His recent State of the Union Address, which was the most divisive of any I recall, reveals he is a very angry man and not someone Americans would want as their uncle. His policies and the undemocratic means by which he implemented them confirm he has been pulled to the far left by far-left extremists in the Democrat Party. 

The Biden administration’s policies invited an invasion along our southern border by millions of unvetted people, compromised national security, allowed crime to spin out of control in our streets, forced middle-class Americans to raid their retirement funds to put food on their tables, and divided America more than at any time in our history since the Civil War. Joe Biden has fulfilled Barack Obama’s promise to “transform” America. This is not a welcome transformation, as confirmed by Biden’s dismal job approval ratings.

When Donald Trump was in office, his Democrats and their media allies portrayed him as a pugnacious New Yorker who “did not act presidential” and somehow craved dictatorial powers. They’re still doing this, although they’ve upped the rhetoric. Over the weekend, Nancy Pelosi invoked Adolf Hitler while attacking the former president.

His detractors are unwilling to look past Trump’s rough edges and see the results he achieved during his first of what I hope will be two terms. His policies achieved the highest wage rate in 50 years while keeping inflation in check, the lowest unemployment rate for minorities, and energy independence for America, among other stunning results. Moreover, his policies and the projection of his and America’s strength kept the country out of any new foreign conflicts. It is essential to our national security that America’s enemies fear our president.

This does not mean that President Trump did not have to do better. He did, and he has done so since leaving office. Having become close to him in the last seven years, I have seen a side of him that is not seen by the public. He is truly one of the most misunderstood men in America, and I and other friends of his have urged him to let the public see the real Donald Trump. His recent praise of Nikki Haley was unifying and shows the magnanimous side of him that his friends often see. Expect more of the real Donald Trump to emerge.

The world has also changed since 2020. It is much less safe, and America’s enemies have become stronger and more emboldened. China, Iran, and Russia have become enriched by changes in America’s energy policy: canceling the Keystone Pipeline, reducing oil drilling leases, and blocking all oil drilling on certain federal lands. America’s cities are less safe because of the illegal entry into the country of millions of unvetted people from China, Russia, Central and South America, the Middle East, Africa, and Europe. This is compounded by the unwillingness of local Democratic Party prosecutors to prosecute violent criminals. Moreover, the Taliban have reopened terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. The stakes now are even higher than the first Trump-Biden match. 

The running mate who Donald Trump picks will be more important than in prior elections. Although he proved in his first term that he is the most capable person to solve America’s problems, it will likely take more than four years to solve the mountain of problems America now faces.

There are several actions conservative donors should take to ensure that Trump-Biden II will have a different outcome than their first match. First, the different factions of the Republican Party must unite behind Trump and participate fully in the presidential election. Put another way, no one should sit out the presidential election or withhold their financial support to our nominee.

Second, those who have supported constitutionally dubious schemes like invoking the 14th Amendment to try to keep Trump off the ballot should discontinue such efforts.

Third, conservative donors should fund efforts to fill holes in Republican election strategies. There are, for example, gaps between Democrat and Republican efforts on early voting for low-propensity voters.  Democrats have a tremendous advantage here. There are also gaps in election mechanics, e.g., Zuckbucks are still flowing into some of the battleground states.

Fourth, Democrats have a consequential advantage in the youth vote – there is a ceiling at 35% of millennial and Gen-Z voters casting votes for the Republican nominee in the last three presidential elections. Glenn Youngkin proved that this gap can be narrowed as he split the youth vote with Terry McAuliffe in the 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election. The key to reaching and persuading young voters is more influential messengers, more impactful messages, and “clean” message distribution channels.

America is worth saving!

Bernie Marcus is the co-founder of Job Creators Network, a philanthropist, and the retired co-founder of The Home Depot.

A company founded by Bill Gates is planning on being the first to build a new generation of nuclear power plants based on small modular reactors (SMRs) in the United States. These plans usually have a power capacity of 300MW or less, which is about 1/3rd of regular reactors. 

TerraPower has officially “joined the race” against Russia and China to develop lower-cost nuclear reactors, according to FT this week.

CEO Chris Levesque said they are seeking US regulatory approval for their innovative liquid sodium-cooled reactor this month. The Natrium reactors could be constructed at nearly half the cost of traditional water-cooled nuclear reactors.

TerraPower, which has secured nearly $1bn in private investments, has also partnered with the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation to explore the deployment of Natrium reactors in the UAE for electricity and hydrogen production.

With up to $2bn in promised support from the US government, the company is advancing its inaugural project in Kemmerer, Wyoming. Despite pending permits, construction near a former coal power site will start in June, focusing on preliminary, non-nuclear structures. TerraPower aims to activate the plant by 2030, according to the report. 

Levesque told FT: “When you use liquid sodium as a coolant instead of water it’s a game-changer. Natrium plants will cost half of what light water reactor plants cost . . . and we are moving our project along pretty aggressively.”

FT reports that American firms are striving to match their counterparts in Russia and China, who have already operationalized two Small Modular Reactor (SMR) plants. These include a floating plant in Pevek, Russia, and another in Shidao Bay, China.

Meanwhile, the U.S. nuclear sector is hindered by elevated interest rates, surging expenses, and a scarcity of the enriched uranium needed for new reactors – not to mention the far left ‘woke’ crowd who continues to protest due to ‘safety concerns’ about what is really the safest, most efficient and greenest way to generate power…

FT notes that in November, rising costs led NuScale, an Oregon company, to scrap its plans for America’s inaugural SMR after utilities balked at a proposed 50% price hike.

TerraPower has yet to quote prices for its Natrium-generated power. Its Kemmerer reactor, initially a demonstration, aims for full-scale commercial operation. In October 2022, TerraPower and PacifiCorp, part of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, announced plans to explore the deployment of five more Natrium reactors by 2035.

“Sodium-cooled reactors operate at lower pressures, which requires fewer safety systems. That reduces problems that could go wrong with the plant and reduces costs because they can be built with simpler materials while maintaining safety,” concluded Adam Stein, director of nuclear energy innovation at The Breakthrough Institute.

Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Former President Donald Trump filed a lawsuit on Monday against the American Broadcasting Companies (ABC) and ABC News host George Stephanopoulos, accusing them of defamation.

The complaint alleges that Mr. Stephanopoulos defamed President Trump on March 10, during an episode of “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” when he repeatedly stated during the broadcast that a jury had found President Trump liable for the rape of writer E. Jean Carroll, despite being “aware of the truth.”

“These statements were and remain false, and were made by Defendant Stephanopoulos with actual malice or with a reckless disregard for the truth given that Defendant Stephanopoulos knows that these statements are patently and demonstrably false,” the complaint reads.

President Trump’s complaint alleges that Mr. Stephanopoulos was aware that the jury did not find the former president liable for rape, “yet still falsely stated otherwise.”

Mr. Stephanopoulos made these allegedly defamatory statements “within the scope and course of his employment or contractual relationship” with ABC and “with intent to harm” President Trump.

The filing outlined two reasons to support the claim that the statements were made “with intent to harm” as being because the ABC host allegedly “was and is aware of the truth regarding the determinations made by the subject juries.”

The additional reason outlined in the complaint alleges that Mr. Stephanopoulos’ statements “appear to have been prepared in advance and were written on notes that he was reading from while making these defamatory statements.”

Ms. Carroll claimed that the alleged incident took place at Bergdorf Goodman in Manhattan more than two decades ago, but could not remember specifically when, according to the filing.

President Trump has maintained his denial of the allegations.

Statements Made During Rep. Mace Interview

The incident at the heart of President Trump’s complaint happened on March 10, during an interview Mr. Stephanopoulos was conducting with Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who was a victim of rape at the age of 16.

During his preamble to introduce her, the ABC host played a clip of Ms. Mace speaking publicly during her 2019 campaign about the impact rape had on her.

The program then cut to Mr. Stephanopoulos, who immediately directed statements to Ms. Mace about her support for President Trump despite a jury’s verdict in his civil case involving Ms. Carroll.

Ms. Mace, who later described feeling blindsided by the questioning, accused Mr. Stephanopoulos during the interview with attempting to shame her as a victim of rape.

“You endorsed Donald Trump for president. Judges in two separate juries have found him liable for rape and for defaming a victim of that rape. How do you square your endorsement of Donald Trump with the testimony we just saw?” asked Mr. Stephanopoulos.

Put immediately offside, Ms. Mace replied: “Well, I will tell you, I was raped at the age of 16, and any rape victim will tell you, I’ve lived for 30 years with an incredible amount of shame over being raped. I didn’t come forward because of that judgment and shame that I felt.

“And it’s a shame that you will never feel, George, and I’m not going to sit here on your show and be asked a question meant to shame me about another potential rape victim. I’m not going to do that,” she continued.

“It’s actually not about shaming you. It’s a question about Donald Trump.”

“No, you are shaming me,” she insisted.

“You’ve endorsed Donald Trump for president,” he said.

“Right.”

“Donald Trump has been found liable for rape by a jury,” Mr. Stephanopoulos said. “Donald Trump has been found liable for defaming the victim of that rape by a jury. It’s been affirmed by a judge. He repeated—”

Ms. Mace, cutting across his statement, said: “It’s not a criminal court case, number one. Number two, I live with shame, and you’re asking me a question about my political choices trying to shame me as a rape victim and find it disgusting.”

As the heated exchange continued, Mr. Stephanopoulos denied that he was trying to shame Ms. Mace.

“You’re trying to shame me this morning,” she said.

“I’m just asking you—” said Mr. Stephanopoulos

“And I find it offensive. And this is why women won’t come forward,” Ms. Mace said.

“Women won’t come forward because they’re defamed by those who perpetrate rape. Donald Trump has been—” Mr. Stephanopoulos said.

“They are judged, and they’re shamed, and you’re trying to shame me this morning. I think it’s disgusting,” Ms. Mace continued, speaking over the host.

During his exchange, the more that Mr. Stephanopoulos defended himself against Ms. Mace’s accusations of shaming her, the more he repeated statements such as that President Trump was “found liable for rape.”

“I’m asking you a very simple question, explain what—” the ABC host said.

“And I answered it. You’re shaming me for my political choices,” Ms. Mace said.

“No, I’m not—I’m asking you a question about why you endorsed someone who’s been found liable for rape. Just answer the question.”

“It was not a criminal court. This was—this was a—it was a civil court,” she said.

“It was a civil court that found him liable for rape,” Mr. Stephanopoulos said.

The ABC host tried to move the discussion forward by noting that Ms. Mace was repeating the same statement about shaming her.

“You’re questioning my political choices because I’ve been raped,” the South Carolina congresswoman charged. “I think that’s disgusting.”

“No,” Mr. Stephanopoulos replied, “I’m questioning your political choices because you’re supporting someone who’s been found liable for rape.”

The host pushed Ms. Mace to answer his question: “Why are you supporting someone who’s been found liable for rape?”

Nancy Mace: If you want to defend E. Jean Carroll, who made a mockery out of rape, then you do that.

Stephanopoulos: Well, actually what you’re doing is defending a man who has been found liable for rape. I don’t understand how you can do that. @atrupar pic.twitter.com/QnxULiu6rz

— The Intellectualist (@highbrow_nobrow) March 10, 2024

The congresswoman asserted that President Trump was found guilty of sexual abuse. “It wasn’t actually rape, by the way,” she added.

Following the interview, Ms. Mace said she wouldn’t do an ABC interview again, telling NewsNation that she had come to discuss “Donald Trump versus Joe Biden and the 2024 race.”

ABC declined to comment to The Epoch Times.

If you’ve ever traveled internationally and returned legally to the United States, there is a rigorous vetting process through Customs and Border Protection. But for the millions of migrants that illegally crossed into the US because of open southern border policies enforced by radical leftists in the White House (and secretly pushed by mega-corporations and NGOs), anyone is welcome, including terrorists and drug lords.

Department of Homeland Security claims that migrants entering flooding into the US undergo “robust security vetting,” but law-abiding citizens, especially folks in Manhattan, know this statement is malarky as neighborhoods transform into third-world countries overnight.

Unveiling the American Dream: A poignant scene captured near the Roosevelt Hotel in #Manhattan, New York, reveals a stark reality as #migrants find themselves sleeping on the streets. A powerful reminder of the complexities behind the dream.#AmericanDream #RooseveltHotel #USA pic.twitter.com/bemanR8bv7

— The Workers Rights (@theworkersright) March 17, 2024

Earlier this month, White House spokesperson Angelo Fernandez Hernandez doubled down on the big lie, claiming migrants “pass through a rigorous vetting process.”

⚠️Independent Journalist “SNEAKING INSIDE the Back of The Roosevelt Hotel in NYC Illegal Migrant intake room. The Roosevelt Hotel, Manhattan, NYC”

There doesn’t appear to be a single woman or child in this footage@SGTnewsNetwork

And don’t forget, an Obama-appointed judge just… pic.twitter.com/HPjao6E31q

— 🇺🇲Salty Texan (@texan_maga) March 19, 2024

The lack of vetting, whether at the southern or northern border, is producing tragic consequences nationwide.

You know what the real ‘Bloodbath’ is?

It’s illegals invading our country and committing m*rder.

REMEMBER THEIR NAMES:

Laken Riley
Christopher Gadd
Lizabeth Medina
Melissa & Riordan Powell
David Hadrich
Cindy Goulding
Cheston Edwards
Deborah Brandao
Nazareth Tamer-Claure… pic.twitter.com/b75zgMhHOg

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 18, 2024

The chaos is being realized as some illegals embark on rape and/or kill rampages. 

Armed and dangerous’ Illegal migrant from Venezuela arrested

15-year-old illegal migrant, suspected of shooting a tourist and firing at a police officer during a failed robbery in Times Square, pic.twitter.com/QRrPbyrPjB

— Amit Shah (Parody) (@Motabhai012) February 10, 2024

One of the most shocking revelations of the Biden administration’s failure to properly vet migrants was in San Antonio, Texas, where authorities recently arrested 29-year-old Aderbis Pirela, one of Interpol’s top 10 Most Wanted, for operating a drug ring within a migrant shelter, according to The National Desk.

Pirela, the second-in-command of a violent Colombian gang, was wanted for four murders, drug trafficking, and warrants out of Bogota. The fact that the gangster made it into the US is evident in the lack of a “robust security vetting” process. 

“This just goes to the heart of one of the main issues. The reality is every time Secretary Mayorkas or anybody from this administration tells the American people that we properly vet everyone before we release them is just a lie,” former Head of Customs and Border Protection Mark Morgan said. 

Morgan continued: “They’re provided a false sense of security that doesn’t exist. The reality is there are many countries that illegal aliens are coming into our country from that we have zero diplomatic relationships with, and we’re getting nothing with respect to their criminal history.”

Aderbis Pirela was on Interpol’s TOP 10 MOST WANTED list with ties to at least four murders, drug trafficking and other warrants out of Colombia where he’s a drug lord.

He was just arrested in Texas this week after entering America illegally in January as, get this… A POLITICAL… pic.twitter.com/XsCLxJHWtN

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) March 19, 2024

Some of those migrants entering the US are known terrorists. Nearly two dozen were caught attempting entry at the southern border at the end of last year. Currently, Iranian assassin(s) roam free in the US (read: here). And the surging terror threat is likely the real reason why New York City mobilized National Guard troops with machine guns to patrol subways. 

The issue facing Biden and his loser party of woke communist radicals is these unvetted illegals are being dumped into once-peaceful neighborhoods across metro areas by the tens of thousands. Every death, every rape, every beating an illegal inflicts on anyone will boil in the veins of Americans as they will never forget the pain and suffering Democrats have caused by open borders. They will take this anger out at the ballot box on Nov. 5. Polling data shows Americans are overwhelmingly fed up with open borders. 

Thanks to Biden’s border policies, our immigration system is overrun. In most cases, we ultimately have no idea who we are actually releasing into the United States. The situation is no different now with the influx of Haitian migrants. pic.twitter.com/uMSCRwXud3

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) March 19, 2024

By the way, let’s not forget the names of the Americans whose lives were cut short by illegals. Say her name: “Laken Riley.” 

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Billionaire activist investor Nelson Peltz plans to vote for former President Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential race, citing President Joe Biden’s mental condition and immigration policies.

“It will probably be Trump and I’m not happy about that,” he told the Financial Times in an interview, adding that Biden’s “mental condition is really scary.” Furthermore, Mr. Peltz expressed his concern regarding the porous U.S. southern border, which has turned into a hot-button issue for both Republicans and Democrats in the election season.

“We can’t go on letting everyone into this country . . . We have an immigration problem—it’s not a Republican or Democrat problem,” said Mr. Peltz. He expressed opposition to stopping immigration altogether but “I want some boundaries put on it so we know at least who we’re bringing in,” he said, according to the outlet.

Illegal immigration has been a thorn in the side of Democrats, with the Biden administration’s policies being criticized for the massive amounts of inflows across the southern border. Former President Donald Trump said at a recent rally that one of the first things he would do once elected would be to end every single “open border policy of the Biden administration.”

“That border was a tiny fraction of what this border is,” President Trump said. “This is the worst border in the history of the world.” Since President Joe Biden took office, there have been an estimated 10 million illegal immigrants who have crossed the border.

Mr. Peltz is the founder of Trian Fund Management, an investment management firm with offices in New York and Florida. According to Forbes, the firm has $8.5 billion in assets under management, with Mr. Peltz currently worth around $1.7 billion.

The billionaire is among President Trump’s neighbors in Palm Beach but has not spoken to the former president “in quite a while,” reported FT.

Regarding President Biden’s mental acuity, “I don’t know what he knows and I don’t know what he doesn’t know.” said Mr. Peltz. “I don’t know who’s speaking for him and that’s troubling.” It is not clear whether he will donate to President Trump’s campaign.

Mr. Peltz has been involved with activist investments for some time. In 2017, he fought and won a seat on the executive board of consumer goods conglomerate Proctor and Gamble. Currently, his focus is on Disney.

Peltz Versus Disney

Mr. Peltz’s investment firm Trian has been involved in a proxy battle with Disney for instituting the investor along with former Disney executive Jay Rasulo as board members. Trian currently holds approximately $3.5 billion of Disney stock. The media behemoth and the billionaire investor have been engaging shareholders for the requisite votes needed for the seats.

Disney movies have been underperforming at the box office lately. Mr. Peltz says he wants to “restore the magic” in the company and outlined his visions in a detailed 133-page memo released earlier this month.

Published by Trian to convince shareholders at the company’s annual meeting next month, the memo said that “Disney is the most advantaged consumer entertainment company in the world,” the company “lost its way” with a deterioration in financial performance, and ultimately loss amounting to tens of billions in shareholder value.

“We believe the root cause of Disney’s underperformance is poor oversight from a Board that lacks focus, alignment and accountability.”

The memo detailed how Disney competitors like Netflix and Amazon were faring much better with their content, and return on invested capital and margins.

Trian blamed Disney for showing “no interest in meeting or inviting Nelson Peltz to interview with the Board or Governance and Nominating Committee.”

Disney responded in a 66-page regulatory filing that Mr. Peltz and Mr. Rasulo were “not what Disney needs right now.” The company said their suggestions “are nothing new” and they did not understand the company’s challenges nor had the skills to promote Disney in its current situation.

However, Mr. Peltz has been known to be persistent in achieving his objectives, as was revealed in 2006 with Heinz, in 2015 with Dupont, and in 2017 with P&G.

Biden’s Mental Criticisms

President Biden’s mental capabilities have been increasingly in the spotlight during the election season. His common gaffes and slurring of speech have raised concerns about his age even among those who supported him in 2020.

According to a New York Times/Siena College poll, 61 percent of respondents believed President Biden was “just too old” to be an effective commander-in-chief.

A February special counsel report described the 81-year-old president’s memory as “hazy,” “fuzzy,” “faulty,” “poor” and having “significant limitations.”

The Robert Hur report noted that President Biden could not recall defining milestones in his own life such as when his son Beau died or when he served as vice president.

In response to reporters’ questions about his memory, President Biden disputed the report’s statements and said he’s “the most qualified person in this country to be president.”

The White House also pushed back on the characterizations of President Biden’s memory in a Feb. 5 letter from the president’s lawyers that was published in Hur’s report. The letter argues that the president’s “inability to recall dates or details of events that happened years ago is neither surprising nor unusual,” particularly about when certain documents were packed or moved.

“We do not believe that the report’s treatment of President Biden’s memory is accurate or appropriate,” the letter said. “The report uses highly prejudicial language to describe a commonplace occurrence among witnesses: a lack of recall of years-old events. Such comments have no place in a Department of Justice report.”

“If you’re too senile to stand trial, then you’re too senile to be president. Joe Biden is unfit to lead this nation,” said Alex Pfeiffer, a spokesman for Make America Great Again Inc., the main super PAC backing Trump’s candidacy.

The Associated Press contributed to the report.

Oil prices extended gains today to fresh cycle highs (5 month highs) as the demand/supply/geopolitical-premium balance appears to have shifted.

“Oil benchmarks have been restored to multi-month highs as supply-side risks grab hold of market’s attention once more,” said Han Tan, chief market analyst at Exinity.

“Oil prices were given a bullish impulse at the onset of the week following the attacks on Russian refineries, better-than-expected Chinese economic data, along with Iraq’s pledge to lower oil exports,” he told MarketWatch.

API

• Crude -1.52mm (+77k exp)

• Cushing

• Gasoline

• Distillates

For the second week in a row crude stockpiles drew-down…

Source: Bloomberg

WTI was trading around $82.70 ahead of the API report.

All of which is bad news for Messers Powell and Biden as inflation expectations are on the rise bigly and so are pump prices…

Source: Bloomberg

Time to blame mom-and-pop gas station managers for their greed.

“Oil’s upside could be capped by perceived delays to Fed rate cuts past June,” as well as still elevated U.S. crude output, and any further stutters to China’s economic recovery, said Han Tan.

Oil bulls could be “given another shot in the arm if the Fed does stick with projections for three 25-basis point rate cuts this year, which should in turn shore up U.S. demand for oil [while] softening the dollar,” he said.

However, oil benchmarks “may be prompted to unwind some of its recent gains if the Fed’s ‘higher-for-longer’ narrative [for interest rates] takes stronger hold of global financial markets,” he said.

Authored by Ted Snider via The Libertarian Institute

It has long been an open secret that the West has been providing Ukraine with funding, weapons, training, maintenance, targeting intelligence, and intelligence on the position of Russian forces and vulnerabilities, and even war-gaming. They have provided Ukraine with everything but the bodies. President Joe Biden has long insisted that American troops “are not and will not be engaged in a conflict with Russia in Ukraine.” The West has long denied that it is directly involved in the war or that they have troops in Ukraine.

And that is mostly true. It is Ukrainian soldiers that are being injured and killed in the hundreds of thousands. But it is not entirely true. After two years of steadfast denial, there has been, over just a couple of weeks in February and March, a flurry of admissions and revelations that there are NATO troops in Ukraine. The question is, why? What is the motivation behind this sudden trove of revelations?

The flurry was kicked off by the release of a transcript of an intercepted February 19 conversation between senior German air force officials that revealed that the United Kingdom has people on the ground in Ukraine. Discussing how German Taurus long-range missiles could be operated in Ukraine, one official says that the Germans “know how the English do it…They have several people on-site.” The conversation between the German officials also appears to implicate the United States. One official says, “It’s known that there are numerous people there in civilian attire who speak with an American accent.”

On February 26, a New York Times report revealed who those civilians may be. More than 200 current and former officials leaked to the Times that “scores” of CIA officers are in Ukraine where they “help the Ukrainians” by providing “intelligence for targeted missile strikes” and “intelligence support for lethal operations against Russian forces on Ukrainian soil.”

On February 26, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz broadened the list to include France. Scholz defended his decision not to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine by saying that it would require the presence of Germans in Ukraine to match their British and French counterparts. He explained, “What is being done in the way of target control and accompanying target control on the part of the British and the French can’t be done in Germany.”

And on March 8, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski stunningly confirmed that “NATO military personnel are already present in Ukraine.” Critical of Scholz, he differentiated himself by not revealing which NATO countries are already in Ukraine. “NATO soldiers are already present in Ukraine. And I would like to thank the ambassadors of those countries who have taken that risk. These countries know who they are, but I can’t disclose them. Contrary to other politicians, I will not list those countries.”

France and Britain reportedly responded with outrage at the intercepted air force conversation. And they were just as furious with Scholz for his revelation. Former UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace said that “Scholz’s behavior has showed that as far as the security of Europe goes he is the wrong man, in the wrong job at the wrong time.” Alicia Kearns, chair of the British Parliament’s foreign affairs committee, called Scholz’s comment “wrong, irresponsible and a slap in the face to allies.” One Berlin-based diplomat reportedly says that “Macron and Scholz aren’t even talking to each other.”

But despite the anger at being called out, neither the British nor the French denied Scholz’s revelation. Despite Kearns’ comment that Scholz is “wrong,” the British Prime Minister’s office confirmed that they do have boots on the ground: “Beyond the small number of personnel we do have in the country supporting the armed forces of Ukraine, we haven’t got any plans for large-scale deployment.”

The French responded by saying that if they don’t have troops in Ukraine, perhaps they should; not exactly an angry rebuke of Scholz. French President Emmanuel Macron said, “There’s no consensus today to send in an official, endorsed manner troops on the ground. But in terms of dynamics, nothing can be ruled out.” Though Scholz immediately replied that the consensus was “that there will be no ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil who are sent there by European states or NATO states,” Macron pointed out, “Many of the people who say ‘never, never’ today were the same people who said never, never tanks; never, never planes; never, never long-range missiles…I remind you that two years ago, many around this table said: ‘We will offer sleeping bags and helmets.'”

Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorski
says “The troops of NATO countries are already in Ukraine” — and then thanks those countries. Sikorski is married to rabid neocon writer Anne Applebaum. These lunatics will start WW3 if given the chance.pic.twitter.com/513gKt9SX3

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) March 10, 2024

In just a couple of weeks, American and German leaks placed U.S. troops in Ukraine, Germany placed France and Britain in Ukraine, the British confirmed they were in Ukraine, Poland confirmed that NATO troops were in Ukraine, and France suggested that, if they’re not, perhaps they should be. What is the motivation behind this sudden chorus of confessions?

There are at least four—and probably a lot more—possibilities. All of them are just speculation.

The least scary is that, recognizing that the West has lost the war in Ukraine and that, after encouraging Ukraine to reject a diplomatic solution in favor of pressing the fight with the promise of Western weapons and support for as long as it takes, the leading supporters of Ukraine are trying to establish the case that they did everything they could: even putting troops on the ground in Ukraine.

The second least scary is that the leaks and revelations are meant to pressure the United States and some European countries to send more financial aid and weapons packages to Ukraine. The belief might be that the they would find that option more palatable than crossing their own red line and sending troops into Ukraine.

The third least scary is that the West is trying to create a perception in Russia of strategic ambiguity. The French newspaper Le Monde reports, “Macron’s office explained that the aim is to restore the West’s ‘strategic ambiguity.’ After the failure of the Ukrainian 2023 counter-offensive, the French president believes that promising tens of billions of euros in aid and delivering—delayed—military equipment to Kyiv is no longer enough. Especially if Putin is convinced that the West has permanently ruled out mobilizing its forces.”

The scariest possibility that was suggested to me is that the West is serious both about NATO troops already being in Ukraine and about the possibility of sending more NATO troops not being ruled out. The leaks and revelations are intended to lay the groundwork for sending more troops. The idea is to sell the idea of sending more troops by desensitizing reluctant Western partners to the risk by pointing out that the risk has already been taken. They might even add that Russia knows it and hasn’t escalated and drawn the West into a NATO-Russia war.

If true, that is a dangerous and difficult to calculate risk. How many troops could be sent before triggering a Russian response? Hopefully, the United States, Germany and others, including Spain, Greece, and Slovakia are sincere in their insistence that no (more?) NATO troops will be sent to Ukraine. One German source told Le Monde that Macron “said that there was no consensus on the subject, but that’s not true: The truth is that France was isolated because most participants expressed their clear refusal.”

Update(1615ET):  Axios has shed more light on details of Monday’s Biden-Netanyahu phone call. Netanyahu has been fuming over what Likud officials have described as a Washington effort to push him out of power, at a moment significant protests led by hostage victims’ families are growing larger by the week. Axios now writes, “President Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during their call on Monday that he is not trying to undermine him politically, two sources with knowledge of the call…”

Aside from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s scathing speech denouncing Netanyahu last week, there was also the ‘unauthorized’ visit of war cabinet minister Benny Gantz to D.C. two weeks ago. Netanyahu viewed it as a ploy to undermine him. There are also these developments according to Axios:

• Netanyahu’s suspicions increased when, in an interview with MSNBC earlier this month, Biden said Netanyahu is hurting Israel more than he is helping Israel.
• Last week, the U.S. intelligence community released its annual unclassified assessment, which said Netanyahu’s political future is in jeopardy, further ratcheting up Netanyahu’s concern.

A Likud Party statement said in response the Schumer’s speech: “Israel is not a banana republic but an independent and proud democracy that elected Prime Minister Netanyahu.” Biden himself later called Schumer’s address “a good speech”. While the White House has been making a lot of noise about the soaring civilian death toll in Gaza, Biden has all but ensured that weapons and billions in foreign aid will always flow…

U.S. news media, Dems & anonymous Biden officials: Biden’s stuck in a war he didn’t want, he has no influence on the Israelis and the real problem is Netanyahu.

Joe Biden, last week: pic.twitter.com/2t3LmL5B78

— Sana Saeed (@SanaSaeed) March 19, 2024

* * *

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has revealed more about his Monday phone call with President Joe Biden. He informed a closed meeting of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that he made it clear to Biden that there’s no way to eradicate Hamas without a ground operation in Rafah.

Biden had reiterated to Netanyahu that the US sees a Rafah invasion as a “mistake” given the presence of over one million internally displaced Palestinian civilians in the city amid an already soaring death toll. 

“The Americans asked that we not do an operation in Rafah,” Netanyahu told defense officials. “But there is no other choice. We need control over the Philadelphi Route,” he continued in refence to the Egypt-Gaza border area.

A White House spokesman on Monday stated that the US administration has yet to see a viable plan from the Israelis on ensuring the safety of refugees. “More than a million people have taken refuge in Rafah. Israel has not presented us or the world with a plan for how we’re where they can safely move those civilians – let alone feed and house them,” NSC spokesman Sullivan said at a briefing.

Netanyahu appeared to directly answer this criticism in his Tuesday remarks. He said that “from Israel’s standpoint, there is nothing preventing Gazans from leaving, but there aren’t countries in the world that are ready to receive them.” Earlier in the conflict, Israel reportedly leaned on neighboring Arab countries to accept the spillover of refugees, which was a non-starter. 

The UN has meanwhile issued a report warning that famine is imminent across the war-ravaged Gaza Strip. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken agreed Tuesday, saying the whole population is now experiencing “severe levels of acute food insecurity.”

“According to the most respected measure of these things, 100 percent of the population in Gaza is at severe levels of acute food insecurity. That’s the first time an entire population has been so classified,” he said during an official visit to the Philippines.

Qatar has said it remains “cautiously optimistic” as Israeli negotiators arrive in Doha for more efforts to nail down a ceasefire and hostage/prisoner exchange deal. However, both sides have still condemned the ‘delusional’ conditions (to use Netanyahu’s words) of the other.

The EU has been piling on pressure…

All 27 European Union countries, except for #Hungary @PM_ViktorOrban, have jointly called for a ceasefire in #Gaza and urged #Israel not to launch its planned assault on #Rafah. pic.twitter.com/OjzJpeZ2XQ

— Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺 (@ejmalrai) March 19, 2024

But Netanyahu is still pledging to enter Rafah, and the major operation looks to be imminent, despite the mounting international pressure for such a plan to be halted.

NVDA showed off a new chip and a robot… BoJ did their hawkish thing (but promised to save the world if things went to shit)… US housing data surprised to the upside… and the screens were green… but it wasn’t the love-fest so many hoped as anxiety remains ahead of tomorrow’s FOMC meeting…

NVDA ended the day higher barely…

Stocks overall ended higher into tomorrow’s FOMC meeting, led by The Dow and Small Caps (and a late-day buying spree made things even shinier for Fed Day)…

Black Gold was the day’s big winner again, with WTI surging up near $84, its highest since

Source: Bloomberg

Despite rate-cut expectations falling (hawkishly) further…

Source: Bloomberg

Bonds were bid today ahead of The Fed with the short-end outperforming…

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin was clubbed like a baby seal after some shenanigans on the BitMEX overnight, but did find support…

Source: Bloomberg

…which followed the largest net outflow day for BTC ETFs as someone liquidated a boat-load of GBTC…

Source: Bloomberg

The yen weakened notably post-BOJ (USDJPY rallied), roundtripping all of March’s gains, and back at its weakest

Source: Bloomberg

Which was mirrored in the Dollar Index, which fully erased the post-payrolls weakness…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, as the world and his pet rabbit anxiously await the words and dots of the The Fed tomorrow, there is a growing trade in “no cuts at all in 2024” bets…

Source: Bloomberg

How will stocks react to any hint of that?

Source: Bloomberg

Well that would get The Fed into action pretty quick… especially in an election year!

Two years ago, we first said that it’s only a matter of time before the Fed admits it is unable to rsolve the so-called “last mile” of inflation and that as a result, the old inflation target of 2% is no longer viable.

At some point Fed will concede it has no control over supply. That’s when we will start getting leaks of raising the inflation target

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 21, 2022

Then one year ago, we correctly said that while everyone was paying attention elsewhere, the inflation target had already been hiked to 2.8%… on the way to even more increases.

The new inflation target has been set to 2.8%. The rest is just narrative fill for the next 2 years. https://t.co/X1xYkecyPy

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 21, 2023

And while the Fed still pretends it can one day lower inflation to 2% even as it prepares to cut rates as soon as June, moments ago Goldman published a note from its economics team which had to balls to finally call a spade a spade, and concluded that – as party of the Fed’s next big debate, i.e., rethinking the Neutral rate – both the neutral and terminal rate, a polite euphemism for the inflation target, are much higher than conventional wisdom believes, and that as a result Goldman is “penciling in a terminal rate of 3.25-3.5% this cycle, 100bp above the peak reached last cycle.”

There is more in the full Goldman note, but below we excerpt the key fragments:

We argued last cycle that the long-run neutral rate was not as low as widely thought, perhaps closer to 3-3.5% in nominal terms than to 2-2.5%. We have also argued this cycle that the short-run neutral rate could be higher still because the fiscal deficit is much larger than usual—in fact, estimates of the elasticity of the neutral rate to the deficit suggest that the wider deficit might boost the short-term neutral rate by 1-1.5%. Fed economists have also offered another reason why the short-term neutral rate might be elevated, namely that broad financial conditions have not tightened commensurately with the rise in the funds rate, limiting transmission to the economy.

Over the coming year, Fed officials are likely to debate whether the neutral rate is still as low as they assumed last cycle and as the dot plot implies….

…Translation: raising the neutral rate estimate is also the first step to admitting that the traditional 2% inflation target is higher than previously expected. And once the Fed officially crosses that particular Rubicon, all bets are off.

… Their thinking is likely to be influenced by distant forward market rates, which have risen 1-2pp since the pre-pandemic years to about 4%; by model-based estimates of neutral, whose earlier real-time values have been revised up by roughly 0.5pp on average to about 3.5% nominal and whose latest values are little changed; and by their perception of how well the economy is performing at the current level of the funds rate.

The bank’s conclusion:

We expect Fed officials to raise their estimates of neutral over time both by raising their long-run neutral rate dots somewhat and by concluding that short-run neutral is currently higher than long-run neutral. While we are fairly confident that Fed officials will not be comfortable leaving the funds rate above 5% indefinitely once inflation approaches 2% and that they will not go all the way back to 2.5% purely in the name of normalization, we are quite uncertain about where in between they will ultimately land.

Because the economy is not sensitive enough to small changes in the funds rate to make it glaringly obvious when neutral has been reached, the terminal or equilibrium rate where the FOMC decides to leave the funds rate is partly a matter of the true neutral rate and partly a matter of the perceived neutral rate. For now, we are penciling in a terminal rate of 3.25-3.5% this cycle, 100bps above the peak reached last cycle. This reflects both our view that neutral is higher than Fed officials think and our expectation that their thinking will evolve.

Not that this should come as a surprise: as a reminder, with the US now $35.5 trillion in debt and rising by $1 trillion every 100 days, we are fast approaching the Minsky Moment, which means the US has just a handful of options left: losing the reserve currency status, QEing the deficit and every new dollar in debt, or – the only viable alternative – inflating it all away. The only question we had before is when do “serious” economists make the same admission.

Meanwhile, nothing changes: total US debt jumps $57BN on March 15, to a record $34.543 trillion.

Three ways this ends: inflate it away, QE it all, or reserve status collapse

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 19, 2024

They now have, and not just Goldman: earlier today, Apollo’s Torsten Slok admitted  his latest “Daily Spark” chart that “inflation is now sticky at 3%”

The Fed’s inflation target is 2%, and the bottom line of the inflation discussion is that inflation has started to move sideways at 3%, and this is a problem for the Fed, see chart below.

And while we have discussed the staggering consequences of raising the inflation target by just 1% from 2% to 3% on everything from markets, to economic growth (instead of doubling every 35 years at 2% inflation target, prices would double every 23 years at 3%), and social cohesion, we will soon rerun the analysis again as the implications are profound. For now all you need to know is that with the US about to implicitly hit the overdrive of dollar devaluation, anything that is non-fiat will be much more preferable over fiat alternatives.

Much more in the full Goldman note available to pro subs in the usual place.