Authored by Allen Zhong via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Department of Energy (DOE) released a watered-down finalized gas stove rule Monday after months of talks with industry groups and climate activist groups.

The final rule made several major revisions to the initial rule which was released in February 2023 and was widely reported as a gas stove ban.

The adopted rule allows extra-high input rate (HIR) burners and oversized cast-iron grates. It also increases the energy conservation standard for gas cooktops or gas ranges from 1,204 thousand British Thermal Units (BTUs) per year to 1,770 thousand BTUs per year.

“The updated efficiency levels for gas cooking tops allow gas cooking tops to retain the presence of multiple HIR burners, continuous cast-iron grate,” read the adopted rules. “The adopted efficiency level thereby preserving consumer product choice for gas cooking tops.”

The rules will not affect any current cooking products but only future products on the market.

About 97 percent of gas cooking tops, 95 percent of electric standard ovens, 95 percent of electric self-clean ovens, 96 percent of gas standard ovens, and 96 percent of gas self-clean ovens would meet or exceed the required efficiency levels.

However, 23 percent of electric smooth element cooking tops would fall short.

It would take the industry $66.7 million of investment to make their product comply with the new standard, the DOE estimated.

The final rules will be effective in 2028.

The adoption of the new rules would save consumers approximately $1.6 billion on their utility bills and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by around 4 million metric tons in the coming 30 years, DOE projected.

The revised rule is based on a joint recommendation back in September 2023 by the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM), the American Council for an Energy-Efficiency Economy, the Alliance for Water Efficiency, the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, the Consumer Federation of America, the Consumer Reports, Earthjustice, the National Consumer Law Center, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.

The AHAM, a trade association representing the manufacturers of household appliances sold in the United States, applauded the new rules, saying it will save energy, preserve cooking methods and features for home cooks, and give manufacturers flexibility.

“This standard is a win for consumers and energy savings,” AHAM President and CEO Kelly Mariotti said in a statement. “We thank DOE for adopting the recommended levels and we ask the Department to follow this success with a speedy release of the test procedure associated with the new standard.”

Gas Stove Ban Controversy

The initial rule published by the DOE said that 50 percent of gas stoves on the market would be impacted.

It’s widely reported as a gas stove ban by the media because it could wipe off half of the gas stoves.

AHAM said that the DOE was banning gas cooking products from the market and the DOE-backed analysis was flawed.

“They have released the most stringent proposal for gas ranges, which only a sliver of the market can meet,” an industry spokesperson for AHAM told The Epoch Times then. “Clearly, the Department of Energy’s intentions are to eliminate gas products from the market. And they should just say that instead of releasing a deceptive and flawed analysis to justify their proposal”

The DOE admitted in the adopted rule that there were errors and inaccuracies in the analysis released with the initial rule.

To address the controversy over the potential gas stove ban, the DOE clarified in May 2023 that the federal government has no plan to ban gas stoves and it will revise the proposed rule to guarantee flexibility.

“Claims that the federal government is banning gas stoves are absurd. Neither DOE nor the federal government plans to ban gas stoves. In February 2023, DOE published a proposal that would improve the efficiency of gas and electric stoves. If implemented, the standards would not go into effect until 2027 and help U.S. consumers save up to $1.7 billion. As required by congressional mandate, DOE is determined to ensure consumers have multiple options that are both cost-effective and energy-efficient,” the DOE explained on its website.

A US F-16 fighter jet has crashed in waters off South Korea’s west coast on Wednesday morning local time, according to initial reporting by Yonhap news agency. The pilot is reported to have ejected from the aircraft and was promptly rescued, after descending to the ocean.

“The fighter jet crashed into the water and the rescued pilot is safe,” Yonhap reports of the incident which occurred near Gunsan, in North Jeolla province. 

Though details have been scant, US Forces Korea have confirmed the crash. There doesn’t appear to have been any casualties as a result of the accident.

The Korean peninsula has witnessed a significant rise in tensions especially going back to last summer, when the US parked a nuclear submarine in a South Korean port for the first time since the 1980s.

From there, Pyongyang has ramped up its ballistic missile tests and military drills, which have been met with a rise in joint US-South Korean drills. However, it is as yet unclear whether this fresh jet crash came within the context of joint exercises.

North Korea has meanwhile kicked off this week with a series of launches, including the latest on Wednesday:

North Korea said Wednesday it conducted a test-firing of long-range cruise missiles with an aim to sharpen its counterattack and strategic strike capabilities, in its latest display of weapons threatening South Korea and Japan.

The report by North Korean state media came a day after South Korea’s military detected the North firing multiple cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, the third launch of such weapons this month. The event extended a provocative streak in weapons testing as North Korea continues to raise pressure on the United States and its Asian allies amid a prolonged freeze in diplomacy.

A mere month ago there was a similar crash of an American F-16 fighter jet, which was also in Gunsan (based out of Kunsan Airbase), and it happened during a training exercise, the details of which can be reviewed in a military publication. 

For several days there has been a flurry of reports in both independent and mainstream media outlets suggesting the US could finally withdraw American troops from Iraq and Syria. These reports spread widely especially before the Sunday drone attack on a US base on the Syrian-Jordanian border, which killed three American soldiers and injured over 40 more, according to revised casualty figures.

For example, Foreign Policy reported last Wednesday that the White House is actively reviewing and reconsidering the troop presence after a years-long occupation of Syria, however the report emphasized that “no definitive decision has been made to leave.”

Still, there had not been any serious reporting or “debate” on a plan to withdraw from Syria going back to the middle of the Trump administration, when then President Trump pointed out that troops were there “to secure the oil”. 

Just as in the aforementioned Foreign Policy article, hawks argue that American must “stay the course” (with no exit date, as these things tend to go) as if somehow the Pentagon’s absence from the region will unleash chaos and an expansionist Iran (or insert Russia, China, or any ‘bad guy’ of the moment).

But this week, a top Biden admin official sought to definitively dispel the substantial rumors that an Iraq or Syria withdrawal could be around the corner.

And it was none other than Victoria “F*ck The EU” Nuland:

“Well, first let me set the records straight, the United States is not withdrawing from Syria,” Nuland, who is US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, has told CNN Turk.

Nuland’s comments are being reported in foreign media but have been absent from the US mainstream, perhaps given general apathy among the American public on questions of the ‘forever’ occupation of Syria.

After the killings of 3 US troops, top State Dept. official Victoria Nuland declares that “the USA is not withdrawing from Syria.” She adds that the US needs to stay to fight ISIS.

Pentagon documents show that this is a lie: the US is barely fighting ISIS. In fact, the US has… pic.twitter.com/KKsmbAD1Yb

— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) January 30, 2024

At this point, Americans are by and large conditioned to assume that it is the “right” of America to indefinitely occupy sovereign foreign states in the Middle East and sweep up their energy resources. And all the while the ruling class in the D.C. beltway feigns concern for the needless loss of life of US troops placed precariously in far-flung deserts.

The Ron Paul Institute’s Daniel McAdams has aptly described what’s really going on, and nothing more really needs to be said…

She loves having American troops killed in places like Syria. It brings the US closer to the neocon fantasy of war with Iran. She views members of the US military as mere cattle. Mere pawns. The people in charge of American foreign policy hate Americans. https://t.co/IyucfW4PYO

— Daniel McAdams (@DanielLMcAdams) January 30, 2024

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Rap star Snoop Dogg has expressed strong praise for former President Donald Trump, joining a list of celebrities who have either spoken favorably about or outright endorsed the former president in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election.

Snoop Dogg, whose real name is Calvin Cordozar Broadus Jr., said in an interview with British newspaper The Sunday Times that he’s still not sure who he’ll endorse in the election. But he made clear his view of the former president on a more personal level.

“I have nothing but love and respect for Donald Trump,” Snoop Dogg said.

This positioning is quite a shift from Snoop Dogg’s 2017 rap video showing a mock execution of a clown dressed as President Trump.

In a mock breaking news clip, Klump is seen at a “Clown House” press conference where the TV news crawl reads “Ronald Klump wants to deport all doggs.”

Later, Snoop Dogg is seen firing a fake pistol at Klump as he stands with his hands raised.

The rapper said President Trump had never done anything wrong to him. On the contrary, “he has done only great things for me.”

The musician specifically praised President Trump’s decision to pardon Michael Harris, one of the co-founders of the Death Row Records label that signed Snoop Dogg early on in his career.

Before leaving office in 2021, President Trump commuted Mr. Harris’ 25-to-life sentence for conspiracy to commit first-degree murder

Mr. Harris, who served a total of 33 years behind bars, told the Daily Mail after he was pardoned that he was grateful to President Trump for the pardon.

“Whyever he did it, he did it, when so many others wouldn’t do it,” he told the outlet, adding, “I’m grateful that God did whatever God do to get mo to sit in this seat. And whatever vessel he used.”

He added that his bid for clemency under former President Barack Obama had failed.

Snoop Dogg’s latest praise for President Trump stands in contrast to earlier criticism, including when he said ahead of the 2020 election that his first-ever vote in a presidential election would be for President Trump’s opponent.

While Snoop Dogg has yet to formally declare his support for President Trump in the 2024 election, a number of celebrities have thrown their weight behind the former president, including comedian Roseanne Barr, actor Dean Cain, and rapper Kodak Black, who once said he would gladly gift the former president $1 million if he needed it.

Besides celebrities, President Trump has racked up 227 noteworthy endorsements from House representatives, senators, and state governors—a figure many times higher than the handful of endorsements given to his sole remaining major GOP presidential rival, Nikki Haley.

President Trump is the frontrunner by far in his bid for the Republican nomination, with 70.3 percent support, compared to 12.6 percent for Ms. Haley, according to the latest RealClearPolitics polling average.

Taylor Swift Biden Endorsement Rumors

Meanwhile, as President Joe Biden’s approval ratings sit at historic lows, his team is reportedly looking to get some enthusiasm going for his campaign by seeking an endorsement from pop superstar Taylor Swift.

It’s unclear whether Ms. Swift, who boasts over 279 million followers on Instagram and has consistently backed Democrats, plans to endorse President Biden.

She endorsed President Biden in the 2020 presidential election and has expressed unfavorable views of President Trump.

The buzz around a possible Swift endorsement for President Biden has become so widespread that, according to The New York Times, the president’s campaign team has urged applicants for an open social media position not to tout the potential endorsement as a silver bullet strategy.

Speculation about Ms. Swift throwing her weight behind President Biden prompted Vivek Ramaswamy, a tech entrepreneur who recently dropped out of the Republican primary race to endorse President Trump, to joke that the NFL may have rigged the Super Bowl to give Ms. Swift a broad platform to announce the potential endorsement.

“I wonder who’s going to win the Super Bowl next month. And I wonder if there’s a major presidential endorsement coming from an artificially culturally propped-up couple this fall. Just some wild speculation over here, let’s see how it ages over the next 8 months,” Mr. Ramaswamy said in a post on X.

Ms. Swift, who is dating Kansas City tight end Travis Kelce, has been spotted in recent weeks attending NFL games in support of her boyfriend.

The Chiefs, who are the reigning Super Bowl champions, are set to play the San Francisco 49ers at this season’s final NFL matchup in Las Vegas, Nevada, on Feb. 11.

Celebrity endorsements aside, President Biden’s strategy appears focused on trying to win over independent voters, while seeking to label President Trump and his supporters as “Make America Great Again” extremists and accusing them of being anti-democratic for their calls for vote audits.

President Trump, on the other hand, has sought to portray President Biden as having disastrous energy and border policies that undermine U.S. national security, while pegging the president as frail, incompetent, and dishonest.

After years of insisting otherwise, the White House now calls the situation at the southern border “a crisis.” The administration had often rejected that phrase, preferring instead to describe the historic influx of migrants crossing illegally as “a challenge.”

But as Philip Wegmann writes via RealClear Wire, that nomenclature is no more. In a notable shift, when asked about border crossings, White House spokesman John Kirby told RealClearPolitics Monday, “The president himself has talked about the fact that there is a crisis going on at the border.”

This was a reference to a statement President Biden made Friday when he said that his administration had been “negotiating” with Congress for “two months” to “finally address the border crisis.” A change in policy as well as rhetoric, the president promised the next day that, if given new powers by Congress, he would “shut down the border right now.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson was quick to spot the change in language. “Finally. It took three years for President Biden to admit there is a crisis at the southern border,” he told RealClearPolitics in a statement, before adding, “It’s not just a crisis, it’s a catastrophe.”

“Still, the president claims he has no executive authority to fix the disaster he has created,” the speaker continued. “That is demonstrably untrue. He can and should act immediately.”

House Republicans appreciate the change in rhetoric.

And as Jackson Richman reports via The Epoch Times, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has made clear where House Republicans will draw the line on any agreement dealing with the border: allowing illegal crossings.

“Any border ’shutdown’ authority that ALLOWS even one illegal crossing is a non-starter. Thousands each day is outrageous. The number must be ZERO,” Mr. Johnson wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Jan. 29.

The deal, whose text is set to be released this week, reportedly would permit the president to close ports of entry if illegal crossings reach a certain threshold.

One of the negotiators, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), announced on Jan. 28 that a proposal was almost ready.

“This bill could be ready to be on the floor of the United States Senate next week,” he said on CNN, “but it won’t be if Republicans decide that they want to keep this issue unsettled for political purposes.”

The White House called on Congress to give the president the ability to protect the border.

“Until recently, Mr. Johnson advocated for HR2 because, in his view, presidents needed new legal authorities in order to secure the border,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre wrote in a memo.

HR2, known as the Secure the Border Act, was passed by the GOP-controlled House last year. It would have required a border wall to be completed and for asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while their claims are considered, in addition to other border security measures. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has said that bill was dead on arrival in the Democrat-controlled upper chamber.

Mr. Johnson previously said any Senate bill that doesn’t include HR2 would be dead on arrival in the House.

“If Speaker Johnson continues to believe—as President [Joe] Biden and Republicans and Democrats in Congress do—that we have an imperative to act immediately on the border, he should give this administration the authority and funding we’re requesting to secure the border,” the memo states.

The memo cited quotes from Mr. Johnson to demonstrate that the speaker is being contradictory.

It quotes him as saying in February 2023: “America is the most compassionate nation in the world, but our immigration system is broken. Reforming that system is a job for Congress, and any balanced legislative approach must include measures to strengthen border security.”

It also cites Mr. Johnson as writing in a letter to President Biden last month that “statutory reforms designed to restore operational control at our southern border must be enacted.”

Mr. Johnson’s office fired back.

“Speaker Johnson has been clear since the day he was handed the gavel that national security starts at our own border. The Secure the Border Act would codify this principle into federal law, and he continues to strongly urge the Senate and President to support it or similar legislation,” Raj Shah, Mr. Johnson’s deputy communications chief, told The Epoch Times on Jan. 29.

“But make no mistake, President Biden pledged on Friday to ‘shut down the border. However, with the stroke of a pen, he could begin by restoring Remain in Mexico, ending catch and release, [and] reforming asylum and parole standards. His refusal places our national sovereignty at stake.”

Former President Donald Trump, the GOP front-runner in the presidential primary, has voiced objections to the upcoming border deal.

“A Border Bill is not necessary to stop the millions of people, many from jails and mental institutions located all over the World, that are POURING INTO OUR COUNTRY. It is an INVASION the likes of which no Country has ever had to endure. It is not sustainable or affordable, and will, under Crooked Joe Biden, ONLY GET WORSE,” he wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social.

President Biden has said he’d sign into law a bipartisan border deal.

“What’s been negotiated would—if passed into law—be the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we’ve ever had in our country,” he said in a Jan. 26 statement.

“It would give me, as president, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.”

However, Mr. Johnson said that President Biden already had executive authority to close down the border.

“President Biden falsely claimed yesterday that he needs Congress to pass a new law to allow him to close the southern border, but he knows that is untrue,” he said on Jan. 25.

“As my letter stated, President Biden can begin to secure the border by ending catch-and-release, ceasing exploitation of parole authority, reinstating the Remain in Mexico program, expanding the use of expedited removal authority, and renewing construction of the border wall,” Mr. Johnson said, citing a letter he sent the president last year.

The forthcoming deal comes amid a crisis at the southern border, as there have been 785,422 encounters at the southwest border by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in the 2024 fiscal year, which started in October 2023, according to the agency. According to CBP, there were almost 2.48 million encounters in the previous fiscal year—an increase of 96,725 from fiscal year 2022.

Oil prices ended higher after WTI bounced off $76, up to $78, reversing the prior day’s losses from concerns about China’s economy as Middle East tensions were top of mind for the day.

“The spreading conflict in the Middle East remains the most visible and growing risk for energy markets,” analysts at J.P. Morgan wrote in note dated Tuesday.

“While escalation cannot be written off, it remains unlikely in our view, as main parties in the conflict have strong incentives to avoid direct confrontation, and so far they have acted accordingly,” they said.

Meanwhile, “drone attacks on refiners in Russia pose a new, less appreciated, but potentially more damaging threat to global oil product balances,” said analysts at J.P. Morgan.

“Since the start of the year, there have been five recorded Ukraine-linked drone attacks on Russian energy infrastructure.”

But for now, the next leg will be driven by any hints at further crude draws from API’s report.

API

• Crude -2.5mm (-800k exp)

• Cushing -2.0mm

• Gasoline +600k (+1.4mm exp)

• Distillates -2.1mm (-800k exp)

Stocks at the crucial Cushing hub fell for the 4th week in a row (for the worst January levels in 12 years). Crude inventories drew down for the 3rd week in a row…

Source: Bloomberg

WTI was trading just below $78 ahead of the API print and was steady after the data…

“In energy, crude oil remains upbeat after last week’s positive price breakout above the $75 [a barrel] and the rising tensions in the Red Sea region as everyone is now expecting the U.S. response to the latest attacks,” said Ipek Ozkardeskaya, senior analyst at Swissquote Bank, in a Tuesday note.

Finally, of note today was reports that in Saudi Arabia, state producer Saudi Aramco on Tuesday said it won’t try to boost its maximum daily oil production to 13 million barrels a day after receiving an order from the country’s energy ministry.

On its face, the decision may give Saudi Arabia “a bit more freedom to maintain a restrictive output policy” beyond the first quarter of this year, said analysts at Macquarie in a Tuesday note.

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Let’s start by Yellen. US Treasury yields dropped after Treasury announced it expects to net borrow $760bn in Q1 vs. a previous prediction of $816bn. Markets hurrahed, but let’s be clear: first, there are quirks of timing in the financing calendar, long grass I don’t go into other, but others do; and second, there is no hike in tax rates nor reduction in public spending – all the ‘gain’ was due to higher nominal GDP growth/‘fiscal drag’, which reflect inflation. That’s bond bullish? Tomorrow’s Quarterly Refunding Announcement’s political trick will be how much bill issuance we see vs. bonds to fund that $760bn. The political gossip will be how much Yellen thinks bond yields are coming down vs. her deliberately issuing them to run-down the Fed’s Reverse Repurchase (RRP) facility given funds parked there can easily switch to higher yielding T-bills. And don’t forget that as RRP excess liquidity declines, that flow is a liquidity gain offsetting Fed QT; and once RRP is drained, some think QT may have to stop. Again, that’s bond bullish… while Treasury fiscal policy bullies the Fed and runs huge, inflationary deficits financed by T-bills!

Let’s then start Blinken – which is that the US is doing when the US Secretary of State states, “The response against Iran could be multi-levelled and come in stages and be sustained over time.” Operation Praying Mantis, where the US sank half the Iranian fleet in a day in the 1980s, it won’t be: Operation Praying Man, ‘tis. Because while the White House counts its dead, injured and loss of deterrence at the hands of Iran-backed forces –as Tehran says it didn’t do it– it’s also counting the cost of a war that would not only not be over by the 2024 election, where higher oil prices would likely mean Biden loses, but might still be going on in 2028. Markets will therefore be relieved as Bloomberg, both accurately and ridiculously, says the US aims to find a way to bomb Iran just enough to show it’s angry without doing real damage – so ‘politesse’, not real politics. But risks remain: bomb too much – war; bomb too little – more Iran pushback until we trigger that same war; and it’s not clear if there is a sweet-spot between the two. Worse, markets don’t get the real backdrop is:  

• Si vis pacem, para bellum (If you want peace, prepare for war).
• Si vis packing, para bellum (The US wanting to exit a region will invite more conflict until it does).
• Si vis packing it in, para bellum (If the US becomes isolationist, it will be OK – but others sink fast).

On which, it’s time for ‘shippen’. As Freightwaves puts it, “The Red Sea crisis –and the Middle East situation in general– is worsening. There’s growing conviction that shipping diversions around the Cape of Good Hope will increase in scope and last much longer than initially expected.” (By some!) Yes, listen to central bankers’ views on the Red Sea crisis. However, also listen to Red Sea ship captains’ views on inflation and rates – the latter have a more realistic view of the world!

While central bankers in warm offices look at PowerPoint slides prepared by wonks steeped in unworldly math and unrealistic theory that say “disinflation”…

… in the Red Sea, airstrikes vs. the Houthis aren’t working to stop Houthi attacks on shipping.

So, maybe the US has boots on the ground in Yemen. Are they visiting, or trying to find local allies to fight the Houthis to repeat Afghanistan-on-sea? And as more cargo shifts round Africa, Somali piracy is picking up in response. Where or what or who next? Don’t be surprised when something ‘unexpected’ happens again.

In the broader region, we should be prayen. US policy is being made by National Security Advisor Sullivan, who in September 2023 noted, “The Middle East Region is quieter today than it has been for two decades,” and by Secretary of State Blinken, who just stated, “We have not seen a situation as dangerous as the one we are facing across the region since at least 1973.” He seems to have forgotten those Iraqi ‘nuclear weapons’, and the Iran-Iraq War – but he’s not wrong that the current situation bears no relation to the idiotic assessment made just four months ago.

We also have the risk of the Israel-Hamas war expanding to Israel-Hezbollah. On the first front, Hamas just rejected another ceasefire in exchange for releasing its hostages, as demanded by the International Court of Justice, instead insisting the war has to stop. On the second, tensions are soaring on the Lebanese border. The Israeli defence minister just stated his troops will “very soon go into action” there soon, and the Free Press notes, “Take the current war with Hamas and multiply it by ten. That’s what war with Hezbollah would look like. And Israelis are not asking if it will begin, but when.” Spring, some feel.

Meanwhile, maritime maven John Konrad makes a key point across the bows of Yellen, Blinken, shippen, and prayen that markets fail to grasp: “the US Navy can either keep the world safe OR protect the large fleet of Danish, Swiss & German owned containerships. The hard truth is the US Navy simply does not have the capacity to do both.”

YES

And the US Navy is doing exactly that… but, with rising 🇨🇳 🇷🇺 🇮🇷 tensions, the US Navy can either keep the world safe OR protect the large fleet of Danish, Swiss & German owned containerships

The hard truth is the US Navy simply does not have the capacity to do both 🤷‍♂️ https://t.co/HJQcWygwEZ

— John Ʌ Konrad V (@johnkonrad) January 29, 2024

Understand what that means: would you like your cargo to arrive quickly and cheaply? OK, but then you can’t have geopolitical stability. Would you like geopolitical stability? OK, but then you can’t have your cargo cheaply and on time.

Right now, the US is trying, and failing, to protect global supply chains, and trying, and failing, to protect geopolitical stability. Whichever path it ultimately chooses will be disruptive and inflationary. Regardless of what wonks with PowerPoint show central bankers in warm offices, there looks to be no sustainable disinflation against this kind of worrying backdrop.

Indeed, out of sight of most in markets, we are seeing defence spending surge in the West, just as we are seeing US fiscal spending go through the roof in other areas. For the first time since 1944, Finland has activated Stage 1 of its procurement plans, activating wartime production reservation agreements; German arms factories which would have taken a decade to be built are now constructed within months, according to Rheinmetall (while complaining about a lack of German orders); and the UK and Australian press have both had headlines about conscription(!) Yet this is just a fraction of what will be required by their economies if the US Navy can no longer secure either global supply chains or geopolitical stability. How about a European navy that can protect its cargo, for example? We are talking vast sums of money.

Even New Zealand, which has contributed six (6!) sailors to the Red Sea efforts, and whose military is seen as not fit for purpose –because why would a country with a small population and very rich natural resources need defenses when it can export stuff to the peace-loving world?– has just had the RBNZ chief economist say it has a “way to go” to get back to 2% CPI, dashing hopes of an earlier rate cut: up went the NZD as a result.

The US itself must also make huge ‘guns or butter’ choices that will have an equally huge impact on QRAs going forwards. This will be evident soon enough, even to those who opt to focus on the shallowest of headlines rather than the depths of the Red Sea and our problems

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Republican Senators are willing to sell the farm for what would be a terrible deal even if Biden elected to honor the terms…

CBS reports Biden and senators on verge of striking immigration deal aimed at clamping down on illegal border crossings

Trojan Horse Deal Details

1. The agreement is expected to give the executive branch a new legal authority to effectively suspend asylum in between official ports of entry when migrant crossings surpass certain thresholds.

2. The power, which Mr. Biden referred to as an authority to “shut down the border” on Friday, would be mandated after average daily migrant crossings hit 5,000 over seven days, or 8,500 in a single day.

3. It could also be activated on a discretionary basis after average daily crossings surpass 4,000 in a week.

4. There would also be a limit on the number of days each year the president could invoke the authority.

1: Biden already the authority to secure the border. He has no interest in doing so or he would have already done so. The administration even ripped open holes in the razor wire fence that Texas erected. If that’s not a come on in message, what is?

2: Has anyone done the math on this? 5,000 a day for 365 days is 1,825,000. There’s your trojan horse right there. We already know what’s inside.

3: Point three is a joke. What’s with this “could” stuff as if Biden would actually do it. Besides, does anyone expect a legitimate count?

4. Point four is an even bigger joke. It would limit the number of days Biden could shut the border even if he wanted to.

Huge Irony of the Deal

The irony of the deal is that the flip side is over a hundred billion in additional spending on Ukraine and Israel that should not be spent at all.

And there’s still more. Here’s bonus point five.

“While the proposal negotiated by the White House and lawmakers would penalize those who enter the U.S. illegally, it would preserve asylum at official ports of entry. In fact, it would require U.S. border officials to continue processing more than 1,400 asylum-seekers daily at these official border crossings when the “shutdown” authority is invoked, sources told CBS News.“

And how does this miracle happen? Here’s bonus point six.

“All the provisions being negotiated would require an enormous surge in personnel and resources, including detention facilities and deportation flights, to be implemented. The Biden administration has asked for $14 billion to fund border operations and hire additional asylum officers, border agents and immigration judges.”

Well, not to worry. The amazing deal Republicans negotiated would only allow 5,000 * 31 In January, March, May, July, October, and December.

My math says that’s 155,000 in those months and 150,000 in the rest except February.

What Republican dimwits negotiated these terms? These clowns are so desperate for money for Ukraine and Israel they will sign anything.

The House should kill this bill outright. But if Johnson puts it to a vote it will sail because every Democrat will back it, laughing all the way.

Denver Health at “Critical Point” as 8,000 Migrants Make 20,000 Emergency Visits

The Denver hospital system is turning away local residents because it is flooded with migrant visits.

Meanwhile, please note Denver Health at “Critical Point” as 8,000 Migrants Make 20,000 Emergency Visits

Texas Showdown

In Texas, the Supreme Court Lets Feds Cut Abbott’s Razor Wire

The swing vote, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, is a Trump nominee. Expect to hear calls of “traitor”.

There is one way to decide this issue. Vote out Biden. The ruling does help Trump.

Meanwhile, the floodgates are open.

Sanctuary Cities Seek More Money for Migrants, But is Money the Problem?

On December 30, I asked Sanctuary Cities Seek More Money for Migrants, But is Money the Problem?

I suspect you know the answer to this one. If not here it is. The more money we throw at this problem, the worse it will get.

By the way, if you have not figured this out, it’s very inflationary.

Russia’s Digital Ministry announced on messenger platform Telegram that a “technical problem” has led to widespread internet outages across the country. 

“A technical problem has arisen affecting the .RU zone, associated with the global DNSSEC* infrastructure. Specialists from the Internet Technical Center and MSK-IX are working to eliminate it,” the ministry said. 

X users say dozens of Russian websites are down:

Report on Internet Connection Issues in Russia pic.twitter.com/94v1maxXhj

— Russian Market (@runews) January 30, 2024

Widespread internet disruption in Russia. Russia built its isolated internet (.ru) for years. Now, a massive outage shows shutting it down is all too easy pic.twitter.com/RLWqDMDWsH

— Maria Avdeeva (@maria_avdv) January 30, 2024

Bloomberg reported that “the most popular local search engine Yandex.ru” and websites of large banks, including Sberbank PJSC and VTB Group, were also affected by the outage. Outages were reported across Moscow, St. Petersburg, Tatarstan, and the Sverdlovsk and Novosibirsk regions.  

Russian Internet users have reported disruptions to their mobile service, as well as issues with accessing many popular websites. Russia’s Digital Development Ministry said the outage was “associated with the global DNSSEC infrastructure.” https://t.co/xXShlS4Txe

— Meduza in English (@meduza_en) January 30, 2024

The ministry continued: “The problem has now been resolved for subscribers of the National Domain Name System. Restoration work is underway. We will keep you updated on the situation.” 

Following a bombshell $83.3 million award against Donald Trump, his rape accuser E. Jean Carroll, whose case was bankrolled by his enemies, couldn’t remember basic facts of her own claim, once described rape as “sexy,” and whose “off the rails” tweets weren’t allowed to be shown to the jury – just put on an absurd display.

When asked by MSNBC‘s Rachael Maddow on Monday night how she’ll spend “Trump’s money” to help “women’s rights,” Carroll did her best impression of a “Price is Right” winner – like rape victims do, telling Maddow: “First thing Rachel, you and I are gonna go shopping, we’re gonna get completely new wardrobes, new shoes…Rachel what do you like, Penthouse? You want France? You wanna go fishing in France? It’s yours Rachel.”

Her lawyer then nervously interjected: “That’s a joke.”

“If me fishing in France could do something for women’s rights, I would take the hit,” Maddow joked back.

Watch:

Talk to a real rape victim. They never laugh about anything regarding the rape or the conviction. This is vile @MSNBC

— shelovesbravesbaseball (@AmyPhillipsJoh1) January 30, 2024

I am a real rape victim and have never laughed about rape. I can’t even watch TV shows with rape scenes. She is a fraud.

— Tracy Ann (@TracyAMHall1) January 30, 2024

Earlier Monday, Carroll joked about turning Trump Tower into an animal sanctuary during a Monday morning interview on CNN, before snapping back to the ‘women’s rights’ script:

The joke is going to be on her when Trump appeals it and wins.

— Steven 🇺🇸 (@SirStevenKJ) January 30, 2024

H/T Modernity.news

Speaking of appeals…

Trump’s attorney said in a new filing that they had discovered a connection between E. Jean Carroll’s lawyer and the judge in the case, citing a bombshell from the NY Post.

A jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in damages from Trump last week, before The Post learned from sources that Manhattan federal Judge Lewis Kaplan was once a “mentor” to Carroll’s lawyer Roberta Kaplan (no relation), when they worked together in the early 1990s at the Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison law firm in Midtown. 

“If Your Honor truly worked with Ms. Kaplan in any capacity — especially if there was a mentor/mentee relationship — that fact should have been disclosed before any case involving these parties was permitted to proceed forward,” Habba wrote in a letter to the judge.

“This issue is particularly concerning since Plaintiff’s other lead counsel, Shawn Crowley, served as Your Honor’s law clerk, and we were previously advised that Your Honor co-officiated her wedding.”  –NY Post

And then of course there’s all those tweets Trump’s team wasn’t allowed to show…

Don’t go spending “Trump’s money” just yet, Jean…