Authored by Egon von Greyerz via GoldSwitzerland.com,

With the US shooting itself in the foot again, we are now certain that this is the final farewell to the bankrupt dollar based monetary system…

More about this follows but, in the meantime, an extremely important warning: 

If you have never been a goldbug, this is the time to become one. 

I decided 25 years ago that the destiny of the world economy and the financial system necessitated the best form of wealth preservation that money could buy. 

And physical gold performs that role beautifully just as it has done for several thousands of years as every currency or fiat monetary system has collapsed without fail throughout history. 

Thus, at the beginning of this century we told our investor friends and ourselves to buy gold for up to 50% of investable liquid asset. 

So at $300 we acquired important amounts of gold and have never looked back. We have of course never sold any gold but only added since. 

I have never called myself a goldbug, just someone who wanted to protect assets against the risk of the destruction of the financial system including all currencies. But now is really the time to become a real gold bug. 

So, today just over 20 years later, gold is up 7 – 8X in most Western currencies and multiples of that in weaker economies like Argentina, Venezuela, Turkey etc.

The total mismanagement of the US financial system has led to the dollar losing 98% of it’s value since Nixon closed the gold window in 1971. Most other currencies have followed the dollar down at varying speeds. 

But now comes the really exciting phase of this race to the bottom. 

We have only 2% left for the dollar based currency system goes to ZERO. 

As Voltaire said in 1728, “Paper money always returns to its intrinsic value – ZERO.”

What we must remember is that the dollar doesn’t just have a further 2% to fall to reach zero. Because to reach zero, it will next fall 100% from where it is today. 

I know the sceptics will say that this is not possible. But these sceptics don’t know their history. Since fiat currencies’ record is perfect, no one must believe that because we live today, it is different to a 5,000 year faultless record of success, or shall we call it failure, of currencies always reaching zero. 

THE US CONTINUES TO SHOOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT

How many times can you shoot yourself in the foot and still walk upright with pride?

Well, the US government certainly has wounded itself mortally with both feet being so full of holes that there is hardly any space left for another hole. 

So, the latest hole in the US dollar foot is a proposal to steal $300 billion of Russian reserves and use the funds for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

A deadline has been set for the G7 nations to come up with the detailed proposal by 24 February. 

The proposal has obviously come from the US backed by its faithful lapdog the UK. 

Now don’t get me wrong, I really like the US and also the UK and their people but that doesn’t mean that I concur with the idiotic decisions taken by their governments without the consent of their people. 

So will 2024 be the year which, when all the evils which the West has created, erupt in the most violent chain of events political, civil wars, geopolitical, more war, terrorism, economic collapse including the fall of the monetary system. 

Well the ingredients are certainly present to create a picture similar to The Triumph of Death painting by Bruegel.  

We obviously hope that this is not where the world is heading but all the ingredients are sadly in place for the start of a series of events which will be both unpredictable and uncontrollable. “The Financial System has reached the End”

MOST MAJOR WARS SINCE WWII HAVE BEEN INSTIGATED BY THE US

As Merkel admitted, since the Minsk agreement in 2014, it was always the intention of the US to push Ukraine into a conflict with Russia. 

This war is still going on with more than 500,000 having been killed. (Since propaganda from both sides is a major part of a war, we will never know the correct figure.) 

It will obviously be very tempting for the G7 to use the $ 300 billion funds blocked stolen, for the war since many countries’ parliaments are becoming reluctant to fund this war. 

So is the US and its allies going to set a precedent that should also apply for other wars?

Since the US initiated the attacks on Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, Syria and many other countries, should not the US foreign reserves be applied for the reconstruction of all these nations? 

But as always, it is one rule for the mighty US and another rule for its enemies. 

As Bush Jr said, “Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.”

THE LAST PHASE OF THE DOLLAR DEBASEMENT NEXT

This very final phase of the dollar debasement to zero really started on June 29, 2022 when the US decided to seize all Russian financial assets. 

That action was the nail in the coffin (as well as the shot in the foot) of the Petrodollar system. This has been in place since 1973 to support the dollar with a payment system for black gold since yellow gold was no longer supporting the dollar. 

To seize a major sovereign state’s (Russia’s) assets can never end well. And then to give those assets to an enemy of that state (Ukraine) is guaranteed to seal the fate of the dollar dominant currency system and its backers. 

An economically weak EU gave its support with the Brexit UK always obeying its US master’s. 

A historical post mortem of this total submission to the command of the US will clearly conclude that it was totally disastrous for the German economy as well as the rest of Europe. But sadly weak leaders always make disastrous decisions. 

And as the West has a massive surplus of weak leaders, it is running from one crisis to the next.

Is Treasury Secretary Yellen blind to what is happening to her economy or is she just giving the world the propaganda lies that all politicians must do to buy votes?

This is what Yellen said to House Financial Services Committee in August 2023:

“The dollar plays the role it does in the world financial system for very good reasons that no other country is able to replicate, including China. We have deep liquid open financial markets, strong rule of law and an absence of capital controls that no country is able to replicate….. But the dollar is far and away the dominant reserve asset.”

“Deep liquid financial markets” means “we” have until now been able to create unlimited amounts of worthless fiat money. “Strong rule of law” means that whoever totally obeys the US increasingly totalitarian system, like for example the Patriot Act, is protected by the law. And as regards capital controls, FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) that the US forced upon the world’s finical system in 2014 has led to a total US control of the global financial system.  

And as regards “the dollar is far and away the dominant reserve asset”, not for long Mrs Yellen. 

Has Janet heard of de-dollarisation, has she heard go the BRICS and has she understood that the runaway debts and deficits are destroying the fabric of the US economy and financial system?

Yes of course she knows all of this and she also knows that she can’t do anything about it except to print more money. So her principal role is to keep the pretences up and hope that the system will not collapse on her watch. And then hopefully she canunscathed pass the baton to the next treasury secretary so that he/she can get the blame. 

BRICS

The BRICS already has 10 members, India, China, Brazil, Russia, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iran, Egypt and Ethiopia. 

In addition, another 30 countries want to join including for example Venezuela. 

The BRICS produce just under 50% of global oil. 

But if we look at oil reserves, the existing BRICS plus aspiring members like Venezuela, have over 20X the oil reserves of the US. 

PEAK ENERGY

Another major economic crisis for the world is the contracting energy system.

The world economy is driven by energy which means fossil fuels. Without sufficient energy the living standards would decline fatally. Currently fossil fuels account for 83% of the world’s energy. The heavy dependence on fossil fuels is unlikely to change in the next few decades.

 And as I have always believed, even electric vehicles are no longer the holy grail that world governments are trying to push onto consumers. There are just too many problems such as cost of buying and cost of repairs, range and questionable CO2 benefits. Also environmentally EVs are a disaster since batteries have a short life and cannot be recycled. 

But that’s not the only problem. For the first 60-70,000 miles an EV produces more CO2 than an ordinary vehicle.

Stocks are building up of unsold EVs, exacerbated by companies like Hertz selling off 20,000 vehicles. 

Also, to produce ONE battery takes 250 tons of rock and minerals. The effect is 10-20 tons of CO2 from mining and manufacturing even before the vehicle has been driven 1 metre. 

In addition, car batteries cannot be recycled but go to landfill which has major environmental implications. 

And as concerns renewable energy, it is unlikely to replace fossil fuels for a very, very long time even if this is a politically uncomfortable view for the climate control activists. What very few realise is that most renewable energy sources are very costly and also all dependent on fossil fuels whether it is electric cars, wind turbines or solar panels.

As the graph shows, the energy derived from fossil fuels has declined for the last few years. This trend will accelerate over the next 20+ years as the availability of fossil fuels decline and the cost increases. The economic cost of producing energy has gone up 5X since 1980.

What very few people realise is that the world’s prosperity does not improve with more debt but with more and cheaper energy.

But sadly, as the graph above shows, energy production is going to decline for at least 20 years.

Less energy means lower prosperity for the world. And remember that this is in addition to a major decline in prosperity due to the implosion of the financial system and asset values.

The graph above shows that energy from fossil fuels will decline by 18% between 2021 and 2040. But although Wind & Solar will proportionally increase, it will in no way compensate for the fall in fossil fuels. For renewable energy to make up the difference, it would need to increase by 900% with an investment exceeding $100 trillion.  This is highly unlikely since the production of Wind & Solar are heavily dependent on fossil fuels.

Another major problem is that there is no efficient method for storing Renewable energy.

Let’s just take the example of getting enough energy from batteries. The world’s largest battery factory is the Tesla Giga factory. The annual total output from this factory would produce 3 minutes of the annual US electricity demand. Even with 1,000 years of battery production, the batteries from this factory would produce only 2 days of US electricity demand.

So batteries will most probably not be a viable source of energy for decades especially since they need fossil fuels to be produced and charged.

Nuclear energy is the best available option today. But the time and cost of producing nuclear means that it will not be a viable alternative for decades. Also, many countries have stopped nuclear energy for political reasons. The graph above shows that nuclear and hydro will only increase very marginally in the next 20 years.

Of course the world wants to achieve cleaner and more efficient energy. But today we don’t have the means to produce this energy in quantity from anything but fossil fuels.

So stopping or reducing the production of fossil fuels, which is the desire of many politicians and climate activists, is guaranteed to substantially exacerbate the decline of the world economy.

We might get cleaner air but many would have to enjoy it in caves with little food or other necessities and conveniences that we have today.

So what is clear is that the world is not prepared for even the best scenario energy case which entails a major decline in the standard of living in the next 20-30 years at least.

IMMINENT DECLINE OF THE WORLD ECONOMY

The above explanation, of the world economy as an energy driven system, is important to grasp in order to understand the effect of the declining energy production. This decline together with the increased energy cost of producing energy will exacerbate the decline of the world economy. 

To add to this longer term energy crisis which very few people discuss or fathom, the world is facing the end of the current monetary system.

Yes, the BRICS countries will over time assume the mantle of the waning Western empire. 

But it won’t happen overnight, especially since the world’s second biggest economy, China, also has a debt problem almost as big as the US one.

Just look at the growth of China’s money supply in this century. No country has survived such an explosion of money supply without serious consequences.

The advantage that China has is that their financial and currency system is principally domestic and can therefore be resolved “in-house”.

JUMP ON THE GOLD WAGON

No one can forecast with certainty when an event will take place.

But what we can determine with great certainty is that the risk is imminent for the world economy and the Western monetary system to go through an uncontrollable  reset of proportions never seen before in history. 

What we also feel certain about is that the gold price very soon will reflect the major problems that the world economy is facing. 

In this century, gold has performed very strongly against all currencies as the table below shows. 

All major central banks will do all they can to support the gold price. 

The BRICS and other Eastern countries will accelerate their already substantial purchases of gold. And the West, led by the US will accelerate the debt creation and spend unfathomable amounts in futile attempts to save their collapsing economies. 

In June 2016 I advised investors to jump on the Goldwagon when gold was $1,300. https://goldswitzerland.com/get-on-the-goldwagon-to-10000/

Today with gold at $2,050 gold is still very cheap and anyone with some savings, small to very big, must now jump on the goldwagon and buy as much physical gold (and a bit of silver) as you can afford and then some more. 

Owning gold will not solve all our problems, but it will at least give us a very important nest egg and protection against the coming financial debacle that will hit the world. 

President Volodymyr Zelensky appears increasingly more serious about pursuing peace negotiations to end the war, and this was on display in comments issued by his top aide headed into the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. 

Ukraine’s presidential chief of staff Andriy Yermak on Sunday explained that Kiev now believes it is crucial for China to be at the table for future talks on its peace formula. “China needs to be involved in talks to end the war with Russia,” the Ukrainian top representative said following diplomatic meetings going into the WEF. China remains the most influential Global South country widely viewed as squarely in Russia’s corner, having refused to rebuke Moscow or join Western-led sanctions after two years of the conflict.

Importantly, Chinese Premier Li Qiang is leading the delegation from Beijing at the WEF this week, which presents a significant opportunity for serious engagement on the question of Ukraine peace. There’s also the potential that Li and President Zelensky could meet, given Yermak said “let’s see” when he was asked by a journalist whether they would directly engage.

Meanwhile, Zelensky has successfully cobbled together a peace summit proposed within the context of world leaders gathering in Davos, and the Swiss government has agreed to play official host, and yet Russia – the other crucial party capable of ending the war – is not invited…

Switzerland agreed to host the summit at Zelenskiy’s request, a Swiss government spokesperson said, adding that further details were being worked out.…

“We would like the Global South to be present…. It is important for us to show that the whole world is against Russia’s aggression, and the whole world is for a just peace,” he said.

The outcome to the summit, expected to be initiated Tuesday, is likely to be merely be more of the same…

A high-level meeting to discuss peace in Ukraine ended without a significant resolution, as talks were held on the eve of the World Economic Forum in Davos with the second anniversary of Vladimir Putin’s invasion fast approaching.

Representatives of more than 83 countries were involved in the fourth and final such meeting of national security advisers, but little common ground was found towards ending a conflict that appears stuck in a grinding deadlock.

Ignazio Cassis, the foreign minister of host nation Switzerland, said the gathering helped clarify certain points for future discussions but that it was clear none of the warring parties were willing to make territorial concessions.

It remains that there are some key aspects of Ukraine’s 10-point peace plan which Moscow sees as a non-starter. For example, here is Point 6 of Zelensky’s ten point peace plan:

To cease the hostilities, Russia must withdraw all its troops and armed formations from the territory of Ukraine, plain and simple. Ukraine’s full control over its state border, recognized internationally, needs to be restored.

Without this, no long-lasting peace can be achieved. Each day Russian soldiers remain on Ukrainian land, Ukrainians have to fight and die to protect their homes and to shield the world from the long-lasting consequences of this aggression. 

Additionally, Zelensky has issued the following words on X: “I will also discuss the return of Ukrainian children stolen by Russia, sanctions, ways to use frozen Russian assets, humanitarian mine clearing, financial assistance, and recovery,” he wrote.

China is seen as key to getting Russia to make significant compromise, yet both Xi and Putin know that Russian military success in Ukraine means Kiev has no cards to play. Ultimately, without China being on board with such initiatives to woo Global South countries to take a firmer anti-Russian line, there’s little that will come out of it.

Still, it seems each side is at least inching toward possible near-future talks. “Liu Jianchao, head of the International Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, told an event in the US that Russia has showed enthusiasm to have peace talks with Ukraine, when Chinese officials talked with them,” according to Bloomberg last week.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

The 9th circuit court of appeals affirmed the constitutional right of vagrants to sleep on sidewalks, in parks, and even on the steps of court houses.

Please consider the Coalition on Homeless v. the City of San Francisco, San Francisco Police Department filed January 11. 2024.

In the ruling, the court sided with the Coalition on Homeless and against the city to “prevent the City and County of San Francisco from enforcing any ordinance that punishes sleeping, lodging, or camping on public property“.

The ruling was based on an extreme interpretation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution.

Eighth Amendment

The 8th amendment says “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

In a 53-page ruling, the Appeals Court ruled that it is “cruel and unusual punishment” to prevent camping on sidewalks or any public property, presumably even courthouse steps.

The last 36 pages of the ruling (first link) was a blistering dissent by circuit judge Patrick J. Bumatay. Here are some pertinent snips.

Today, we let stand an injunction permitting homeless persons to sleep anywhere, anytime in public in the City of San Francisco unless adequate shelter is provided. The district court’s sweeping injunction represents yet another expansion of our court’s cruel and unusual Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. Our decision is cruel because it leaves the citizens of San Francisco powerless to enforce their own health and safety laws without the permission of a federal judge. And it’s unusual because no other court in the country has interpreted the Constitution in this way.

Based on a misreading of the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, the district court now dictates to San Francisco how it may manage its sidewalks, streets, and parks. The result of the district court’s far reaching injunction is that homeless persons now have a choice to sleep, lie, or sit anywhere they want in public at any time until San Francisco can provide them shelter. That ruling is far removed from the original meaning of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause and disregards the long history of anti-vagrancy laws in this country. And the district court goes beyond even our circuit’s extraordinary reading of the Clause.

The Coalition on Homelessness sued San Francisco seeking to enjoin enforcement of State and local laws barring sleeping on sidewalks at certain times, public lodging and camping, and obstructing streets and parks. See Cal. Penal Code §§ 148(a), 370, 372, 647(e); S.F. Police Code §§ 168, 169. Based on an underdeveloped factual record, and apparently without even considering how these individual laws fit within our Martin/Grants Pass framework, the district court agreed to enjoin enforcement of the laws against “involuntarily homeless individuals.” Worse yet, the district court didn’t even define what it means to be “involuntarily homeless” and gave conflicting signals on the point—an issue we address in our concurrently filed memorandum disposition. To top it off, the district court then set a novel end date for the injunction. It continues “as long as there are more homeless individuals in San Francisco than there are shelter beds available.” Never mind that injunctions usually terminate at the end of litigation, or that the relief here is merely meant to be preliminary. This sweeping injunction has no basis in the Constitution or our precedent. San Francisco should not be treated as an experiment for judicial tinkering.

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear the Case

Due to the overwhelming and unprecedented stupidity of the 9th Circuit ruling, the US Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal from local governments in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Phoenix.

The Wall Street Journal noted that California Governor Gavin Newsom argued in a friend-of-court brief that “courts are not well-suited to micromanage such nuanced policy issues based on ill-defined rules.”

The Journal’s comment is quite the hoot: “We look forward to Mr. Newsom’s constitutional communion with Justice Clarence Thomas.“

The Hotel California Wealth Tax Advances, You Cannot Leave to Escape It

On January 10, I commented The Hotel California Wealth Tax Advances, You Cannot Leave to Escape It

Wealth Tax Details

• The bill would impose an annual excise tax of 1.5% on the worldwide net worth of every full- and part-year California resident that exceeds $1 billion, starting this tax year.

• Come Jan. 1, 2026, the state would tax wealth that exceeds $50 million at a rate of 1% each year, with an additional 0.5% tax on assets valued at more than $1 billion.

• Part-time residents would be taxed on a pro rata share of their wealth based on the number of days they spend annually in California.

• The tax would also apply to nonresidents who have recently left the state.

• Democrats exempted real property from the tax as a favor to their high-end real-estate industry and Hollywood donors. 

• To spread the wealth around to plaintiff-bar donors, the bill would apply the state’s False Claims Act to wealth-tax records and statements. This means plaintiff attorneys could sue affluent individuals on behalf of the state for allegedly under-reporting assets. Plaintiff attorneys would be entitled to a share of the state’s recovery.

If the wealth tax passes, I look forwards to another mind meld of a different nature with the US Supreme Court.

Update (2103ET): As predicted, Donald Trump has been declared the winner of the Iowa Caucus by the Associated Press. Despite just 1% of the votes in, the former President is leading both Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis by more than 35-points as of this writing, more than projected in the final NBC News/Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll.

Developing…

*  *  *

In chilly Iowa, Republican candidates are making their final appeals before gathering for a 7 p.m. Caucus – during which party members will plead their case for various candidates they would like to see on the ballot. All times mentioned are local.

Voters eager to participate in the caucus are expected to face temperatures of -2 degrees, and 35 degrees below zero with wind chill factor, which would break the state’s 1972 record for coldest caucus day by a longshot, per the Des Moines Register.

Donald Trump – the party’s clear frontrunner by a wide margin, plans to call caucus captains throughout the day, and will release a video message for supporters.

The former president canceled in-person rallies scheduled over the weekend due to sever weather, but will hold a watch party at the Iowa Events Center in Des Moines.

Did we mention the wide margin? The former president is also way ahead in endorsements by fellow Republicans.

Trump has the backing of well over 100 GOP governors and members of Congress — including more than 20 U.S. senators and top House members like Speaker Mike Johnson — outpacing his rivals for the party’s nomination in all of those categories. On Sunday he added more: Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum. –NPR

Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis will hold three campaign events today – stopping in Sergeant Bluff, Council Bluffs, and Cedar Rapids.

He will also attend an evening caucus before proceeding to his campaign watch party in West Des Moines, the Epoch Times reports.

DeSantis has the backing of key Iowans, including the state’s GOP governor, Kim Reynolds. He is also endorsed by Iowa evangelical leader, Bob Vander Platts.

Nimrata ‘Nikki’ Haley will appear at a tele-town hall at 5 p.m., while her watch party will be held at 8 p.m. in West Des Moines.

Haley, while lacking notable endorsements in Iowa, did pick up a key endorsement from the next state on the primary calendar, New Hampshire, where Gov. Chris Sununu (R) has thrown his support behind her.

Vivek Ramaswamy started the day with a town hall meeting in Urbandale, after which he held a 10:30 a.m. rally in Waterloo. Later, he will appear in Cedar Rapids at 1 p.m., before moving on to the Surety Hotel in Des Moines for a 5 p.m. caucus night party.

Stay tuned for updates…

The White House was ‘swatted’ on Monday, after a person called 911 to falsely claim that there was a fire at the residence and that someone was trapped inside.

Multiple vehicles from DC Fire and Emergency Medical Services responded just after 7 a.m. ET, after which officials concluded that it was a false alarm.

And while no cops were involved, “it’s in the same spirit” of “swatting” incidents that have more recently targeted public officials, according to Noah Gray, communications director for DC fire and EMS, NBC News reports.

In so-called swatting incidents, someone makes a false report of a crime in progress to draw police to a certain location.

It’s unclear who made the call or where it came from. A Secret Service spokesperson said any fire at the White House would have been immediately detected — and there clearly wasn’t one.  

President Joe Biden was at Camp David when the call to 911 was made. He later traveled to Philadelphia to participate in a service event at a food bank to mark the birthday of the late civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

In recent weeks, politicians from both parties have been ‘swatted’ – including ‘Georgia Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene, whose home was raided by authorities on Christmas Day following a suicide hotline tip, New York Rep. Brandon Williams and Florida Sen. Rick Scott. on the Republican side,’ (per the NY Post), and on the Democrat side – Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, George Soros, and Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, who booted Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot last month.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley was also swatted recently, as was the Hunter Biden laptop repair store owner, John Paul Mac Issac.

Fulton County, Georgia DA Fani Willis implied she was guilty of something – telling a Sunday congregation at the Big Bethel AME Church ahead of Martin Luther King Jr. Day that “you cannot expect black women to be perfect and save the world,” and that “we need to be allowed to stumble.”

Watch:

Fani Willis believes she’s saving the world—we just need to allow her “to stumble” at times 😂 pic.twitter.com/svY7jOkxm8

— Julia 🇺🇸 (@Jules31415) January 15, 2024

Willis has come under fire for hiring a man named Nathan Wade (without proper approval), a private attorney in the midst of a divorce who “has little to no experience trying felony cases, much less complex RICO actions,” according to a 127-page filing in former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election trial in Georgia.

Wade ended up pocketing nearly $700,000 from Fulton county taxpayers – with which he allegedly took Willis on lavish vacations. He also billed taxpayers $2,000 to talk to the Biden White House about prosecuting Biden’s political opponent.

Allegations surfaced last week from one of Trump’s co-defendants, Mike Roman, a political operative who served as Trump’s director of Election Day operations on his 2020 reelection campaign, who accused Willis and Wade of engaging in an “improper” romantic relationship.

Citing “sources close” to both Willis and Wade, Roman’s lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, claimed the pair have been involved in an “ongoing, personal and romantic relationship,” and went on vacations together. The filings argued the alleged relationship, which Merchant claims started before the election interference began, makes the indictment “fatally defective” and requests it be dismissed. –The Hill

Willis then played the (double-reverse) race card, saying: “I’m a little confused. I appointed three special counselors. It’s my right to do, paid them all the same hourly rate. They only attack one.”

“I hired one white woman, a good personal friend and a great lawyer, a superstar, I tell you. I hired one white man — brilliant — my friend and a great lawyer. And I hired one Black man, another superstar, a great friend and a great lawyer,” she continued, without referencing Wade by name.

“The Black man I chose has been a judge for more than 10 years, run[s] a private practice more than 20 [years],” said Willis. “Represented businesses in civil litigation … served a prosecutor, a criminal defense lawyer, special assistant attorney general.”

Willis then pretended to talk to God, asking: “God, isn’t it them who’s playing the race card when they only question one?”

“They’re playing the race card when they constantly think I need someone from some other jurisdiction in some other state to tell me how to do a job I’ve [done] almost 30 years.“

Did the other two attorneys she hired take her on lavish vacations?

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) will get to the bottom of it – after launching an investigation into Wade.

“According to a recent court filing, you have been paid more than $650,000—at the rate of $250 per hour—to serve as an ‘Attorney Consultant’ and later a ‘Special Assistant District Attorney’ in the unprecedented investigation and prosecution of the former President and other former federal officials,” wrote Jordan in a Friday letter reported by Just the News.

“This filing also alleges that while receiving a substantial amount of money from Fulton County, you spent extravagantly on lavish vacations with your boss, Ms. Willis.”

“Basically, there is a 100% probability that our sun, generating what they call a GMD, which is a solar storm, that hits hard, hits our Earth, and the magnetic field we have around the Earth, and can fry everything that is electric above the ground, including our entire grid,” actor Dannis Quaid explained to Tucker Carlson in one of the former Fox anchor’s most surreal yet terrifying interviews yet.

Scared yet? You should be.

Accomplished actor and musician Quaid shares insights on his upcoming documentary titled “Grid Down, Power Up”, highlighting the inevitability of a massive solar storm (a Carrington event such as occurred in 1859) impacting Earth in catastrophic ways.

At the time, Quaid notes, the GMD (geomagnetic disturbance) devastated the then-existing telegraph system, and asks Carlson to consider the potential magnitude of such a disaster in today’s electrically-dependent society. He notes:

“imagine what that would do now with a very large storm… it would take out not only the electricity but all of our infrastructure,” the actor exclaims, adding that:

“There wouldn’t be water in your tap. You couldn’t get gas for your car because the whole system is broken down.”

Quaid hopes that by bringing attention to the potential catastrophe he can nudge politicians into action to harden the grid against such events (natural or terrorist-driven)…

“It’s something we don’t like to think about but it’s… whether from the Sun or a bad actor this is something that 100% chance it’s going to happen and we are just no nowhere no way prepared for it.” ;

…although he is not optimistic given the challenges posed by regulatory agencies and the private ownership of power companies.

“President Trump actually signed an executive order to harden our grid to protect ourselves against an event like this happening. Obama tried to get that going as well and it’s stuck in these Regulatory Agencies.“

And if we don’t do something about it, basically all the worst bits from the bible…

“Everything that we rely upon would be gone. The food would melt in our refrigerators…” Quaid states, warning that “within a year, 90% of the world’s population would be dead from starvation, disease, or killing themselves in total and utter social catastrophe.”

He concludes the interview with thoughts on American democracy and the need for balanced political discourse, advocating for education about the values that make us a nation and urging for cooler heads to prevail in politics.

Watch the full interview here (from behind a pillow)…

Multiple large explosions have been reported overnight (local) near the US Consulate in Erbil, Iraq, in what appears to be a major escalation from Iran.

The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has already taken responsibility for the attack against what a statement dubbed foreign “espionage centers” and “anti-Iranian terrorist gatherings in parts of the region” with ballistic missiles.

All eyes on #Erbil tonight — video appears to show at least some projectiles made impact, and they’re big.

Sources in #Iraq claim short-range ballistic missiles or heavy suicide drones were used, possibly from southern #Iraq or #Iran.

Serious development. pic.twitter.com/Mx3aXHRbJY

— Charles Lister (@Charles_Lister) January 15, 2024

ABC News is reporting that four people were killed in the fresh missile attack, however, no Americans have been hurt. US officials have told regional media that no American facilities were impacted by the missile strikes in Erbil, even though many initial reports said it took place near the vicinity of the US consulate.

Very close in time to this attack, possibly within as little as five minutes of the Erbil incident, Israel launched airstrikes against Iran-linked targets outside Aleppo International Airport in northern Syria.

One regional correspondent, Joyce Karam, pointed out that Monday has been an exceptional day in terms of the number of hugely escalatory events close in time. She wrote that the “Middle East is imploding, in one day”…which has included the following: 

• Attack on US ship by Yemen Houthis
• US intercepting 2nd attack in Red Sea
• Israel strikes in Gaza [and Syria]
• Stabbing & car ramming near Tel Aviv IRGC attack in Iraq
• IRGC attack in Syria

As for the IRGC action in Syria, a statement said it targeted an ISIS site, in retaliation for the twin suicide bombings in Kerman city in southeast Iran on Jan.3. ISIS had taken responsibility for the attack which killed over 100 people who were attending memorial events commemorating the death of Qassem Soleimani.

Iran’s IRGC launches ballistic missiles near the US Consulate and on an Israeli Mossad headquarters in Erbil, Iraqi Kurdistan, and simultaneously on Syria, targeting groups related to the Kerman terror attack. pic.twitter.com/K38oBLwzWO

— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) January 15, 2024

The IRGC statements made so far include acknowledgement of the following military actions Monday (some of which occurred in the overnight hours Tuesday, local time):

• Attack on anti-Iranian terrorist sites (i.e. US military sites) in Iraq’s Erbil
• Attack on ISIS terrorist sites inside Syria
• Attack on Mossad HQ in Kurdistan, Iraq

According to more details in Reuters from Iran’s attack on northern Iraq: “Explosions were heard in an area some 40 kilometers northeast of Erbil in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region, three security sources said, in an area near the U.S. consulate as well as civilian residences.”

Al-Mayadeen reports six explosions heard in a missile strike southwest of Aleppo, Syria. @syriahr attributes the strike to Israel. Meanwhile, Iraqi media reports a missile attack on an American base in Irbil, northern Iraq. A busy night in the skies of the Middle East. pic.twitter.com/1H4WdZcTg9

— Ariel Oseran (@ariel_oseran) January 15, 2024

All of this is spillover from the Gaza War, as things continue to slide into a possible broader regional conflagration. 

More video from the Erbil attack, however which remains unverified…

#BREAKING: Video of possible ballistic missile impacts in Erbil, northern Iraq https://t.co/Y8koVdwRH4

— ELINT News (@ELINTNews) January 15, 2024

Authored by Robert Malka via BitcoinMagazine.com,

Marxism and Bitcoin have one thing in common, the idea that a radical change in the structure of society will happen in a bottom up decentralized fashion. Which of them, if either, will succeed in that goal?

Marx tells us the revolution will be decentralized.

The Have-nots will tire of the great inequity of capitalism, and the few thousand Haves will suffer from the worldwide rebellion they encouraged through their greed.

Building central banks and controlling the money supply will force the onset of Communism.

Centralization of wealth leads to decentralized rage; the overthrow is inevitable. Class will be the deciding factor, and people of all stripes and sexes among the most developed nations will rebel first. The dominos will fall until the least developed countries finally industrialize, experience the same inequities, and become communists themselves.

This is not what happened, of course. Lenin adapted Marxism to suit his needs, and with the help of Communist sympathizers in the United States, Communism was implemented top-down in underdeveloped Russia. The dominoes toppled forcefully. Country after country fell into or out of Communism thanks to top-down or outside interests throughout the Cold War, always at the expense of the citizenry, and rarely at their behest.

Ironically, we discover, Communism has always been propped up by top-down physical force and moneyed interests, the very people Marx himself despised.

Versions or elements of Communism now exist in China and the United States. One is an initially poor, now dystopian regime that plays capitalist games, and the other is a regime struggling between political correctness, a limp conservatism, and a central bank barely holding the economy together.

Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonym for the creator(s) of Bitcoin, makes no political statements.

In his nine-page whitepaper and public postings, we learn how Bitcoin works, and whether it might succeed — by which he meant a high volume of transactions processed and a failure of entities to attack and delegitimize the network.

It is, however, well-established that Bitcoin’s deflationary monetary policy and peer-to-peer structure have roots in the insights of Austrian economists such as Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich von Hayek, and others — thinkers who developed their work in direct contrast to Marx and the historical, political bent of his dialectical materialism. It is no surprise then that theories have emerged about the political implications of adopting Bitcoin.

According to one theory, the most developed countries, particularly the United States, are closest to the fiat money printer. The strongest central bank is the one that runs the world’s reserve currency. The few who run that central bank can print unlimited amounts of money and launder it to suit their interests. Such interests will never align with that of their people’s, and particularly never of the countries forced to tether themselves to today’s global reserve currency, the US dollar. The dollar, not tied to gold or other hard money, will inflate into nothingness. Other central banks also printing money will suffer doubly. Their money is debasing, and the dollar on which their money relies is also debasing.

The people will figure this out, and tire of it. They will realize that they cannot store the value of their days’ work in a debasing currency, and will pull their money out of the fractional reserve banks that enable this endless printing. They will put this money into a hard asset, initially gold, and eventually Bitcoin.

Slowly, then suddenly, the revolution will be decentralized. The citizens of developed countries will invest in Bitcoin, but as relative winners in the fiat game, they will use it as a currency last. Similarly, the governments of the most developed countries will fail to take Bitcoin seriously, or be hostile to it. But the citizens of poor countries, and those with debased currencies, will leap to Bitcoin first. The poor will realize Bitcoin’s volatility is not so bad when their country’s currency hyper-inflates far faster. Its monetary policy is at least transparent. Who knows what happens in the offices of the Federal Reserve?

The citizens of smaller, poorer countries will store their value in bitcoin and transact with it. Smaller, poorer governments will see that Bitcoin gives them a way out of fiat’s approach of debt and debasement, adopting it as legal tender. The dominoes will fall. The Haves of the central banks will be overthrown, replaced by the Have-nots who had bitcoin first. The developed countries will be the last to catch on. And finally, thanks to Bitcoin’s deflationary monetary policy, the poor countries will have a leg up in this Orange New World. Someday we will live in a free-market paradise, where no one is in control of the money supply and economies can grow as The People will.

In both theories, the economic situation leads to a decentralized emotional/cultural phenomenon, namely a struggle against a corrupt oligopoly.

But when it comes to Bitcoin, this hasn’t happened as expected either.

When Nayib Bukele, President of El Salvador and head of the party Nuevas Ideas, made his country the first to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender, citizen interest in Bitcoin in El Salvador was virtually 0%. Only a few bitcoiners from developed countries, who had made their home in touristy El Zonte beach, knew anything about Bitcoin. Today, the degree of citizen-wide adoption of Bitcoin in El Salvador is over 35% and rising, with some of the thanks going to the government’s Chivo wallet, and some to non-profit efforts such as Mi Primer Bitcoin. El Salvador’s domino fell mostly from top-down efforts, and as poor a country as it is, its other legal tender is the US Dollar, the world’s reserve currency. While El Salvador doesn’t have control of the dollar’s monetary policy, it is certainly doing better by adopting it compared to Argentina or Lebanon, whose currencies are terribly debased as of this writing.

Further, there are obvious falsities here. The United States hasn’t adopted Bitcoin as legal tender, but it sure has a lot of bitcoin. The IRS has holdings. Rumor even has it that other agencies confiscate, keep, and purchase bitcoin from time to time, the latter being particularly easy for a country that’s routinely printing money.

The list of countries mining bitcoin for free money, some of which is kept, is too long a list to name. So, certainly developed countries, whether or not they acknowledge Bitcoin’s relevance publicly, are invested. So much for a leg up for the poor countries.

Finally, there is also the geopolitical exercise of using bitcoin.

Russia is accepting bitcoin for natural gas, and the UAE is warm to the asset. Both are far from poor or underdeveloped countries.

On the other hand, Nigeria isn’t rich. The Nigerian people transact in bitcoin more than anyone besides Americans. Yet the government is hostile to it, going so far as to push their CBDC, the e-Naira, on the populace. Meanwhile, savvy citizens in Argentina and Lebanon mine and save in bitcoin, while their governments don’t seem to see the urgency in using it.

So, is Bitcoin, or rather Bitcoin Economic Theory, destined to a history as murky and ubiquitous as Communism’s? Can any theory encompass this asset’s trajectory? Further, given that Bitcoin, by its nature, challenges central banks, and by extension certain normalized tenets of Communism, we should expect to see them challenge one another geopolitically — right?

Which economic incentive structure wins? Is it a soft win, forcing countries like China to accommodate the network without sacrificing their political structure? Or does it extinguish centralization altogether? Or is Bitcoin snuffed out by some ingenious circumstance none of us yet foresee?

• As it stands, Bitcoin is certainly the underdog, whose main advantage is its decentralization through its proof-of-work consensus mechanism.

• Meanwhile, fiat has a hold on every major institution on earth — including the military needed to get its way.

The geopolitical theories surrounding Bitcoin rely on the assumption that it cannot be stopped. As a computer network, anyone can run a node, anyone can transact with anyone else, and anyone can mine to secure the network and make money. It is, in fact, the most secure computer network ever built, with 99.99999999% uptime and zero successful attacks made against it.

Laws cannot stop people from using Bitcoin. Though it is possible to track purchases made on the ledger, allowing governments to arrest or harm people who defy such laws, theoretically, people will move out of such places and move to places where they can transact in their money of choice. People who try to attack the network by co-opting hashrate will find they’ll make more money supporting the network rather than investing energy to work against it.

The fact that it’s hard money means everyone — including those who despise it — will eventually opt into storing their value within the network, preventing them from wanting to sabotage it and lose their wealth. Only the few closest to the money printer have the most to lose in moving to a Bitcoin Standard. They cannot navigate a world in which they lose control of the predominant money. If they can’t beat them, they’ll join them.

I would be remiss without mentioning Major Jason Lowery’s theory, which, while controversial, makes for a compelling story: As Bitcoin finds its way into every nook and cranny, nation-states will come to adopt Bitcoin and wield it as a geopolitical weapon, sublimating the motivation to go to war. Instead, there will be warring hash rates, and geopolitical divisions along the lines of bitcoin mining. This is a compromise of sorts between both ideas, whereby Bitcoin is co-opted by the present authorities — members of the central bank included — but Bitcoin finds a way to shift their incentives in its favor.

To the extent that they can hoard the remaining bitcoin, and attempt to dominate the network by conquering hashrate, Major Lowery’s proposed economic ‘game’ may find some reality. While there are several valid critiques of Lowery’s thesis, a version of such an event may occur. Per Limpwar, countries that adopt Bitcoin as legal tender first, attempting to leverage it against other countries, may find themselves trapped. Adversarial countries could sell their bitcoin during a competing country’s recessions, further plummeting the purchasing power of that country in the short term. If a military initiative follows that up, it could be the difference between a win or a loss.

Similarly, a government could hoard bitcoin for just such a response against its people. As its people commit to revolution, having primarily committed their assets to Bitcoin, the government may sell a substantial sum of bitcoin, weakening its people’s assets. Perhaps other countries or citizens would purchase that bitcoin, once again raising the price. Perhaps it would take longer than expected. As we’ve seen, bear markets can reliably last more than a year, and it only takes a few whales to shift the price of bitcoin dramatically. There is not yet any reason to believe that the Bitcoin economy will behave differently in the future.

My position is that imposing a framework onto Bitcoin indicates a lack of integrity. The network will thrive where it is needed, and falter where it is not. It is not yet obvious that it will be equally needed everywhere, or have equal value everywhere. Gulf countries, for example, may come to hoard bitcoin, but find no need to spend it, preferring to transact in their fiat currency, grounded in the value of their natural and digital assets. The citizens of such regimes may do the same, feeling no need to transact internationally, and possessing no strong economic incentive to use bitcoin.

Struggling countries may be similarly slow to adopt Bitcoin, preferring to clamp down on their citizens, who may not be prepared to suffer for transacting with digital assets. The people of China may experience such a fate. Certainly, this seems to Bitcoiners like a geopolitical medium-term stupidity. But many regimes engage in such stupidities.

And finally: would a Bitcoin economy look dramatically different from the way the economy looks today? It seems very likely that the economy will be similar under a Bitcoin Standard as it is under the fiat system. Any large changes to such a system would take generations, and even such changes might simply be iterations to the current system rather than the radical vision of a few Bitcoiners. There will still be credit. Many people will sill prefer to leave their money with intermediaries. Countries will still have central bodies managing the purchase, sale, and holdings of bitcoin, along with how they legally navigate the network and the transactions that it services. Perhaps countries will spend less than they do today, or focus less on GDP – but is it really so wild to believe that, when push comes to shove, countries won’t continue to spend more than they have? We believed before World War One that spending more money than a country had was impossible – but Europe kept the war going for what was believed to be an impossibly long time. Bitcoin will never be able to eliminate that instinct. Where There’s a Will, There’s a Way.

So, perhaps Bitcoin will win over centralization, Communism, and the threat of infinite inflation in the long term. In the short- and medium-term, perhaps a societal chiropractic adjustment will be recognizable, to those of us who are watching.

*  *  *

Marx believed that all culture and politics was built atop the economic structure of a people. Our economics defines us, and its historical progression, from tribal bartering to feudalism to the free market, to communism and beyond, is inevitable. There are a non-zero number of Bitcoiners who also presume an historical teleology for Bitcoin, in fact only disagreeing with Marx on which inevitability to expect: Communism or Bitcoin. Red or Orange. Many, but not all, of the prominent Maxis are Christians. Hegel, who inspired the dialectical materialism of Marx, undoubtedly (and, given Marx’s atheism, ironically) borrowed from Christian theology to devise The Phenomenology of Spirit. It makes some sense then that in economics both see a kind of savior of history. Both, therefore, believe that only their asset, or approach, will win, and that a new politics will broadly be inspired from it. Whether a new politics is brought about from one or the other is not only possible, but proven. We see how Marxism has inspired virulent political strands of itself. Bitcoin may very well do the same.

But to believe, as both may, that only their approach will come to dominate — Marx’s because of the fundamental (and necessarily-always-growing) inequity born of the Haves always taking from the Have-nots, and Bitcoin’s because no other asset is a superior storer, transferrer, and protector of energy and value — seems shortsighted. It may also be true that the whole framing of this problem is wrong. Perhaps economics is not the base upon which cultural and political superstructures are built – that, instead, economics merely influences some, but not nearly all, of a society’s functions. Believing otherwise puts us in too narrow a framing, risking the chance we miss the roots of other deep cultural or political issues. Addressing such an issue would require that we address whether, as Marx believed, all philosophical issues fundamentally stem from the material world, and whether new philosophies can only emerge from new material conditions.

Regardless, we see that both philosophies haven’t played out the way anyone expected. And, for the first time since Marx wrote, we have a real application of Austrian economics. The latter never had a political chance against the zealotry of Marxism until Bitcoin’s emergence. However, given that Marxism is fundamentally a philosophy of ressentiment, and though bitcoin may displace it, it is unrealistic to believe it will eliminate it altogether.

Fundamentally, the workers of the world who remain resentful, even if Bitcoin wins, will either infect elements of it with their philosophy — technology, too, can be driven in unexpected directions — or they will bide their time until the next opening.

In another 300 years, who knows what will come of Bitcoin? Who knows whether the integrity of such a system will last, or whether central banks not only remain, but thrive in a new form?

Maxi fanaticism is not ungrounded. Bitcoin has shifted the economic landscape of whole countries, and saved the wealth of many. It promises to shift the very fabric of money and the way we navigate energy.

And yet it seems that no clear theory can encapsulate it. Bitcoin is filling up, slowly but surely, a great space where once there was ocean. Will it continue to fill every space until we navigate with it, as fish do water? And who knows if other such economic theories won’t continue to compete. But the way there will be long and bumpy, and undoubtedly the dominos will not fall in any of the ways we can possibly imagine.