The Thursday night US and UK-led major strikes on Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen, while posing a significant risk for escalating the Gaza war into a regional conflict, still apparently have not deterred the Iran-backed rebel group’s resolve to attack Red Sea shipping and even Western naval vessels.

Houthi spokesman Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree released a videotaped address saying “The American and British enemy bears full responsibility for its criminal aggression against our Yemeni people, and it will not go unanswered and unpunished.” Houthi sources have tallied over 70 strikes across five regions of Yemen, indicating that at least five people died in the attacks. The Pentagon indicated over 100 missiles of a variety of types were used.

The US Air Force’s Mideast command said in a statement that a combination of jets, destroyers, and a submarine were used, hitting Houthi “command-and-control nodes, munitions depots, launching systems, production facilities and air defense radar systems” in the operation which followed repeat Houthi attacks on Red Sea vessels. “I will not hesitate to direct further measures to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce as necessary,” President Biden had said in a written statement.

“These strikes are in direct response to unprecedented Houthi attacks against international maritime vessels in the Red Sea—including the use of anti-ship ballistic missiles for the first time in history,” the US Commander-in-Chief had added.

According go more details of the variety of weapons systems and platforms used: 

More than 15 F/A-18 Super Hornet strike fighters operating from the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower were involved, according to Fox News, citing unnamed Pentagon sources. Unspecified Air Force fighters operating from a base in the Middle East were also part of the attack. Newsweek has yet to verify these reports.

The USS Florida guided missile submarine and U.S. surface ships launched Tomahawk cruise missiles. It is not clear what other vessels took part in the bombardment, but American Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers have been operating in the Red Sea in recent months.

But though intense, it was a relatively brief attack, likely lasting not more than 30 minutes, or definitely less than an hour. Videos of large fireballs lighting up the night sky flooded social media as key cities like Saana and the port city of Hodeidah were hit, where there also remain large population centers.

But again, the key takeaway here is that after these brief fireworks which many officials have complained comes much too belatedly (though some US lawmakers have already highlighted there was no Congressional approval), the Houthis are likely soon to resume their attacks. Also likely is that there will eventually be more rounds of coalition strikes on Yemen as the crisis endures. Thursday night’s attack is likely to actually result in further reduced commercial shipping traffic in Red Sea waters now visited by war:

• MILITARY ADVISES SHIPS TO AVOID BAB EL-MANDEB: INTERTANKO NOTE
• OIL TANKER FIRM HALTS RED SEA TRIPS AFTER US STRIKES: BBG

Videos (unverified) of large fireballs on the horizon have been widely circulating…

🚨🇬🇧🇺🇸🇾🇪#BREAKING: The scenes in Yemen CURRENTLY. pic.twitter.com/aOtc0dQMx1

— Censored Men (@CensoredMen) January 12, 2024

A Foreign Ministry statement by a Houthi spokesman, Hussein al-Ezzi, acknowledged “a massive aggressive attack by American and British ships, submarines and warplanes” before going on to say that “America and Britain will undoubtedly have to prepare to pay a heavy price and bear all the dire consequences of this blatant aggression.”

Mohammed Abdul-Salam, the Houthis’ chief negotiator and spokesperson, additionally said the Western powers have “committed foolishness with this treacherous aggression.”

“They were wrong if they thought that they would deter Yemen from supporting Palestine and Gaza,” he said in an online statement, vowing further that “targeting will continue to affect Israeli ships or those heading to the ports of occupied Palestine.”

The Pentagon has said that it has no plans to send more troops or assets to the region for now, and will monitor the situation, also as all eyes are on US bases in Iraq and Syria, as American forces brace for potential retaliatory attacks from Iran-backed militias.

Importantly, CENTCOM had called out the Iranians specifically. “We hold the Houthi militants and their destabilizing Iranian sponsors responsible for the illegal, indiscriminate, and reckless attacks on international shipping that have impacted 55 nations so far, including endangering the lives of hundreds of mariners, including the United States,” said General Michael Erik Kurilla, USCENTCOM Commander.

The strikes in Yemen (🇾🇪) were carried out or supported by (at least) the following aircraft:

🇺🇸 RC-135 Rivet Joint
🇺🇸 P-8 Poseidon
🇺🇸 E-2C Hawkeye
🇺🇸 15+ F/A-18 Super Hornets

🇬🇧 Voyager tanker
🇬🇧 4 Typhoons

(Thread will be updated with photos/videos)

1/x pic.twitter.com/G50YROcD3z

— Aerospace Intelligence (@space_osint) January 12, 2024

Meanwhile, Dave DeCamp at AntiWar.com provides the following brief backgrounder of the history of the war which raged in Yemen going back to 2015. Interestingly, Saudi Arabia was quick to distance itself from Thursday night’s major Western coalition operation…

* * * 

The US and its allies have a history of killing civilians in Yemen, as the UN estimated in 2021 that about 377,000 people were killed by the US-backed Saudi/UAE war against the Houthis that started in 2015. More than half died of starvation and disease caused by the blockade and the coalition’s brutal bombing campaign.

The strikes risk shattering a fragile truce between the Houthis and the Saudi-led coalition that’s held since April 2022, although the Saudis have distanced themselves from the US anti-Houthi activity in the Red Sea.

Some members of Congress have criticized President Biden for launching the strikes in Yemen without congressional authorization. “The President needs to come to Congress before launching a strike against the Houthis in Yemen and involving us in another middle east conflict. That is Article I of the Constitution,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) wrote on X.

Following yesterday’s hotter-than-expected CPI, this morning’s Producer Price Index was expected to accelerate (headline not core). However, it did not – headline PPI actually decline 0.1% MoM (+0.1% MoM exp). That is the 3rd straight month of ‘deflation’ but inched PPI YoY up to +1.0%

Source: Bloomberg

Energy and Construction cost deflation dominated the headline PPI MoM decline…

Source: Bloomberg

Energy and Food deflation dominated the slowing of the YoY PPI (though Services is re-accelerating)…

Source: Bloomberg

Excluding food and energy, the core PPI was unchanged MoM in December – the third month of unchanged in a row, which dfragged the Core PPI YoY down to +1.8% (the lowest since Dec 2020)…

Source: Bloomberg

Goods PPI deflated and Services was unchanged…

Half of the decrease in the index for final demand goods is attributable to prices for diesel fuel, which dropped 12.4%

Over 80% of the decrease in the index for unprocessed goods for intermediate demand can be attributed to a 13.2% drop in prices for crude petroleum.

Reminder, disinflation does not mean lower prices. Core producer prices are up 16.9% since President Biden came into office (and headline PPI up over 18%)…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, the deflationary impulse remains for the headline PPI as ‘intermediate PPI’ remains below zero BUT it is starting to accelerate higher…

Source: Bloomberg

That’s a little worrying given The Fed seems adamant it wants to cut in March to save the banking system from collapse.

As happens every quarter, moments ago JPM – the largest US bank – officially fired the starting gun on Q3 earnings season when it reported earnings which – largely still courtesy of the bank’s taxpayer-funded g(r)ift of First Republic earlier this year – were solid (well maybe not that solid, with the first first dumping only to recover more than fully after the market realized how strong the bank’s guidance was), beating on the bottom line, and despite some revenue weakness (in equity sales and trading and investment banking) and some gloomy comments from CEO Jamie Dimon, were well received by the market: it is the other US banks, and especially the smaller ones, that are a far more concerning prospect (especially after the BTFP bank bailout program ends in March), while JPM once again validates its “fortress balance sheet” especially with the benefit of the recent taxpayer-funded fortressization in the form of acquiring all First Republic good assets while stuffing Uncle Sam/FDIC/taxpayers with the bad ones.

First, here is a summary of what the bank just reported: the bank closed out the most profitable year in US banking history with its seventh consecutive quarter of record net interest income and a surprise forecast that the good times may continue in 2024.

Let’s turn to the details, by taking a closer look at what the bank just reported for the just concluded fourth quarter:

• Q4 Adjusted Revenue $39.94 billion, missing exp. of $40.23 billion, and while the print was up $2.5 billion from a year ago, it was the 2nd consecutive quarter of declines from a record high of $42.4 billion in Q2.
  • Q4 net interest income $24.18 billion, beating estimate $23.01 billion; the net yield on interest-earning assets was 2.81%, above the estimate 2.74% and up from 2.72 last quarter.

• Q4 Net Income $9.3 billion, down 15% (and down 21% ex First Republic), as EPS dropped to $3.04, missing exp. $3.94, and down from $3.79 in Q4 ’22 (the bank’s effective rate was 17.8%, much lower than a “managed rate” of 26.7%)
  • That said, JPM noted that significant items included $2.9 billion FDIC special assessment. Adjusting for this “one-time chart”, Net Income would have been $12.1 billion while EPS would come in at $3.97, beating estimates 

• Provision for credit losses $2.762 billion, above the estimate $2.42 billion, and double the $1.384 billion in Q3
  • Net Charge offs more than doubled to $2.2 billion from $0.9 billion YoY, which however was below the expected $1.74 billion
  • Also of note, one quarter after JPM surprised the market with a $113 million release in loan loss reserves, the bank is back to preparing for the coming recession, and in Q4, it built reserves by $598 million, which however was still down from $1.4 billion a year ago.

• Return on equity 12%, missing the estimate of 13.8%
• Return on tangible common equity 15%, missing the estimate 18%
• Net interest income was $24.49 billion, beating exp of $23.61 billion
• Tangible book value per share $86.08

Some context here: as BBG’s Max Abelson notes, everything about JPM is just staggering: “this bank’s standardized risk-weighted assets hit $1.7 trillion, its cash and marketable securities are $1.4 trillion, and average loans are near there at $1.3 trillion. The biggest gets bigger.“

And speaking of bigger, JPMorgan just made more annual profit than any firm in US banking history: the $9.3 billion of net income in the fourth quarter means the biggest bank in US made $49.6 billion for the year, up 32% from last year and topping a record $48.3 billion from 2021.

As BBG notes, “JPMorgan is so vast, and makes so much money, that it can be hard to put either into context. But consider that the six biggest US banks didn’t have a $100 billion year until 2018. JPMorgan came close to making half that in 2023.

“There is nobody in the banking business that I’ve seen that compares,” Lee Raymond, the longtime oil executive who served on the bank’s board for decades, said late last year. “It’s really hard to see where anybody has done what JPMorgan has been able to do.”

Turning to Jamie Dimon’s earnings statement, he called the bank’s reported $9.3 billion “solid,” but points out that number would be $12.1 billion if it weren’t for the “FDIC special assessment and discretionary securities losses.”

“Our record results in 2023 reflect over-earning on both NII and credit, but we remain confident in our ability to continue to deliver very healthy returns even after they normalize. Our balance sheet remained extremely strong, with a CET1 ratio of 15.0%, a staggering $514 billion of total loss-absorbing capacity and $1.4 trillion in cash and marketable securities.”

Why so much hate for the special FDIC assessment fee (which we saw last March just how important that fund can be with the collapses of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.) Well, after the FDIC dipped into that fund earlier last year, big banks like JPMorgan have been on the hook to now replenish it. The bill was expected to be around $3 billion, so the actual $2.9 billion charge is just shy of that prediction. Ironically, while Jamie loves the benefit Signature bank has led to his balance sheet (with virtually no cash out of his pocket) he hates the modest insurance payment he has to make to prepay for future Signature Banks. No surprises there.

Dimon also said that he continues to believe that the recent series of regulatory and legislative proposals, including Basel III endgame, “could cause serious harm to consumers, businesses, and markets. We hope that regulators will make the necessary adjustments so the rules promote a strong financial system without causing undue consequences for end users.”

So why was the year so good? Dimon explains that the bank’s “record results” for 2023 “reflect over-earning on both NII and credit, but we remain confident in our ability to continue to deliver very healthy returns even after they normalize.” As Bloomberg’s Max Abelson notes, this is a big deal: Dimon is hinting that these numbers can’t stay this big forever, though he doesn’t seem worried about a big fall, either.

That said, Dimon made a cautious remark about the soaring US deficit, saying that while “the U.S. economy continues to be resilient, with consumers still spending, and markets currently expect a soft landing, It is important to note that the economy is being fueled by large amounts of government deficit spending and past stimulus. There is also an ongoing need for increased spending due to the green economy, the restructuring of global supply chains, higher military spending and rising healthcare costs.” This, Dimon warns, “may lead inflation to be stickier and rates to be higher than markets expect.” We agree as discussed yesterday.

On top of this, Dimon warns that “there are a number of downside risks to watch. Quantitative tightening is draining over $900 billion of liquidity from the system annually, and we have never seen a full cycle of tightening. And the ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have the potential to disrupt energy and food markets, migration, and military and economic relationships, in addition to their dreadful human cost. These significant and somewhat unprecedented forces cause us to remain cautious.”

Looking at the balance sheet, JPM reported:

• Loans: Average loans of $1.32T, below exp. $1.32 trillion, up 17% YoY and 1% QoQ
• Deposits: average deposits of $2.40T, above exp. $2.36 trillion, flat YoY and up 1% QoQ, even as QT continues and is supposed to shrink bank balance sheets
• CET1 capital of $251BN; total loss-absorbing capacity stands at $514BN.
  • Standardized and Advanced CET1 capital ratios of 15.0%

A quick tangent on just how much of a taxpayer gift the FDIC-funded handover of Signature Bank to JPM has been. Here is Bloomberg’s analysis showing JPM results with and without Signature:

• Firmwide, JPM average loans were up 17%, but up only 4% excluding First Republic
• Average deposits were flat, or down 3% excluding First Republic
• Net income was $9.3 billion, down 15%, or down 21% excluding First Republic
• Net revenue was $39.9 billion, up 12%, or up 7% excluding First Republic
• NII was $24.2 billion, up 19%, or up 12% excluding First Republic. (NII excluding markets was $23.6 billion, up 18%, or up 11% excluding First Republic)
• Noninterest revenue was $15.8 billion, up 3%, or flat excluding First Republic.
• Net income attributable to First Republic was $647 million, reflecting “$1.3 billion of net interest income, $533 million of noninterest revenue and $890 million of noninterest expense.”
• Noninterest expense was $24.5 billion, up 29%, or up 24% excluding First Republic
• In CCB, client investment assets were up 47%, but only up 25% excluding First Republic
• In CCB, average loans were up 27%, and only up 6% excluding First Republic
• In CB, average loans were up 19%, but only up 3% excluding First Republic
• In AWM, average loans were up 6%, or only up 1% excluding First Republic

As noted above, the bank turned more cautious this quarter, with the provision for credit losses rising to $2.8 billion, reflecting net charge-offs of $2.2 billion and a net reserve build of $598 million. What was behind this increase? What else: Consumers. “The net reserve build included a $546 million net build in Consumer, driven by loan growth in Card Services, and a $41 million net build in Wholesale.”

What about those $2.2 billion of charge-offs? They were up $1.3 billion, “predominantly driven by Card Services and single-name exposures in Wholesale which were largely previously reserved.”  And for those keeping context, “prior-year provision was $2.3 billion, reflecting a net reserve build of $1.4 billion and net charge-offs of $887 million.”

As usual, the bank was quite generous in distributing shareholder capital in the form of:

• Common dividend of $3.1B or $1.05 per share
• $2.0B of common stock net repurchases
• An LTM net payout of 41%

Next turning to JPM’s all important Corporate & Investment Bank (CIB) results, the bank reported revenue for the business at $10.96 billion, missing analyst estimates of $11.31 billion.

Drilling down, total banking revenue was $4.058 billion, of which investment banking revenue was $1.576 billion, missing estimates of $1.78 billion despite a 13% increase in investment banking fees, with the firm citing “higher debt and equity underwriting fees

Turning to the all important markets section we read:

• Markets revenue of $5.8B, up 2% YoY
  • Fixed Income Markets revenue of $4.03BN, beating estimates of 3.84BN and up 8% YoY, driven by higher revenue in Securitized Products Group7 , partially offset by lower revenue in Rates
  • Equity Markets revenue of $1.78BN, missing estimates of $1.93 billion and down 8% YoY, driven by driven by “lower revenue in Derivatives and Cash.”

Meanwhile, expenses in the group rose 4% to $6.8B, “predominantly driven by the timing of revenue-related  compensation.” Finally, credit costs in the group were $210mm, with NCOs of $121mm and a net reserve build of $89mm.

Next, a quick look at JPMorgan’s Asset & Wealth Management division, where assets under management rose 24% to a record $3.4 trillion, “driven by continued net inflows and higher market levels.”

On the expense side, numbers are rising, no surprise there. With the bank sporting a record number of employees – rising to just shy of 310K –  more workers inherently means a bigger bill for compensation, which JPMorgan points out. As noted below, on the expense forecast slide of the presentation, the first-listed driver of 2024 expenses (which are expected to be somewhere in the $90 billion region) will be “business-growth-driven hiring, primarily in front office.”

All that said, readers can ignore most of what was written because what cemented the bank’s stock turnaround in the premarket where it first fell as much as 4%, was its outlook on slide 12 of the presentation, which was unexpectedly hiked to a record $90BN, smashing estimates of an $86BN number, and setting Wall Street’s minds at ease that the coming easing would somehow crippled JPM’s profit juggernaut.

Yes, JPM makes money during hiking cycles; it now expects to make even more money during the coming easing cycle. Well, maybe not: becase as JPM reveals in a separate slide, the impact of the Fed’s coming cuts in 2024 will lead to an $8BN drop in NII from a baseline of $97 billion. And what is more remarkable, Jamie Dimon now expects a whopping 6 rate cuts this year. Just how bad are things going to get?

Additionally, the bank also forecast full-year 2024 expense of $90 billion, driven by i) business-growth-driven hiring, primarily in front office; ii) Increase in technology spend associated with investments and higher business volumes, iii)  Continued investments in the business, iv) Marketing; v) Residual inflationary pressures and others…

…. and a card services net charge-off rate of less then 3.5%

The outlook was so surprising that after the stock had fallen as much as 4% after the bank first announced its historical data (before the NII flashing red headline hit), the bank’s outlook was enough to stage a remarkable rebound in JPM stock which is now trading some 2% higher even as the rest of the banks in the space continue to trade flat or down amid mixed results from BofA, Wells and Citi.

Here is the full JPM investor presentation (pdf link).

Manhattan’s rental market showed no signs of easing, with prices climbing higher in December. This indicates that apartment hunters will face near-record-high rents into the spring season.

The median rent on new leases signed last month was $4,050, unchanged from a year before and up 1.3% from November, according to Bloomberg, citing new data from appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. and brokerage Douglas Elliman Real Estate. December’s month-over-month increase was the first since July, in a period when rents generally trend lower. 

Other data points also show apartment demand for the two months ending in 2023 was red hot, with deals soaring 14% from December 2022. 

Although rents peaked at record highs last summer and the supply of apartments has increased, these welcoming signs have yet to push rents meaningfully down to offer apartment hunters relief. 

Jonathan Miller, president of Miller Samuel, said this might be the best relief renters get. 

“Even though they’ve come down from the summer peak, rents are still elevated. We’re coming out of a frenzy period and transitioning into one of stability,” Miller said, adding, “The era of very steep trajectories in rents is over.” 

The good news is that Manhattan’s vacancy rate hit 3.42% last month, the highest level since July 2021. Also, listing inventory was up 33% from one year ago to 7,621 units. This might cap rental prices unless demand further accelerates.

Even though inventory is rising, Miller noted that the share of leases with bidding wars was still around 15%. 

“We wouldn’t be having bidding wars if supply was adequate,” he said.

Miller added that no dramatic price decline is coming down the pipe, adding lower mortgage rates allow some renters to step into the homebuying ring this spring and that would take a little pressure off the leasing market. 

So what happens to the rental market in New York City when progressives in City Hall provide a permanent housing solution to the 100,000 migrants?  

Authored by Sam Bourgi via CreditNews.com,

The World Bank has issued a grim warning to developing countries: Sort out your debts or risk a “lost decade” of economic and financial ruin.

According to the Washington-based lending institution, developing countries spent a record $443 billion servicing their debt in 2022. That’s a 5% increase from the previous year.

That money is going toward principal and interest payments on debt from the past two decades. Over that period, developing countries borrowed lavishly, assuming that steady economic growth and low interest rates would allow them to repay their debts comfortably.

Then Covid, war in Ukraine, and rising interest rates threw a wrench in their plans.

Developing countries—which account for roughly 60% of global GDP—have seen interest payments on their debt increase sharply over the past two years.

“Record debt levels and high interest rates have set many countries on a path to crisis,” said Indermit Gill, the World Bank’s chief economist.

“Every quarter that interest rates stay high results in more developing countries becoming distressed.”

If that wasn’t bad enough, the U.S. dollar has strengthened since 2020, contributing to spiraling inflation across many developing countries and causing their foreign exchange reserves to dwindle.

Americans think 9% inflation was bad. In Argentina, inflation spiked above 70%, while Chile, Brazil, and parts of Africa saw double-digit inflation rates.

[ZH: Actually late last night, Economists tracking Argentina see inflation at 213% at year-end, up 21.2 ppts from previous forecasts, according to the central bank’s monthly survey.]

In a September report, the World Bank acknowledged that low-income developing countries face the biggest challenge in paying down their debt. These countries account for one-fifth of the global population.

“Facing the increased financing needs in the aftermath of the pandemic and under pressure to respond to the cost-of-living crisis, reducing debt has become more challenging,” the Bank wrote.

What does a lost decade even mean?

In economics, a lost decade generally refers to an extended period of slow or negative economic growth, lasting roughly ten years or more. The term was originally coined to refer to Japan’s sluggish growth beginning in the 1990s.

Unlike Japan, however, developing countries probably can’t afford ten years of stagnation. A shrinking economy means less revenue to spend on underdeveloped infrastructure, healthcare, education, and debt payments.

The International Monetary Fund describes this as a vicious cycle that only contributes to more poverty and indebtedness.

“Revenue shortages keep them from paying down debt, which forces them to borrow even more to meet basic needs,” wrote Fanwell Bokosi, an economic affairs officer with an IMF-affiliated organization.

“Budget cuts only make matters worse by slowing economic growth, thereby reducing tax revenue,” he explained.

Growth outlook downgraded

Earlier this month, the World Bank warned that developing countries would grow just 3.9% this year—more than one percentage point lower than the average from the previous decade.

By the end of 2024, the Bank estimates that roughly a quarter of people in developing countries will be poorer than they were before the start of Covid. This figure is as high as 40% for the lowest-income countries.

It’s not just developing nations facing a grim outlook. The IMF and World Bank have downgraded their outlooks on advanced nations, too. In fact, the global economy is on track to complete the worst half-decade of growth in 30 years, World Bank economists said.

Per the IMF’s projections, advanced economies like the U.S., Eurozone, Japan, and the U.K. are on track to grow a dismal 1.4% this year. That’s lower than 2023’s mediocre 1.5% growth rate.

Current lithium extraction and refinement methods are outdated, often harmful to the environment, and ultimately inefficient. So much so that by 2030, lithium demand will outstrip supply by a projected 1.42 million metric tons. But there is a solution: Direct lithium extraction (DLE). 

For this graphic, Visual Capitalist partnered with EnergyX to try to understand how DLE could help meet global lithium demands and change an industry that is critical to the clean energy transition.

The Lithium Problem

Lithium is crucial to many renewable energy technologies because it is this element that allows EV batteries to react. In fact, it’s so important that projections show the lithium industry growing from $22.2B in 2023 to nearly $90B by 2030.

But even with this incredible growth, as you can see from the table, refined lithium production will need to increase 86.5% over and above current projections.

The Solution: Direct Lithium Extraction

DLE is a process that uses a combination of solvent extraction, membranes, or adsorbents to extract and then refine lithium directly from its source. LiTASTM, the proprietary DLE technology developed by EnergyX, can recover an incredible 300% more lithium per ton than existing processes, making it the perfect tool to help meet lithium demands. 

Additionally, LiTASTM can refine lithium at the lowest cost per unit volume directly from brine, an essential step in meeting tomorrow’s lithium demand and manufacturing next-generation batteries, while significantly reducing the footprint left by lithium mining. 

Providing the World with Lithium

DLE promises to disrupt the outdated lithium industry by improving lithium recovery rates and slashing emissions, helping the world meet the energy demands of tomorrow’s electric vehicles.

EnergyX is on a mission to become a worldwide leader in the sustainable energy transition using groundbreaking direct lithium extraction technology. Don’t miss your chance to join companies like GM and invest in EnergyX to transform the future of renewable energy. 

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Scientists in China, experimenting with a coronavirus closely related to the virus that causes COVID-19, found that it had a 100 percent kill rate in a small mouse study, according to the researchers’ announcement on Jan. 4.

The scientists, including a doctor trained by the Chinese military, cloned a pangolin coronavirus and infected modified mice to “assess its pathogenicity,” they said in a preprint paper published on bioRxiv.

Of the four mice infected with the virus, all began to lose weight five days post-infection. Shortly thereafter, they exhibited symptoms including sluggishness and white eyes.

The four mice died within eight days of inoculation. Researchers described the results as “surprising.”

Researchers then infected eight additional mice, euthanized them, and selected organs from four to analyze. High levels of viral RNA were found in various organs, including the brain, lungs, and eyes. While the viral load in the lungs decreased by the sixth day, it increased in the brain.

“This finding suggested that severe brain infection during the later stages of infection may be the key cause of death in these mice,” the scientists said.

The experiments were on a mutant strain of the pangolin virus, known as GX_P2V(short_3UTR).

The results suggest a risk for the virus to “spill over into humans,” researchers said.

Experts Concerned

Justin Kinney, an associate professor at the Simons Center for Quantitative Biology at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in the U.S., said the research described in the paper does not seem to fall under the category of gain-of-function because the Chinese scientists did not purposefully enhance the virus to be more pathogenic or transmissible.

“The research is still very dangerous, though,” Mr. Kinney told The Epoch Times via email. “I am especially concerned that the paper does not say what biosafety level the work was performed at. Coronavirus research in China is often done at a biosafety level (BSL-2) that is inadequate for working with potential pandemic pathogens that might be transmitted by air.

“Indeed, coronavirus research done at BSL-2 may have caused the COVID-19 pandemic. And by showing that the coronavirus has a surprisingly high pathogenicity, the work underscores the need for extreme caution when working with novel coronaviruses.”

The first COVID-19 cases were detected in Wuhan, China, near a laboratory that has conducted risky experiments on coronaviruses, including enhancing the pathogenicity of a bat coronavirus. Some scientists believe that the virus causing COVID-19 likely originated from the lab, given its history and the fact that, years later, a natural origin has yet to be identified.

Lihua Song, a scientist in Beijing who co-authored the new paper, did not respond to a request for comment on how the scientists ensured the experiments they performed were safe.

Critics noted that the researchers who published the new study include Yigang Tong, who was trained in a Chinese military program and worked in military-run labs. He also co-authored a paper in 2023 with Zheng-Li Shi, who helps run the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Justin Goodman, senior vice president of the White Coat Waste Project, a U.S. nonprofit, said the new study added to the body of evidence showing Chinese scientists have been conducting “dangerous and deadly tests on mice.”

“This is why shipping US tax dollars to foreign adversaries’ unaccountable animal labs is a recipe for disaster and we’re working with lawmakers to stop it,” Mr. Goodman told The Epoch Times via email.

The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) has for years funded lab work in China and other foreign countries, including testing done in Wuhan.

This week, Congress is focusing its questioning of Dr. Anthony Fauci on some of those experiments. Dr. Fauci has, for years, led the NIH office responsible for funding this work.

Results Unclear

The Chinese scientists infected genetically engineered mice that have lungs modified to better mimic humans. The outcomes were not compared with other live viruses, such as SARS-COV-2, which causes COVID-19.

That makes it unclear whether the pangolin coronavirus “is generally more dangerous than SARS-CoV-2, or if their results are due to the specific mice they used,” said Mr. Kinney. “And it’s not at all clear from their results what might happen were a human to become infected with this coronavirus.”

Mr. Kinney helped co-found a group called Biosafety Now that advocates for independent oversight of risky experiments.

Dr. Tong and his colleagues compared the pathological changes in the mice with those in a control group and found no evidence of severe inflammation. They noted that these results were consistent with reports from Shi regarding the pangolin coronavirus, as well as with their previous experiments conducted on golden hamsters and another type of mouse.

The researchers called for more investigation of the high pathogenicity of the coronavirus and said that their study “offers a distinct alternative model for understanding the pathogenic mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses.”

A lone outlier and rare voice of dissent to come out of the generally staunchly pro-Ukraine central and eastern European countries has been Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico. He has stirred the pot again and caused outrage among fellow government officials after penning an op-ed this week wherein he slammed the West for getting Ukraine wrong all along.

What’s more is that the op-ed published by Slovak newspaper Pravda.sk on Tuesday was issued at the very moment President Zelensky has been touring nearby Baltic countries while urging more weapons and support as the “arms warehouses are empty”, supposedly. Fico is a member of the left Smer party in Slovakia and has pointed out that NATO leaders and the US have “repeatedly erred in assessing” the real state of the war.

He articulated that it’s largely the false “black-and-white vision” of the war, a simplistic narrative “desired in Washington or Brussels,” which has resulted in blunder after blunder, and greater suffering for all during an unnecessarily protracted conflict. Fico described the now proxy war as a “futile waste of human resources and money” that the Western allies got painfully wrong.

Fico said the Russian invasion was the result of a negative domino effect of events going back to 2014, when Washington asserted its influence in Kiev.

“Russia responded to the security situation and Ukraine’s pressure to join NATO by violating international law, using military force without an international mandate,” Fico wrote. “Big countries often do that, let’s see what the US accomplished in Iraq.”

“And the West, instead of immediately making every effort to achieve a quick ceasefire, at the beginning of 2022 without even losing a tenth to Ukraine, made a huge mistake,” he continued. “[The West] incorrectly evaluated the use of Russian military force as an opportunity to bring Russia to its knees.”

Indeed, US officials themselves have made similar statements over the ‘opportunity’ they see in the conflict. For example Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin famously said the US goal is to “weaken” Russia under Putin.

Fico’s op-ed also spoke to the futility of seeking to pump more billions and advanced weapons into Kiev (also amid the EU seeking 50BN euros, which was held up by Hungary). His words suggest it’s game over and that nothing will change regardless of EU and US policy:

Russia completely controls the occupied territories militarily, Ukraine is not capable of any meaningful military counter-offensive, [and] it has become completely dependent on financial aid from the West with unforeseeable consequences for Ukrainians in the years to come,” he explained.

“The position of the Ukrainian president is shaken, while the Russian president increases and strengthens his political support,” Fico continued, pointing out that “neither the Russian economy nor the Russian currency collapsed, [and] anti-Russian sanctions have increased the internal self-sufficiency of this huge country.”

There are other recent signs that Fico’s assessment is accurate, such as the following…

US Officials Are Concerned About Split Between Zelensky and Military Chief

Bloomberg reports, “Officials in Washington are concerned differences between Zelenskiy and his army chief, Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, are slowing efforts to crystallize a new strategy.”

“Ukraine’s military is… pic.twitter.com/sENg35puG0

— Kyle Anzalone (@KyleAnzalone_) January 11, 2024

During his tour of Baltic allies Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, Zelensky had complained that his armed forces are “sorely lacking” in advanced anti-air technology, also at a moment Russia has increased missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities in response to Ukrainian cross-border attacks on Belgorod.

Kiev has already in the last months been signaling the world that it is ready to blame Washington if it loses the war (which already looks like the outcome), given Biden’s planned over $60 billion in Ukraine defense aid was held up by GOP members of Congress. But maybe the West should listen to the populist Slovak PM Fico.

Authored by John Butler via FortuneAndFreedom.com,

• Farmers are revolting in Germany and neighbouring countries

• Populist parties continue to rise in the polls

• The EU may not survive in its current form

I recently wrote about what has become a global, populist political phenomenon.

Citizens of multiple countries, in both hemispheres, are not only voting for populist candidates but are also working outside their entrenched political establishments to either enact desired changes or oppose undesired ones.

The latter has been in focus this week as German farmers travelled to Berlin and other cities to blockade the roads in protest at the removal of certain subsidies considered noncompliant with official climate policies. Although not well reported in the British media, in the continental media, the protests made the front page.

Farm subsidies have existed all across Europe ever since the EU was founded. Affordable and available basic food was considered – and still is – a matter of national security. And since European farmers are not always as competitive as those elsewhere, subsidies were deemed required to keep them in business.

No longer. Apparently, climate goals now trump food security and affordability. And so the subsidies are to be ended, rendering farmers less competitive and possibly forcing some into bankruptcy.

As has been true throughout modern European history, the progressive Dutch were among the first to revolt against what they perceived as oppressive rules handed down from above. Farmers blockaded multiple cities and motorways in response to proposed nitrogen (fertiliser) quotas. More recently, the Dutch gave the largest portion of seats in the Tweede Kamer – their equivalent of the House of Commons – to the populist party of Geert Wilders.

Now farmers in Germany, the EU’s largest, wealthiest country, and largest net contributor to the EU budget, have joined the fray. They, in turn, have been joined by farmers in neighbouring Poland, Hungary and Austria. HGV drivers, many of whom supply farms with fertilisers and other essentials and in turn deliver produce from farm to table.

The pitchforks have come out, as it were.

As it happens, the UK also has a venerable populist tradition. In 1381, there was the so-called “Peasants Revolt” led by Wat Tyler. It began in Brentwood, Essex, with a dispute over unpaid taxes and rapidly spread to engulf much of southeast England. London was sacked, and many prominent buildings were set on fire. These included the Tower of London, in which Richard II’s lord chancellor and lord high treasurer were discovered by the rebels and summarily killed.

By comparison, today’s EU farmers are rather restrained in their actions. But they have laid down a populist political gauntlet of sorts. The common agricultural policy has been the backbone of the EU for decades. The perceived common interest of farmers has functioned as a form of political “cement” to hold the European project together and provide a base on which to build further integration into other industries.

Having been pushed too far, the farmers are now threatening to undermine the entire European project with support for populist and, in some cases, outright anti-EU parties. Recent polls suggest that, in eastern Germany, Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is the leading political party.

Brussels has yet to voice any specific concerns about the matter. Perhaps they see these developments as just storms in teacups.

Ensconced in their modern glass and steel palaces, they might even ponder whether, if European food security and affordability are compromised in pursuit of their lofty climate goals, they should just let their peasants eat cake instead.

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.”

– Richard Nixon

Many years ago, a newspaper headline asked the question: “What’s the difference between a politician and a psychopath?”

The answer, then and now, remains the same: None.

There is no difference between psychopaths and politicians.

Nor is there much of a difference between the havoc wreaked on innocent lives by uncaring, unfeeling, selfish, irresponsible, parasitic criminals and elected officials who lie to their constituents, trade political favors for campaign contributions, turn a blind eye to the wishes of the electorate, cheat taxpayers out of hard-earned dollars, favor the corporate elite, entrench the military industrial complex, and spare little thought for the impact their thoughtless actions and hastily passed legislation might have on defenseless citizens.

Psychopaths and politicians both have a tendency to be selfish, callous, remorseless users of others, irresponsible, pathological liars, glib, con artists, lacking in remorse and shallow.

Charismatic politicians, like criminal psychopaths, exhibit a failure to accept responsibility for their actions, have a high sense of self-worth, are chronically unstable, have socially deviant lifestyles, need constant stimulation, have parasitic lifestyles and possess unrealistic goals.

It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about Democrats or Republicans.

Political psychopaths are all largely cut from the same pathological cloth, brimming with seemingly easy charm and boasting calculating minds. Such leaders eventually create pathocracies: totalitarian societies bent on power, control, and destruction of both freedom in general and those who exercise their freedoms.

Once psychopaths gain power, the result is usually some form of totalitarian government or a pathocracy. “At that point, the government operates against the interests of its own people except for favoring certain groups,” author James G. Long notes. “We are currently witnessing deliberate polarizations of American citizens, illegal actions, and massive and needless acquisition of debt. This is typical of psychopathic systems, and very similar things happened in the Soviet Union as it overextended and collapsed.”

In other words, electing a psychopath to public office is tantamount to national hara-kiri, the ritualized act of self-annihilation, self-destruction and suicide. It signals the demise of democratic government and lays the groundwork for a totalitarian regime that is legalistic, militaristic, inflexible, intolerant and inhuman.

Incredibly, despite clear evidence of the damage that has already been inflicted on our nation and its citizens by a psychopathic government, voters continue to elect psychopaths to positions of power and influence.

Indeed, a study from Southern Methodist University found that Washington, DC—our nation’s capital and the seat of power for our so-called representatives—ranks highest on the list of regions that are populated by psychopaths.

According to investigative journalist Zack Beauchamp, “In 2012, a group of psychologists evaluated every President from Washington to Bush II using ‘psychopathy trait estimates derived from personality data completed by historical experts on each president.’ They found that presidents tended to have the psychopath’s characteristic fearlessness and low anxiety levels — traits that appear to help Presidents, but also might cause them to make reckless decisions that hurt other people’s lives.”

The willingness to prioritize power above all else, including the welfare of their fellow human beings, ruthlessness, callousness and an utter lack of conscience are among the defining traits of the sociopath.

When our own government no longer sees us as human beings with dignity and worth but as things to be manipulated, maneuvered, mined for data, manhandled by police, conned into believing it has our best interests at heart, mistreated, jailed if we dare step out of line, and then punished unjustly without remorse—all the while refusing to own up to its failings—we are no longer operating under a constitutional republic.

Instead, what we are experiencing is a pathocracy: tyranny at the hands of a psychopathic government, which “operates against the interests of its own people except for favoring certain groups.”

Worse, psychopathology is not confined to those in high positions of government. It can spread like a virus among the populace. As an academic study into pathocracy concluded, “[T]yranny does not flourish because perpetuators are helpless and ignorant of their actions. It flourishes because they actively identify with those who promote vicious acts as virtuous.”

People don’t simply line up and salute. It is through one’s own personal identification with a given leader, party or social order that they become agents of good or evil.

Much depends on how leaders “cultivate a sense of identification with their followers,” says Professor Alex Haslam. “I mean one pretty obvious thing is that leaders talk about ‘we’ rather than ‘I,’ and actually what leadership is about is cultivating this sense of shared identity about ‘we-ness’ and then getting people to want to act in terms of that ‘we-ness,’ to promote our collective interests. . . . [We] is the single word that has increased in the inaugural addresses over the last century . . . and the other one is ‘America.’”

The goal of the modern corporate state is obvious: to promote, cultivate, and embed a sense of shared identification among its citizens. To this end, “we the people” have become “we the police state.”

We are fast becoming slaves in thrall to a faceless, nameless, bureaucratic totalitarian government machine that relentlessly erodes our freedoms through countless laws, statutes, and prohibitions.

Any resistance to such regimes depends on the strength of opinions in the minds of those who choose to fight back. What this means is that we the citizenry must be very careful that we are not manipulated into marching in lockstep with an oppressive regime.

Writing for ThinkProgress, Beauchamp suggests that “one of the best cures to bad leaders may very well be political democracy.”

But what does this really mean in practical terms?

It means holding politicians accountable for their actions and the actions of their staff using every available means at our disposal: through investigative journalism (what used to be referred to as the Fourth Estate) that enlightens and informs, through whistleblower complaints that expose corruption, through lawsuits that challenge misconduct, and through protests and mass political action that remind the powers-that-be that “we the people” are the ones that call the shots.

Remember, education precedes action. Citizens need to the do the hard work of educating themselves about what the government is doing and how to hold it accountable. Don’t allow yourselves to exist exclusively in an echo chamber that is restricted to views with which you agree. Expose yourself to multiple media sources, independent and mainstream, and think for yourself.

For that matter, no matter what your political leanings might be, don’t allow your partisan bias to trump the principles that serve as the basis for our constitutional republic. As Beauchamp notes, “A system that actually holds people accountable to the broader conscience of society may be one of the best ways to keep conscienceless people in check.”

That said, if we allow the ballot box to become our only means of pushing back against the police state, the battle is already lost.

Resistance will require a citizenry willing to be active at the local level.

Yet if you wait to act until the SWAT team is crashing through your door, until your name is placed on a terror watch list, until you are reported for such outlawed activities as collecting rainwater or letting your children play outside unsupervised, then it will be too late.

This much I know: we are not faceless numbers.

We are not cogs in the machine.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we are not slaves.

We are human beings, and for the moment, we have the opportunity to remain free—that is, if we tirelessly advocate for our rights and resist at every turn attempts by the government to place us in chains.

The Founders understood that our freedoms do not flow from the government. They were not given to us only to be taken away by the will of the State. They are inherently ours. In the same way, the government’s appointed purpose is not to threaten or undermine our freedoms, but to safeguard them.

Until we can get back to this way of thinking, until we can remind our fellow Americans what it really means to be free, and until we can stand firm in the face of threats to our freedoms, we will continue to be treated like slaves in thrall to a bureaucratic police state run by political psychopaths.