Authored by Dorothy Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Fox News executives miscalculated in their sudden decision to oust the network’s most popular prime-time host, Tucker Carlson, according to Victor Davis Hanson, a historian and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

“One of the messages the Murdochs are not quite understanding [is] that when you take away somebody who had a greater potential elsewhere and was a precious asset that anchored your whole evening lineup, and you fired him in a fit of pique, or anger, without thinking it through, you’ve gotta be very careful, because you’re not gonna be able to replace a guy like that,” Victor Davis Hanson told The Telegraph on April 29.

A week after Carlson’s abrupt exit, why the popular prime-time host left the network remains a mystery.

A brief statement issued by Fox News said only that the two “have agreed to part ways” and “We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor.”

Carson’s last broadcast was on April 21. During his final on-air segment, Carlson told his audience that he would be back on Monday.

While the network has parted with several popular news personalities like Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly, the case for Carson was different, according to Hanson.

“Before they fired him, they thought ‘Fox is bigger than any one anchor: We fired Bill O’Reilly. And guess what? Tucker showed up, and he has the same size of audience or bigger,’” he said. “We can do that because people tune into us because [of] the brand.

“But I don’t think they understand it’s not quite like that. It’s cumulative: It’s like a cut, a cut, a cut, and each one magnifies the prior one. So when you get rid of Bill O’Reilly, and you get rid of Megyn Kelly … you go up and down, and Newsmax and competitors creep in and grab your audience.

“I don’t think that there was a serious cause of firing him other than an emotional one,” Hanson said.

On April 26, Carlson broke the silence with a video posted on Twitter that drew some 23 million views, exceeding the number of viewers of his old prime-time show on the cable news channel.

Hanson suggested Carlson doesn’t really need to go on television. Instead, the media figure, like his former colleague Megyn Kelly, could pursue an independent route.

“Even though Tucker was supposedly getting two more years at $20 million a year, given his appeal and talents, he could probably make more than that with his own venue,” he said, adding that the media business is “fragmented.”

But Fox News “needed Tucker Carlson to appeal to the new Republican Party,” Hanson noted.

“What do I mean by that? He was talking about the absurdity of woke, and I don’t where you find somebody like that, who has the ability to articulate those positions but is not crazy,” he continued.

“Tucker came from one of the wealthiest families in California. He was an aristocrat … So for him, brought up like that as an aristocrat, to become a populist and yet know how the aristocratic mind works, is very unusual.”

Hanson estimated the “big vacuum” created by Carlson’s departure was about 3.5 million viewers, breathing life into rival conservative networks.

Following Carlson’s exit, Newsmax drew doubled viewers at the 8 p.m. EST slot, Hanson said, adding that Fox News’ parent company lost $800 million in market value after the April 24 announcement.

“I’m not sure that they can find somebody like that to come in … that is funny and affable and knowledgeable.”

Now that the network is taking rating hits after Carlson’s exit, leftists are celebrating.

“They’re in celebration now. AOC [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] and people are saying things like, ‘We don’t believe in cancel culture, but we got him canceled.’ That’s what they’re saying. They think they took him down.

“They criticize him every day. They said he was a racist. They said he was a transphobe, homophobe, and they think that eventually they got … For that slot should have been making hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising, but they were able to cut his revenues by 30 or 40 percent, by boycotts, pressuring corporations that they were going to boycott them if they bought time.

“They feel that that’s a paradigm that now is successful. And they’re going to use it.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Fox News for comment.

Thousands of Hollywood writers are putting down their pens and shutting down their laptops today as they join the picket line in a major labor action. This comes after their union was unable to reach agreements with movie and TV studios to secure higher wages. 

The Writers Guild of America, representing about 11,500 Hollywood writers, decided to strike Tuesday following six weeks of failed labor negotiations with Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Disney, Discovery-Warner, NBC Universal, Paramount, and Sony. 

“The companies’ behavior has created a gig economy inside a union workforce, and their immovable stance in this negotiation has betrayed a commitment to further devaluing the profession of writing,” WGA wrote in a press release. 

“From their refusal to guarantee any level of weekly employment in episodic television, to the creation of a “day rate” in comedy variety, to their stonewalling on free work for screenwriters and on AI for all writers, they have closed the door on their labor force and opened the door to writing as an entirely freelance profession. No such deal could ever be contemplated by this membership,” the union continued. 

WGA has been advocating for better pay and adjustments to a business model they argue has made earning a living wage more challenging over the last several years. According to the union, soaring content creation by streaming platforms like Netflix and Disney+ has led to a drop in the median pay for producers and writers. 

The last time WGA went on strike was in November 2007, causing a bottleneck in Hollywood’s content production process. The labor dispute lasted for 100 days, finally ending in early 2008. 

One immediate disruption will be the production of late-night talk shows, including Jimmy Kimmel Live and The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. Depending on how long the work stoppage last, this could impact television shows and movies. 

The labor action might not be a terrible thing considering an increasing number of Americans are fed up with ‘woke’ content pushed by Hollywood elites. This was evident last year when a series of films, books, and other media projects with progressive messaging failed to resonate with audiences and consumers.

WGA also called for the regulation of artificial intelligence within scriptwriting. 

The WGA’s proposal to regulate use of material produced using artificial intelligence or similar technologies ensures the Companies can’t use AI to undermine writers’ working standards including compensation, residuals, separated rights and credits. #WGAStrong
🧵 1/7

— Writers Guild of America, East (@WGAEast) March 22, 2023

During a recent interview on “NBC Nightly News,” Raphael Bob-Waksberg, the creator of Netflix’s animated series “BoJack Horseman,” said writers’ demands are clear and concise: 

“We want more money. We want enough money to make a basic living doing what we love.”

“I think we’re getting to the point where it’s going to be that the only people who can afford to try to start a career in television or movies are going to be people who are independently wealthy already, which I don’t think is good for television or movies. I don’t think we want that.”

Recall we penned a recent note titled “Get Woke, Go Broke: Hollywood Is Dying And They Deserve It.” 

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Pornhub has disabled access to its website in Utah in response to a new law requiring companies publishing adult content to verify users’ ages before allowing them to view the X-rated material on their platforms.

The pornography website confirmed in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times that it completely disabled its websites for individuals located in the state on May 1.

Individuals in Utah attempting to access Pornhub’s site are now greeted with a lengthy video message from the adult entertainer and member of the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee, Cherie DeVille, explaining that they are unable to do so because of the new age-verification law.

“As you may know, your elected officials in Utah are requiring us to verify your age before allowing you access to our website,” DeVille says.

“While safety and compliance are at the forefront of our mission, giving your ID card every time you want to visit an adult platform is not the most effective solution for protecting our users, and in fact, will put children and your privacy at risk.”

“In addition, mandating age verification without proper enforcement gives platforms the opportunity to choose whether or not to comply. As we’ve seen in other states, this just drives traffic to sites with far fewer safety measures in place. Very few sites are able to compare to the robust Trust and Safety measures we currently have in place. To protect children and user privacy, any legislation must be enforced against all platforms offering adult content,” DeVille continued.

The adult entertainer goes on to state that Pornhub, which is owned by Montreal-based company Mindgeek, places great emphasis on user safety, but that it ultimately believes the most effective way to protect children and adults using the site is to identify them via their devices, allowing them access to age-restricted materials and websites based on that identification.

Until a real solution is offered, we have made the difficult decision to completely disable access to our website in Utah,” DeVille continued. “Please contact your representatives before it is too late and demand device-based verification solutions that make the internet safer while also respecting your privacy.”

Utah Bill Tackles Harmful Materials

The move by Pornhub comes after Utah Gov. Spencer Cox last month signed into law Senate Bill 287, also known as the “Online Pornography Viewing Age Requirements.”

Under that bill, commercial entities that provide pornography or other materials harmful to minors are required to verify users’ ages through “reasonable age-verification methods” before they can access such material.

Such methods include “digitized information cards” or third-party age-verification services that compare the personal information entered by the individual seeking to access the website to material available from either a commercially available database or an aggregate of databases, used by the government agencies to confirm identities or age.

Adult content companies can also use “any commercially reasonable method that relies on public or private transactional data” to confirm the individual’s identity when they attempt to access the material, the bill states.

Commercial entities that “knowingly and intentionally” publish or distribute a “substantial portion” of material that is harmful to minors online without performing reasonable age verification methods to ensure users are of age may be held liable under the law, including for damages and court costs resulting from the minor accessing the material.

The law defines harmful material as “material that exploits, is devoted to, or principally consists of descriptions of actual, simulated, or animated display or depiction of any of the following, in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors: (i) pubic hair, anus, vulva, genitals, or nipple of the female breast; (ii) touching, caressing, or fondling of nipples, breasts, buttocks, anuses, or genitals; or (iii) sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation, excretory functions, exhibitions, or any other sexual act.”

The age verification legislation is set to take effect on May 3.

Porn a ‘Public Health Crisis’

Pornhub’s terms of service state that users must be 18 years or older, or the age of majority in the jurisdiction they are accessing the website from in order to use the site.

“If you are under 18 or the applicable age of majority, please do not use the Website. You also represent that the jurisdiction from which you access the Website does not prohibit the receiving or viewing of sexually explicit content,” it states.

However, the state of Utah in 2016 declared porn a “public health crisis” that was creating a “broad spectrum of individual and public health impacts and societal harms.” A string of other states, including Arizona, have since followed suit.

Last year, lawmakers in Louisiana passed similar legislation requiring publishers of online material that could be harmful to minors to verify user ages.

Unlike Utah, Louisiana provides a mobile app that allows users to create a digital replica of their driving license which can then be scanned to verify their age, according to Ars Technica.

This is not the first time that Pornhub has found itself at the center of controversy. In 2021, the website came under fire after The New York Times reported that it hosted unlawful content, including nonconsensual pornography and videos of child sexual assault.

While the adult website initially denied the allegations, it later pledged to crack down on illegal content and said it will only allow properly identified users to upload such materials.

The Epoch Times has contacted Pornhub for comment.

By Joseph Lord of The Epoch Times

The United States will be sending troops to the southern border with Mexico, the White House announced on May 2. The move was unveiled ahead of an expected surge of illegal immigrants as pandemic restrictions, known as Title 42, are set to lift on May 11.

The southern border has been hammered over the past two years by an unprecedented influx of illegal immigrants, leaving border control authorities struggling to keep up with limited resources.

Pentagon Press Secretary Gen. Pat Ryder confirmed in a Tuesday press conference that the Pentagon would be sending 1,500 U.S. military personnel “to supplement” Border Patrol resources for 90 days. Ryder suggested this could be extended as the need arises.

These 1,500 troops “will fill critical capability gaps, such as ground-based detection and monitoring, data entry, and warehouse support until CBP [Customs and Border Protection] can address these needs through contracted support.”

“Military personnel will not directly participate in law enforcement activities,” Ryder added.

While the first wave of troops will be drawn from active-duty personnel, Ryder said that the Pentagon was looking into other options, including potentially pulling from reserves.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday that the move was made in the hopes of freeing Border Patrol agents up to focus on apprehending illegal immigrants crossing the border.

Under President Donald Trump, military servicemembers performed similar functions at the border. When Trump deployed troops to the border in 2018, Democrats blasted the move as a “politicization” of the military. This time however, in comments to reporters, Jean-Pierre said that the deployment was “common practice.”

“DoD personnel have been supporting [Customs and Border Protection] at the border for almost two decades now,” she said, referring to the Department of Defense.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in a statement Tuesday, said the additional forces would help “to reduce irregular migration, ensure safe, orderly, and efficient processing, and promptly remove individuals without a legal basis to remain in the United States.”

Currently, 2,500 troops are serving in some capacity along the border. The addition of 1,500 new troops, nearly a twofold increase, comes days ahead of the end of Title 42, a COVID-era immigration rule making it easier for illegal aliens to be turned away at the border.

DHS added that Customs and Border Protection’s investment in new technology and personnel will reduce the need for such assistance moving forward.

Despite an unprecedented flow of illegal migrants across the border, the administration has long refrained from using the word “crisis” to describe the situation.

President Joe Biden and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas have each insisted that the border is secure and under operational control.

The decision to send troops to the border comes as Republicans prepare a series of legislation addressing immigration problems along the border.

Read more here.

By Philip Marey, Senior Strategist at Rabobank

Summary

• Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a new letter to the Congressional leadership, with the message that the X-date could arrive as soon as June 1.

• With the adoption of the Limit, Save, Grow Act in the House of Representatives and President Biden’s unwillingness to negotiate about conditions for a raise in the debt limit, a game of chicken between Republicans and Democrats has started.

• So far, markets reacted to the possibility of a US federal government default with a revealed preference for one month treasury bills over longer dated T-bills. However, we are still far from the panic needed to break the stalemate between Republicans and Democrats. This is likely to occur closer to the X-date.

• Either this game is over within a few weeks or we are going to see a suspension of the debt limit until later this year. In both cases, we are not likely to see any solution until financial markets start to panic.

Introduction

Although the midterm elections in November turned out better for the Democrats than could have been expected based on the high inflation rate and President Biden’s low approval rating, they lost their majority in the House of Representatives. With the 118th Congress in session since early January, the balance of power in Washington DC has shifted. After two years of Democratic Control, with Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress and a Democratic President, the Republicans are now able to shoot down any bill on the House floor in the next two years. This means a regime shift has taken place in US politics this year to Divided Government, where legislation requires bipartisan cooperation. The first of the fiscal standoffs that we warned for in Midterm implications is already taking shape and it is the most dangerous one, the debt limit.

McCarthy’s move

On April 26, the House of Representatives adopted the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, presented by House Speaker McCarthy a week earlier, with a 217-215 vote. All Democrats voted no, so did four Republicans. The bill, drafted by the leadership of the House Republicans, in consultation with various members, raises the debt limit by $1.5 trillion or until March 31, 2024, whichever comes first. Note that the current debt limit of $31.381 trillion was reached on January 19, after which the Treasury Department started extraordinary measures, postponing the X-date, when the Treasury will be unable to meet all of its debt obligations. In exchange for the higher debt ceiling, the House Republicans want to limit government spending. The bill sets discretionary spending for fiscal year 2024 (October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2024) at the level of fiscal year 2022 and then limits growth in discretionary spending to no more than 1% a year in the next decade. The bill also rescinds unspent COVID relief funds, and make changes to energy, regulatory and permitting policies. However, the plan also cuts the increased funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). What’s more, it will prevent implementation of President Biden’s student debt cancellation and Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) expansion, and impose or expand work requirements in several federal safety net programs. This means serious concessions by the Democrats, which they are not likely to agree to. In fact, President Biden has made clear repeatedly that he does not want to negotiate at all. His position remains that he wants a “clean” debt limit raise, i.e. without any condition.

Biden’s game of chicken

With the adoption of Limit, Save, Grow Act by the House of Representatives, and Biden’s demand for a “clean” raise of the debt limit, a game of chicken has started between Republicans and Democrats. Both parties want to avoid a government default, which would cause significant damage to the financial markets and the economy. Consequently, the so-called X-date, when the extraordinary measures are exhausted, is the deadline for the game of chicken. In the time before the deadline, we are not likely to see any party blink, unless a financial market panic breaks out. Once the deadline passes, neither party has an interest in keeping the US in default. By this time, financial markets will definitely be in turmoil.

It could be argued, especially by Democrats, that as the Republicans are the party attaching conditions to the debt limit increase necessary to avert or end the default, they are likely to bear most of the pressure to concede. This argument frames the current game as a repeat of 2011 and 2013. However, the crucial difference is that the Limit, Save, Grow Act is actually a bill to raise the debt ceiling! So it is misleading to claim that “House Republicans are holding our economy hostage and threatening default” as the White House press secretary did on April 27. In fact, it could be argued, in particular by Republicans, that the Democrats are the obstacle to a raise in the debt ceiling. After all, if the Senate – where Democrats are needed to get the 60 necessary votes – adopts this bill and President Biden signs it into law, the debt ceiling is lifted. The truth is that after the difficult process to confirm McCarthy as the new House Speaker in January, the Democrats hoped that the House Republicans would not be able to agree on what they wanted in exchange for a raise in the debt limit. That would have strengthened the Democrats’ demand for a clean raise, i.e. without conditions. Now, it seems reasonable to start negotiations about spending cuts attached to the raise in the debt ceiling. However, a game of chicken with financial market turmoil as leverage is more likely to unfold. In the end, i.e. close to the X-date, the game of chicken is likely to be resolved under pressure from financial markets. So how are markets reacting to the developments regarding the debt ceiling so far?

Markets looking for near-term safety

On January 13, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a letter to the Congressional leadership, noting that it was unlikely that cash and extraordinary measures would be exhausted before early June. To avoid the risk of holding a treasury bill that may not be repaid investors have shown a preference for near-term treasury bills in recent weeks. The yield on one month bills has clearly moved away from the yield on three, six or twelve month bills. While the yields on the latter three maturities continue to move together, the one month yield tanked after McCarthy’s presentation of the Republican plan brought the debt limit to the forefront. Demand from money market funds likely played a major role in the decline in the one month yield. Recently, money market funds have received large inflows from depositors concerned about the safety of their holdings at small banks or their modest returns at large banks. At the same time, the supply of near-term T-bills has fallen as the Treasury has already hit the debt ceiling and is trying to delay the X-date. So far, markets reacted to the possibility of a US federal government default with a revealed preference for one month T-bills over longer dated T-bills (This should subside as early June enters the one month horizon). However, we are still far from the panic needed to bring Democrats and Republicans together. This is likely to occur closer to the X-date

X-date in June?

On May 1, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a new letter to the Congressional leadership, with the message that “After reviewing recent federal tax receipts, our best estimate is that we will be unable to continue to satisfy all of the government’s obligations by early June, and potentially as early as June 1, if Congress does not raise or suspend the debt limit before that time.” This means that the X-date could arrive sooner than previously expected, due to disappointing tax receipts. Shortly after Yellen’s announcement, President Biden invited top Republicans and Democrats for a meeting next week about raising the debt limit. However, a White House official said that Biden will repeat his view that Congress should pass a stand-alone increase in the debt limit, but that he is open to a discussion on the budget that is not linked to raising the debt limit. In other words, the Democrats are not blinking, neither are the Republicans.

Also on May 1, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a nonpartisan budget agency, updated its budget projections and concluded that lower-than-expected tax receipts this year create a significantly greater risk that the Treasury will run out of funds in early June. Earlier, they forecasted that the default could occur as soon as July. While, prior to May 1, markets had a wide range of forecasts regarding the X-date, from June to September, and even beyond, it looks like the probability of the X-date being located in June has increased substantially.

This would increase the pressure on the players of the game of chicken rapidly in the coming weeks. Alternatively, or  because of this, we could see a temporary suspension of the debt limit to buy more time to negotiate (the Republicans are likely to want something in exchange for that, probably something from the Limit, Save, Grow Act they adopted last week). For example, Congress could delay the deadline to the end of the fiscal year, September 30. This would bring the deadline for the budget for fiscal year 2024 and the deadline for the debt limit together, allowing for a comprehensive solution. However, it would also add to the pressure at the new X-date, because failure to reach a deal would lead to both a government shutdown and a government default.

Conclusion

The game of chicken between Democrats and Republicans has really kicked off after the House of Representatives voted for the Limit, Save, Grow Act, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a letter indicating that the X-date could arrive as soon as June 1, and Biden’s repeated dismissal of any conditions attached to a raise in the debt limit. Either this game is over within a few weeks or we are going to see a delay until later this year. In both cases, we are not likely to see any solution until financial markets start to panic.

For the second consecutive day, a Russian freight train has been derailed not far from the Ukrainian border, in what appears to be another sabotage attack. These cross-border irregular warfare attacks seem to be stepping up simultaneous to the so-called Ukrainian Spring counteroffensive being stalled.

Reuters is reporting based on local sources that “An explosion derailed a freight train for the second day in a row in a Russian region bordering Ukraine on Tuesday, sending both the locomotive and some cars off the tracks, authorities said.”

Bryansk regional governor Alexander Bogomaz confirmed in a Telegram statement, “An unidentified explosive device went off near the Snezhetskaya railway station. There were no casualties.” He described that “As a result of the incident, a locomotive and several wagons of a freight train derailed.”

The Bryansk region borders both Ukraine and Belarus, and this second sabotage incident happened just to the southeast of Bryansk. With this latest freight disaster, which occurred mid-evening local time, some 20 cars derailed, according to Russian media.

The day prior (Monday), a section of track in the same oblast but which lies even closer to the border with Ukraine was blown up, derailing a train carrying fuel and timber.

Another train sabotage reported in Bryansk region in Western Russia, with 20 cars going off rails after a series of explosions. Russian Railways called it “illegal interference,” per RBC. This is a second incident in two days — yesterday another train carrying fuel was blown up. pic.twitter.com/itpUVN32kC

— Mary Ilyushina (@maryilyushina) May 2, 2023

Bryansk has been a region which has seen frequent cross-border attacks throughout the conflict. Over the weekend, projectiles fired from Ukraine killed four people in a Russian village which lies just 10km from the border.

All of this has resulted in speculation over whether the delayed Ukrainian counteroffensive could turn into a focus on irregular cross-border guerrilla tactics.

Another bomb causes a second train derailment in two days in Russia’s Bryansk region. https://t.co/A2bk3bi56L pic.twitter.com/nfEqR6WGel

— Kevin Rothrock (@KevinRothrock) May 2, 2023

Already there’s been multiple drone attacks, sabotage bombings, as well as assassinations of high-profile Russians. If Ukrainian frontlines collapse, this could unleash more “punishment” inside Russian territory by covert operatives. The Kremlin has frequently also alleged that the US and other NATO countries have supported Ukraine in these black ops.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

In 2021 I published an article titled ‘The Fed’s Catch-22 Taper Is A Weapon, Not A Policy Error’ in which I outlined the deliberately engineered trap the Federal Reserve has created for the American economy. Specifically, I confronted the issue of strangled liquidity through increasing debt costs vs continued money printing and inflation.

It’s an issue that Jerome Powell warned about in 2012, years before he became Fed Chairman; the consequences of creating a stimulus dependent system and then abruptly cutting off the life support. As soon as he was installed as the head of the central bank he implemented the very policies he predicted would cause a crash.

The result? We just saw the beginning of the end with the latest banking crisis involving companies like SVB, First Republic and Credit Suisse – It’s not just US finances, but banks around the world that rely on liquidity injections from the Fed to stay afloat. The central bankers addicted the system to cheap easy debt and now they are taking away the drugs.

In other words, no one can honestly argue that the central banks are ignorant or unaware of the threat. They KNOW what’s about to happen and they do not care. But why does the establishment want a crisis now instead of five years ago, or five years in the future?

Thankfully, much of the public is becoming aware of the various programs to introduce CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies), but what they may not understand is the manner in which such massive economic changes usually happen. Generally speaking, in order to institute a new economic system the banks have to take down the old system.

The last time we saw this happen was just after the Great Depression and WWII. The deflationary crash and the war conjured the proper amount of global chaos and before the dust settled western nations instituted the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944, making the dollar the defacto world reserve currency while locking down the price of gold.. Then they established the globalist International Monetary Fund (IMF) the same year and the United Nations in 1945. The world was centralized dramatically in a little over a decade.

I believe we are fast approaching another engineered singularity, a controlled demolition of existing systems to make way for a cashless society, a one world currency and global governance. I believe this because it’s all the globalists can talk about these days; it’s not as if they’re trying to hide it anymore.

The BIS and IMF are actively fielding one-world digital currency mechanisms right now; structures that would combine all national CBDCs under one umbrella. In the meantime, globalist think-tanks like the WEF (World Economic Forum) are ranting excessively about the coming era of an AI controlled economy and a “4^th Industrial Revolution” in which you will “own nothing, have no privacy” and will be forced to adapt to a cashless socialist sharing system.

All they need is a scapegoat to complete their crisis formula. War seems to work well in distracting the masses from the true culprits behind any financial calamity, and numerous institutions are hard at work to convince the public that countries like Russia are to blame for ongoing stagflation problems. Of course, the stagflation crisis started well before the war in Ukraine and many Americans are not buying the spin.

China, a dedicated partner to the globalist project, has shown consistent fealty to the IMF and is a key player in the move towards a one-world currency system. Because they are the largest importer/exporter on the planet and have considerable leverage over the US dollar, they have the ability to strike the final blow against the dollar’s world reserve status. A heightened conflict with China would be a perfect cover for the dumping of the Greenback, making way for the IMF’s new global currency, called the UMU (Universal Monetary Unit).

However, foreign conflagrations will not be enough for the establishment to keep the American public from scrutinizing the narrative. They need a domestic enemy, a frightening threat that lives right next door. That is to say, they need to find a way to blame conservatives and liberty activists for the impending crash that they caused.

Keep in mind that the Biden Administration and the leftist media have been pumping out propaganda asserting that all our fiscal problems including our national debt are somehow rooted in conservative policies. This is nonsense.

At bottom, the majority of our economic threats can be traced directly back to the Federal Reserve as well as large international banks, and these institutions enact policy REGARDLESS of the political party that is in control of the government. But, if we’re going to talk about the political group that has most helped the central bankers set the calamity in motion, the Democrats win the prize.

It was Barack Obama and Joe Biden that doubled the US national debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the span of 8 years. Trump didn’t help matters and did not institute spending cuts at the level he should have, but the bulk of his debt contributions occurred because of the covid response. There are a number of issues to criticize Trump for, including the kinds of people he brought into his cabinet, but the current economic chaos is not rooted in anything Trump did.

It was the Biden White House that pressed for covid lockdown policies to stay in place for years when they should have been ended within months as soon as it became clear the covid virus was a non-threat to 99.8% of the population. Biden and the Democrats made it impossible for the country to continue functioning without trillions in covid helicopter money, and it was those fiat measures that finally broke the camel’s back. Prices on everything skyrocketed under Biden, not Trump.

The majority of our national debt problems were piled up during the reign of Democrats, and they CONTINUE to demand trillions more in spending without conditions. This brings us to the debt ceiling.

In the past, the debt ceiling debate has been a predictable farce. Republicans demand cuts, they haggle with the Democrats who want a blank check, nothing is ever really resolved and the debt ceiling gets raised yet again with no noticeable reductions in spending. The government keeps stealing from the American public at an exponential rate while also triggering more inflation.

It’s a Catch-22 for conservatives. No one in the mainstream criticizes the Democrats for wanting to spend more because most people don’t understand how inflation works. All the Dems have to do is agree to reasonable budget cuts, but they refuse. When they don’t allow cuts, the Republicans are forced to either cave in, which makes them look weak, or, they’re forced to stand their ground and be accused of reckless disregard for American debt obligations.

Democrats claim that ANY cuts to the budget will lead to economic crisis. They have no intention of negotiating to reduce US debt. They don’t have to – All the blame falls on conservatives regardless.

To be sure, there are multiple Neocon politicians that support the Democrats at every turn, but there are also some Republicans trying to pull the country back from the brink. We should give these people credit.  It’s easy to accuse all political participants of being part of the “false left/right paradigm,”, and maybe that was true ten years ago, but now I suspect this mantra is being exploited to divide conservatives and liberty proponents from any alliances at the government level.

The leftist argument on the debt ceiling is essentially this: “We must keep spending more to fix the problems created by spending too much.”

It’s a circular con job. Pursuing budget cuts is portrayed as an act of terrorism by the corporate media. Saving taxpayer money is considered evil, and conservatives who entertain the notion are painted as insurrectionists. Why is no one criticizing the Democrats and their all-or-nothing philosophy? After all, budget cuts can be made while ALSO paying off the national debt, right?

The tactic makes sense if you look at it from a villain’s perspective. All the Democrats have to do is not allow any cuts and continue to demand more spending without conditions. Then, when the contingent of Republicans in Congress that actually care about fiscal responsibility refuses to back down, the White House, the media and the majority of leftists initiate a propaganda wave; an artificial outcry suggesting that “radical” conservatives are destroying the economy.

If the conservatives give in, then the public blames them for bowing to the “Uniparty.” If they don’t give in, the establishment wraps up the stagflationary collapse and lays it right in our laps. They may try to force the issue of a debt ceiling impasse just to hide the crash that is happening anyway.

Or, maybe not. Maybe this time is like all the other times and Republicans will back down yet again and the ceiling is raised by another couple trillion dollars. The talking points I’m seeing in the media and on social media, though, suggest to me that something very strange is about to happen in the debt fight. If it goes down the way I suspect, then it will be vitally important to disrupt the narrative.

The economy is crashing for a lot of reasons and none of them have anything to do with the government trying to spend less.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott migrant bus service to is ramping back up in a big way — and mayors in destination cities are fuming, especially New York City’s Eric Adams and Chicago’s outgoing Lori Lightfoot. 

“More than 57,000 migrants, mostly hailing from Latin America, have arrived in [New York City] since last spring, while Chicago has fielded more than 8,000 newcomers,” Politico reports.

In a statement issued Monday, Adams accused Abbott of targeting cities based on the skin color of their elected officials: 

“This weekend, we learned that Governor Abbott is once again deciding to play politics with people’s lives by resuming the busing of asylum seekers to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Denver, and Washington, D.C.

Not only is this behavior morally bankrupt and devoid of any concern for the well-being of asylum seekers, but it is also impossible to ignore the fact that Abbott is now targeting five cities run by Black mayors. Put plainly, Abbott is using this crisis to hurt Black-run cities.”

We pause to note that, where America’s largest metropolises are concerned, “black-run cities” is increasingly a redundancy. 

Moving on from his implicit accusation of racism, Adams went on to accuse Abbott of shipping migrants to New York against their will, and having security guards “hold them hostage” when they tried to get off in other cities.

He also blamed border states for the overload of immigrants while asking President Biden for help. “With a vacuum of leadership from border states, we need the federal government to step in and provide us with support and to prevent this cruelty from continuing.” That’s an interesting angle, given the federal government routinely opposes states taking border security into their own hands. 

Even Adams has been increasingly critical of the Biden administration’s immigration policies. In April, he said, “The city is being destroyed by the migrant crisis…The national government has turned its back on New York City…This is in the lap of the president of the United States.” Reiterating that desperate messaging on Monday, Adams said, “This crisis is more than one city can handle.”

Adams isn’t the only mayor attacking Abbott for sharing the wealth of northbound diversity pouring into the country. On Sunday, Chicago’s Lightfoot, who will exit office on May 15 after a losing reelection bid, sent a letter to Abbott asking him to “stop this inhumane and dangerous action.” 

Like Adams, Lightfoot also painted a picture of desperation, saying that, although “Chicago is a Welcoming City…we simply have no more shelters, spaces, or resources to accommodate an increase of individuals at this level.” 

She wrote that many migrants shipped from the Lone Star State “needed extensive medical care. Some of the individuals you placed on buses were women in active labor, and some were victims of sexual assault. None of those needs were addressed in Texas.” 

When Abbott wrote back to Lightfoot on Monday, he didn’t address those allegations. He did, however, point out that that the immigration situation is about to get much worse: 

“With Title 42 expulsions set to end next week, the federal government has estimated that we could have up to 13,000 illegal immigrants cross the U.S.–Mexico border every single day…. If Chicago can’t deal with 8,000 in less than a year, how are small Texas border communities supposed to manage 13,000 in just one day?” 

Abbott told Lightfoot to shift her fire, and urge the Biden administration to “do its job by securing our border [and] repelling the illegal immigrants flooding into our communities.” 

When Lightfoot says shipping people to Chicago is “inhumane and dangerous,” she might just have a point: 

🚨#BREAKING: Chaotic Scene Unfolds in Downtown Chicago as Teenagers Vandalize Cars and Gunfire Erupts

📌#Chicago | #Illinois ⁰
There is currently a significant police response taking place in downtown Chicago due to a large group of teenagers causing chaos. They have been… pic.twitter.com/n7xhBpsTKs

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) April 16, 2023

Chicago pic.twitter.com/9kNes6Tegn

— Clown World ™ 🤡 (@ClownWorld_) April 17, 2023

Oil prices cratered today – their biggest drop since the start of January – amid low liquidity and dismal macro data.

“The market is an investor desert,” said Scott Shelton, an energy specialist at ICAP.

“The fundamental information that generates predictable price action doesn’t exist.”

Separately, Bloomberg reported Tuesday that OPEC’s oil production fell last month by 310,000 barrels a day to an average of 28.8 million, the lowest in nearly a year, as a pipeline suspension reduced exports from Iraq.

Tonight’s API data may hint at just how big a downturn we are seeing.

API

• Crude -3.939mm (-3.30mm exp)

• Cushing

• Gasoline (-300k exp)

• Distillates (-1.5mm exp)

For the 3rd week in a row, crude stocks saw a draw-down (slightly bigger than expected)…

Source: Bloomberg

The OPEC+ output cuts announced in early April “have only gone into effect this week,” so inventory declines may not start until July, he said.

“Recession fear is like a hurricane that destroys everything along its path — oil included,” said Manish Raj, managing director at Velandera Energy Partners.

“It does not matter that fundamentals for oil are now stronger than ever, with rising demand and falling supply in the foreseeable future.”

WTI was hovering just above $71.50 ahead of the API print with little to no reaction after…

“It’s going to take some evidence in the physical market on the tightening we see in our balances before we see any more positive or committed trading activity,” Emily Ashford, an energy analyst at Standard Chartered Bank, said by phone.

Finally, we note that Morgan Stanley slashed its forecast for Brent crude prices in the third quarter by $12.50 to $77.50 a barrel, saying Russian supplies remain high enough and that much of the demand boost from China’s reopening has likely already played out. 

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

As long as we mint millions from a Never-Ending Bull Market, we’ll always stay one step ahead of the Debt Monster. AI! .

Of the many astounding developments of the current era (AI!), none is more remarkable than the proliferation of soothsayers peering into crystal balls to predict The Most Important Trend In The Universe–a Bull or Bear stock market. The computing power and wealth thrown at conjuring up charts, statistics and forecasts is astounding in and of itself, but the proliferation of crystal balls and soothsayers is even more astounding.

After reviewing hundreds of charts, statistics and forecasts on the most arcane correlations and the deepest data-dives (AI!), I’ve reached soothsayer satori: the secret to insuring a Never-Ending Bull Market in which monumental wealth will be piled up by all those entities (software and wetware alike–AI!) who buy every tiny dip and continuously roll over their zero-expiration-day-call-options is this:

Say “AI” 300 times with fervent enthusiasm and then click your heels three times. You will then be transported to a magical paradise where stocks only go down for a few moments to enable dip-buyers the immense satisfaction of buying more stocks at a discount.

Did I forget to say AI? I’m on number 199, and I’m trying not to lose count. AI!

Setting aside the thousands, or perhaps millions, of charts, statistics and forecasts, let’s just ponder one: TCMDO, Debt Securities and Loans, courtesy of the Federal Reserve System.

AI, 200, AI, 201–AI! The first thing we notice is the total debt has been following a parabolic curve since that spot of bother (recession) in 1981-82, increasing 15.5-fold since Q1 1983, 40 years ago, from $6 trillion to $94 trillion.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP), more or less a measure of the real economy, increased from $3.5 trillion in 1983 to $26.5 trillion in 2023, a 7.5-fold increase, a considerably less stupendous rise than debt.

This chart raises two questions:

1. How long will it take to add the next $40 trillion in debt?

2. Precisely how will AI change the trajectory of debt, or the eventual banquet of consequences of parabolic increases in debt?

One interesting thing that isn’t communicated by the chart is that Americans haven’t experienced a real recession for 40 years. A real recession lasts a long time and grinds down debt via a rising tide of bankruptcies, defaults and writedowns. Thanks to Federal Reserve hocus-pocus, no recession since 1982 has lasted more than a few brief months or been more than a shallow dip.

Only people 60 years of age and older have any experience as working adults of a real recession. For everyone younger, we might as well be talking about the Panic of 1873 or even that spot of bother in Rome circa 14 AD.

Despite poring over hundreds of charts, statistics and forecasts issued by soothsayers peering into digital crystal balls (AI!), not one reflected the possibility that the US was overdue for a real recession that wiped out $40 trillion in debt rather than another Bull Market run that added another $40 trillion in debt.

Never mind, as long as we mint millions from a Never-Ending Bull Market, we’ll always stay one step ahead of the Debt Monster. AI! Crystal Balls, Soothsayers and AI, Oh My…AI, 202, AI, 203…

*  *  *

My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century. Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.