Authored by Mike Whitney,

The last thing you’d ever expect to hear on a mainstream news channel, is the truth.

But – strange as it might seem – that’s exactly what happened on Wednesday night on the Tucker Carlson Show. Carlson interviewed veteran journalist Glenn Greenwald in a 4-minute segment that provided the best ‘easy-to-understand’ summary of the Ukraine War you’ll hear anywhere.

And what was so shocking about the interview, was how casually both men veered onto topics that are essential to grasping “How we got to where we are today” but which are entirely banned on all the other cable news channels. 

You are not allowed to know, for example, that Russia was “lured into the conflict in Ukraine”. That does not fit the script that has been passed-along from the Biden State Department to their lapdogs at the cable news stations. You’re also not allowed to know that the US does not fight wars “to spread democracy” or that “the US has no vital interests in Ukraine” or that “Russia is not really our enemy”. All of those topics are verboten. You’re not even allowed to think about these things, which is why– for the most part– they have been completely scrubbed from any-and-all discussion of foreign policy in the corporate media.

That’s what makes the segment with Greenwald such a stunner, because it’s 4 glorious minutes of pure, unvarnished truth delivered from a platform that typically only produces, lies, disinformation and propaganda. 

Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald: “If you want to believe the fairy tale that the US government goes to war to spread democracy, Ukraine is not the place for you.” pic.twitter.com/dxgaVNYuj7

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) December 8, 2022

That’s why I transcribed the entire interview. Any mistakes are mine. Here it is:

Tucker Carlson– What bothers me is not so much what Zelensky is doing– there’s a lot of tyranny abound the world (and) I don’t brood on it. But the fact that (a) we are paying for it, and (b) our leaders are defending it. I think every American should be upset about that.

Glenn Greenwald– “I think in general, Americans should be very skeptical when the government says ‘We’re going to fight wars on the other side of the world and spend tens of billions of dollars in military aid to spread democracy.’ The US government doesn’t actually care about spreading democracy. Many of its closest allies in the world have always been some of the world’s most despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. All the US government cares about is whether these regimes serve US interests. …If you want to believe the fairy tale that the US government goes to war to spread democracy, then Ukraine is not the place for you. You mentioned the argument that ‘Zelensky is in war, he has to curb liberty’, but go back to 2021, a year before Russia invaded and you’ll find articles where he shut down opposition television stations and shut down opposition political parties (which is) the hallmark of what every tyrant or despot does….and that was true even before Russia invaded.”

Tucker Carlson– I wonder how Republicans can continue to defend this (because) I think you are right; I think our foreign policy is almost always about defending our interests…. But I don’t see our critical interests at stake here, so, what is this about?

Glenn Greenwald– If the US government was honest… they would get rid of this script that we have to go and defend democracy. That is a fairy tale that tries to get Americans to feel better about the fact that we are involved in many, many countries all over the world. That is not the real reason. The only reason to do it is for ‘vital US interests’. The line in Washington for decades was the US has no vital interests in Ukraine. That was Obama’s view, that was the bipartisan view. Why did that change? The only reason is because we saw an opportunity to trap Russia inside Ukraine all based on the view that Russia is our enemy (which is) something only Democrats should believe because they think Russia is to blame for the 2016 election and Hillary’s defeat. But why would Republicans want confrontation with Russia? What American benefits from that except arms manufacturers? …

Tucker Carlson– That’s a really good question, and I haven’t unraveled it. (But) It seems pretty clear that the Biden administration baited Russia into this invasion. You had the Vice President (Kamala Harris) in western Europe days before telling Zelensky to join NATO which, of course, they knew was a red line (for Russia) They wanted this invasion, I think that’s very obvious. Do you think this was all about ‘preparing for war with Russia’?

Glenn Greenwald– If you think Russia is a grave enemy of the United States, then it makes sense to try to lure them into a war that they can’t win, like we got lured into Afghanistan for 20 years or like we lured the Soviet Union into Afghanistan back in the ’70s because it does deplete your enemy. The question is: Why should Russia be seen as our enemy? Both Obama and Trump said there’s no reason to see Russia that way. It has one-fifteenth the size of our military budget. It’s not threatening American borders. Why are we so obsessed with spending tens of billions of dollars to weaken Russia which we could be using here at home to benefit the lives of American citizens when Russia is not doing anything to the United States unless you are a crazy ‘resistance’ person who believes they’re the reason Donald Trump won. But if you don’t believe that, what is the rational for this? There is none.”

Tucker Carlson– “I know, and as always, they have hijacked the best instincts of the American people, their compassion, and turned it against them. Glenn Greenwald, great to see you tonight”.

Who could have seen this coming?

they/them are/fired pic.twitter.com/QYHTam2spK

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 13, 2022

Having been accused of stealing luggage from airports in two separate incidents, President Biden’s non-binary deputy assistant secretary for spent fuel and waste disposition has left the administration.

A Department of Energy spokesperson said on Monday evening:

“Sam Brinton is no longer a DOE employee. By law, the Department of Energy cannot comment further on personnel matters.”

Brinton, 35, who was appointed in June, faces charges for the incidents at both the Las Vegas and Minneapolis airports and they are due in court in Minnesota on December 19.

The White House has repeatedly refused to comment on the scandal, claiming it is a non-political issue.

The Department of Energy has also tried to distance Biden from the issue.

We are sure the groundswell of the Alphabet-Twitter will be up in arms decrying the Biden administrations decision to fire the klepto as some brazen act of prejudice and bias is some form transphobism?

Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,

We’ve done quite a few episodes of commenter TAE Summary’s “Tales of Two Narratives” through time. Let’s add this one, why don’t we. Reading through -especially- Twitter, the past 24 hours or so, it struck me how fitting this is. We’re talking narratives that are so many light years apart, never the twain shall meet.

Interested in time travel? This is for you.

On the one hand, lots of people react to the following tweet by Elon Musk, by claiming Fauci saved millions of lives. On the other hand, just as many people (or so it seems) claim Fauci killed millions of people. It’s hard to get a bigger, and more consequential, chasm, than that.

And apparently this Musk tweet got the most likes in Twitter history. What does that tell us? This chasm is not just on Twitter, this is the entire country plus anywhere else on the planet where people follow this.

Despite the enormous 24/7 pressure to accept “The Science”, get a shot and a mask, and shut up.

Of all people, John Brennan tried. The ex-CIA director who was caught lying to the Senate in 2014, and in 2017 to the House Intelligence Committee (Steele Dossier) about Russian interference during the 2016 election, still appears to think he has some form of moral high ground. Which is remarkable in and of itself. But at least Brennan has “class”.

Elon Musk’s reaction has been loud and clear (note: this tweet is not a direct reaction to Brennan):

Elon Musk has promised us a “full” record of the decision making process behind the censoring and banning by Twitter’s former staff, of renowned doctors like Peter McCullough, Robert Malone, Pierre Kory, Robert Marik, Richard Urso, and many more. Many of these distinguished scientists have seen their careers and livelihoods hampered, even destroyed by Fauci -and Twitter- over the past -almost- 3 years. And, of course, anyone else who dared question “The Science”.

This was (is?!) a highly concerted effort. How many people died who could have been saved with ivermectin? Or just Vitamin D3, for that matter? HCQ? So many lives were lost to FDA, Fauci et al banning anything but Pfizer. Many more will perish because they now have mRNA in their bodies, and will never be able to get rid of it anymore.

The “full record” will be a spectacle. Even if some things still remain hidden. Elon Musk may not be a saint, I very much hope he’s not, saints scare me, but I’d take him over Tony Fauci any day of the week.

Here’s TAE Summary:

The Mainstream Narrative

• As a worldwide ‘public square,’ Twitter should be heavily regulated for misinformation and spamming by hostile interests. Twitter bears a responsibility to take action against disinformation and hate. Content moderation on platforms like Twitter is absolutely necessary to safeguard our democracy. As a private company Twitter is under no legal obligation to protect free speech and everything Twitter has done is within the law. Twitter and other social media platforms were instrumental in combating disinformation about Covid 19, climate change, election integrity and the war in Ukraine.

• Elon Musk is an arrogant, toxic person. He doesn’t really care about free speech. His goals in purchasing Twitter are political. His takeover of Twitter is the most terrifying development in recent history. His purchase of Twitter will destroy it by driving away advertisers and providing a platform for Neo-Nazis and other hate-speechers. Under Musk, Twitter is a scammer’s paradise. Elon Musk decimated the staff of Twitter (breaking Federal labor laws) while restoring accounts that spread disinformation. Control of Twitter involves national security risks and Musk’s takeover should be investigated by the US Government.

• The so-called “Twitter Files” are a feast for conspiracy theorists and have re-enlivened the influence of entities like QAnon. Journalists like Matt Taibbi writing about the Twitter Files are selling their souls to do PR work for the richest man in the world. The Twitter Files entries are sloppy, anecdotal and devoid of context. They are a nothing event about nothing event. The hysteria surrounding the Twitter Files is being used by Republicans for political gain.

• The Hunter Biden laptop story was difficult and the truth was not known early and so caution was justified. There is no evidence in the Twitter Files that the government was involved in the suppression of the Hunter Biden Laptop story. There is nothing on Hunter Biden’s laptop that actually implicates Joe Biden. James Baker took the careful approach and urged Twitter to weigh both sides of the Hunter Biden Laptop story before proceeding.

• Hate speech has dramatically increased since Must took over Twitter and these hateful tweets will lead to violence against the already marginalized. Right wing accounts such as those of Donald Trump, Project Veritas and the Babylon Bee should continue to be banned.

The Counter Narrative

• Twitter management was openly against free speech and used techniques such as “Visibility Filtering” to limit the reach of some posts. Twitter had secret blacklist files to limit the distribution of certain tweets specifically targeting right wing users. Twitter and other social media platforms have been instrumental in distributing disinformation and hiding the truth about Covid 19, climate change, election integrity and the war in Ukraine. Twitter censorship was used by the Democrats for political gain

• Elon Musk is a hero. He bought Twitter to restore free speech. Twitter, pre-Musk, was a major accomplice and enabler in selling-out America’s future. Twitter was bloated with excess and left wing employees.

• The Twitter Files show that the DNC and FBI were directly involved in suppressing free speech and prove that the 2020 elections were not free and fair. Twitter was clearly involved in election interference. The government interactions with Twitter were similar to Nazi propaganda methods. Twitter employees and their government contacts should be made to answer for their actions before congress. So-called journalists criticizing Matt Taibbi for his work on the Twitter Files are embarrassing in their uniformity and mindless support of a corrupt system.

• The files on Hunter Biden’s laptop prove that Joe Biden used his office to make money and Twitter’s suppression of the laptop story was done to help get Joe Biden elected. It is a bigger scandal than Watergate. James Baker was involved in RussiaGate at the FBI and the Hunter Biden Laptop suppression at Twitter. Baker deleted some of the content that should have been in the Twitter Files.

• The claims that hate speech has increased on Twitter since Musk’s takeover are utterly false. Hate speech is not tolerated on Twitter. Twitter largely ignored child trafficking issues until Musk took over. Lifting the ban on Donald Trump, Project Veritas and the Babylon Bee on Twitter are victories for free speech.

Red pill or blue pill?

*  *  *

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site. Thank you for your support.

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

Just two Monday headlines perfectly illustrating the extreme imbalance of the one for one Brittney Griner, Viktor Bout trade last week which Russia is now positively celebrating: 

• In Russia: Viktor Bout’s victory tour: Freed Russian arms dealer praises Putin and joins ultranationalist party
• In America: Griner dunks in first basketball workout since Russian detention

The convicted international arms trafficker who was only a week ago still serving out a 25-year sentence in a US federal penitentiary on terror-related charges is wasting no time. Not only has he done public appearances and state media TV interviews, wherein he praised President Vladimir Putin and pledged his full support for the Ukraine invasion, but he could already be on his way to a parliament seat. 

Days after his exchange for Brittney Griner, Viktor Bout has joined the LDPR, so surely it’s only a matter of time before he gets himself a seat in the Duma

If this happens he’ll join the likes of Andrei Lugovoi, wanted for poisoning Alexander Litvinenko, in their esteemed ranks pic.twitter.com/dMv1URJNt7

— Francis Scarr (@francis_scarr) December 12, 2022

The “Merchant of Death” has joined Russia’s ultra-nationalist Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR), the organization announced Monday, and received his LDPR membership card at a ceremony from party leader Leonid Slutsky.

Slutsky praised the newly freed arms dealer, saying, “We are the party of patriots! I am sure that Viktor Bout — a strong-willed and courageous person — will take a worthy place in it. Welcome to our ranks!” 

This after on Saturday in Bout’s first interview since arriving in Moscow to a hero’s welcome he actually “volunteered” to go fight in Ukraine. He declared his willingness to go fight at the front lines if he had to opportunity and “necessary skills.”

He further described that his only complaint is that Putin didn’t launch an attack on Ukraine sooner…

“Hero of our time,” read a description of the RT interview posted on YouTube. In that interview, Bout was eager to play the role of national martyr. “Everything that happened to me is now happening to our country,” he said, alluding to the international condemnation Russia has experienced since launching the invasion of Ukraine earlier this year.

“I am proud that I am Russian, and that Putin is our president. I honestly don’t understand why we didn’t do this earlier,” he said of the unprovoked attack on Ukraine.

Without doubt, Russian media is eager to loudly gloat over the fact that the Kremlin obtained the release of a very high profile prisoner from the US, and all it had to do was hand over a celebrity WNBA player who brought cannabis vape cartridges into the country.

Fully aware that American officials and the public would be keeping an eye out for his first statements since being released, parts of the RT interview were delivered in English, in order to send a ‘message’. 

Lord of War ‘24
pic.twitter.com/MH5nq8NH44

— Dan Lyman (@realdanlyman) December 10, 2022

Bout spoke about the internal “suicide” of Western civilization as it has lost its values, which is a similar theme Putin himself has emphasized over the last several years. 

Meanwhile, American media ‘celebrated’ Griner’s first basketball workout after being freed from Russian prison and delivered in safety back home. The aforementioned Axios story unironically began: “WNBA star Brittney Griner did a light basketball workout on Sunday and pulled off a dunk in her first move back after nearly 10 months behind bars in Russia.”

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear President Joe Biden’s appeal of a judge’s ruling that blocked his student debt relief program and found it unlawful, taking up the matter alongside another lawsuit against the policy.

The Biden administration appealed a recent decision handed down by Texas-based U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman to block the program, siding with an advocacy group. An appeals court also ruled against the relief program and placed it on hold.

The case the court announced Monday it would take up involves two holders of student loan debt – Alexander Taylor and Myra Brown – who said the federal government did not follow the right procedure in announcing and implementing the plan earlier this year. In an order, the Supreme Court wrote that it would determine whether Taylor or Brown had standing to file their lawsuit and will then hear the merits of it.

On Dec. 1, the Supreme Court confirmed would hear arguments on the legality of the debt relief program in another case pursued by six mostly Republican-led states. At the same time, the court will keep Biden’s multi-billion-dollar program on hold as it hears arguments next year.

The forgiveness program, which was announced by Biden in August, included up to $20,000 in loan relief for low- and middle-income debt holders. Some 26 million individuals already applied for relief, according to the Department of Education, which said that about 16 million of those have been approved.

The Texas lawsuit was filed by two borrowers who were partially or fully ineligible for the loan forgiveness, backed by the Job Creators Network Foundation, a conservative advocacy group founded by Bernie Marcus, a co-founder of Home Depot Inc.

Pittman, appointed as a judge by former President Donald Trump, ruled that the administration overstepped its authority to order debt cancellation under a 2003 law called the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, which can “waive or modify” student financial assistance during war or national emergency.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit later ruled to allow the judge’s injunction to stay until a final ruling in the case is issued. That prompted the Biden administration to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Attorneys general in Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina filed a lawsuit against the relief plan several weeks after it was unveiled to the public. Those states had claimed that they have the legal standing to challenge the plan, which they also argued exceeds the federal government’s authority.

According to the Supreme Court order issued Monday, the Brown case will be “deferred pending oral argument,” which reports say is slated for February of next year, alongside Biden v. Nebraska, the suit that was filed by the six states. No specific date was given.

Under a separate COVID-19-related order, those with student loan debt currently don’t have to make payments. Last week, the White House pushed back the payment pause until mid-2023 while the lawsuits are resolved.

President Joe Biden announces student loan relief with Education Secretary Miguel Cardona on Aug. 24, 2022. (Oliver Douliery/AFP via Getty Images)

Other Challenges

“The act requires a real connection to a national emergency,” the states’ lawyers wrote in court papers in late November. “But the department’s reliance on the COVID-19 pandemic is a pretext to mask the president’s true goal of fulfilling his campaign promise to erase student-loan debt.”

Lawyers for the administration, in asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court’s injunction against the program on Nov. 18,  wrote that the injunction should be lifted because it means that millions of people won’t be able to pay back their loans.

Because the plan won’t be implemented in the immediate future, the injunction “leaves millions of economically vulnerable borrowers in limbo, uncertain about the size of their debt and unable to make financial decisions with an accurate understanding of their future repayment obligations,” argued U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar in favor of the White House.

Prelogar asserted that the six states do not have the legal standing to file the lawsuit, she said, adding that the federal government acted within its authority to set up a debt-relief program.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated (pdf) that the program could total $400 billion over about 10 years. Because of the hefty price tag, Republicans criticized the program, while they also claimed the Biden administration announced the relief plan to coincide with the Nov. 8 midterm elections.

“These responsible Americans paid off their student debt, worked their way through college, or chose a career path that did not require student debt—but Biden is now forcing them to pay off other people’s loans,” Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), who recently won her reelection, told The Epoch Times on Oct. 21.

Read more here…

Just hours after refusing to attend a Senate hearing on his role in the collapse of FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried has been arrested by The Royal Bahamian Police Force, according to a statement from the Attorney General of The Bahamas Sen. Ryan Pinder KC.

The arrest came after the U.S. filed criminal charges against Bankman-Fried, the statement said, and the nation expects the U.S. to request The Bahamas extradite Bankman-Fried in short order.

“As a result of the notification received and the material provided therewith, it was deemed appropriate for the Attorney General to seek SBF’s arrest and hold him in custody pursuant to our nation’s Extradition Act.

At such time as a formal request for extradition is made, The Bahamas intends to process it promptly, pursuant to Bahamian law and its treaty obligations with the United States.”

Responding to SBF’s arrest, Prime Minister Davis stated:

“The Bahamas and the United States have a shared interest in holding accountable all individuals associated with FTX who may have betrayed the public trust and broken the law. While the United States is pursuing criminal charges against SBF individually, The Bahamas will continue its own regulatory and criminal investigations into the collapse of FTX, with the continued cooperation of its law enforcement and regulatory partners in the United States and elsewhere.”

Presumably this means he will not be attending tomorrow’s Congressional hearing with Maxine Waters.

*  *  *

Official Statement below:

Source

Authored by Alex Kimani via OilPrice.com,

• Supertanker rates reached record levels earlier this year.

• Very Large Crude Carrier rates have plunged to just $38,000 per day, falling some 62% from a few weeks ago. 

• OPEC+ cuts and waning SPR releases are short-term volume headwinds in the oil transportation sector.

Earlier in the year, supertanker freight rates hit record levels as traders scrambled to park crude in storage to take advantage of a record gap between spot and future prices shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine. Freight rates for very large crude-oil carriers (VLCC) along the Middle East Gulf to China route reached as high as $180,000 a day while VLCC time charter rates for floating storage jumped to as much as $120,000 per day.

But the situation has now reversed with supertanker rates plunging sharply. According to Bloomberg, ships capable of hauling 2 million barrels of crude are now earning about $38,000 a day, down 62% from just weeks ago after OPEC+ cut production and reduced releases from US reserves lowered seaborne volumes, Bloomberg reports.

“Clearly OPEC+ cuts and waning SPR releases would both be short-term volume headwinds. They cut production from the first of November and you would expect some lag, and we are seeing activity in the Middle East cooling off somewhat. That’s the simple explanation,” Lars Bastian Ostereng, an analyst at Arctic Securities has told Bloomberg.

Lower freight rates are encouraging some crude to travel longer distances. For instance, Bloomberg has reported that a South Korean refiner bought 2 million barrels of U.S. crude for March arrival. Meanwhile, offers for long-haul U.S. cargoes for delivery to Asia have declined partly due to lower shipping costs.

But things could not be more different in the natural gas arena.

Energy Crisis Sparks Mad Dash For Floating LNG Terminals

Demand for LNG floating storage and regasification units (LNG-FSRUs) has increased sharply this year, with Europe facing an energy supply squeeze as Russia has progressively cut pipeline gas flows. 

Demand for LNG imports has intensified after the ruptures on the key Nord Stream pipeline system quashed any prospect of Russia turning its gas taps back on. This has forced dozens of countries in Europe to turn to FSRUs or floating LNG terminals, which are essentially mobile terminals that unload the super-chilled fuel and pipe it into onshore networks.

Currently, there are 48 FSRUs in operation globally, with Rystad Energy revealing that all but six of them are locked into term charters. 

According to energy think-tank Ember, the EU has lined up plans for as many as 19 new FSRU projects at an estimated cost of €9.5bn. 

The biggest beneficiaries are Korean shipbuilding, for whom FSRUs are a major revenue-generator. Korea is the definitive world leader in this field. According to local media, Korean shipbuilders managed to book 46% more orders so far, YoY. And the government’s goal is for the country to grab 75% of the market share by 2030. 

The setup couldn’t be better. With the supply of these vessels so tight, the cost of charters into Germany has doubled year-on-year to $200,000 a day. 

“Last year there was a surplus of FSRUs and this year there is a deficit. Up until now there have been sufficient vessels in the market, but as most have now been taken, it’s becoming more challenging,” Per Christian Fett, the global head of LNG at shipbrokers Fearnley LNG in Oslo, has told Bloomberg.

Texas-based Excelerate Energy Inc. is sending three FSRUs to Europe with combined throughput capacity to import 15 billion cubic meters of gas, or about 10% of the pipeline and LNG imports from Russia in 2021. Demand for the terminals in Europe is so strong that it could make it less affordable for emerging nations to use FSRUs for their own needs.

“The risk is real that underutilized facilities in other regions of the world could be relocated to Europe, existing charter terms permitting,”Kaushal Ramesh, a senior analyst at consultant Rystad Energy, has said.

New Dutch terminal

The Netherlands has taken its first delivery of LNG at a new terminal, boosting Europe’s efforts to wean itself off Russian gas. Previously, the Netherlands could only import LNG through Rotterdam; however, that has changed with the commissioning of two FSRUs, the Golar Igloo and Eemshaven LNG, moored in Eemshaven. The FSRU project was completed in record time Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. With the pair of floating ships now supplying gas to the landlocked Czech Republic and Germany.

“The arrival of the new LNG terminal is an important step not only for the Netherlands, but for the whole of Europe to completely phase out the dependence on energy from Russia as quickly as possible,” Rob Jetten, Dutch minister for climate and energy, has declared. FRSUs offer the quickest and most efficient way for Europe to end its reliance on the pipelines that bring in large quantities of natural gas from Russia.

Europe has been working hard to wean itself off Russian energy commodities ever since the latter invaded Ukraine. The European Union has banned Russian coal and plans to block most Russian oil imports by the end of 2022 in a bid to deprive Moscow of an important source of revenue to wage its war in Ukraine.

But ditching Russian gas is proving to be more onerous than Europe would have hoped for. Whereas supplies of Russian pipeline gas–the bulk of Europe’s gas imports before the Ukraine war–are down to a trickle, Europe has been hungrily scooping up Russian LNG. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the bloc’s imports of Russian liquefied natural gas jumped by 41% Y/Y in the year through August.

“Russian LNG has been the dark horse of the sanctions regime,” Maria Shagina, research fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, has told WSJ. Importers of Russian LNG to Europe have argued that the shipments are not covered by current EU sanctions and that buying LNG from Russia and other suppliers has helped keep European energy prices in check. 

Source: WSJ

LNG Deluge

Maybe Europe’s LNG imports from Russia can be justified on a purely economic basis.

Natural gas prices in Europe have plunged over the past few weeks with CNBC reporting that a  “Wave of LNG tankers is overwhelming Europe in an energy crisis and hitting natural gas prices.” According to MarineTraffic via CNBC, 60 LNG tankers, or  ~10% of the LNG vessels in the world, are currently sailing or anchored around Northwest Europe, the Mediterranean, and the Iberian Peninsula. 

It’s a fair bet that a good chunk of those vessels originated from the United States.

Europe’s natural gas demand has skyrocketed as the EU tries to lower its reliance on Russian natural gas following its invasion of Ukraine. Europe has displaced Asia as the top destination for the U.S. LNG, and now receives 65% of total exports. The EU has pledged to reduce its consumption of Russian natural gas by nearly two-thirds before the year’s end while Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have vowed to eliminate Russian gas imports outright. Unlike pipeline gas, supercooled LNG is much more flexible and can be shipped from far-flung regions, including the U.S. and Qatar. 

Europe is not alone here. Shipping data has revealed that China has imported nearly 30% more gas from Russia so far this year, typically at a steep discount.

Thankfully, there’s a clear upside to imports of Russian LNG to Europe: the continent has managed to fill its gas stores well ahead of schedule, with Reuter’s gas meter revealing that 90% of the EU gas storage is currently filled.

Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute, 

A delegation from the Congressional Progressive Caucus met with the Cuban president, in a rare high-level meeting among government officials. Washington maintains a Cold War-era embargo against Havana.

The Associated Press reported Representatives James McGovern (D-MA), Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Troy Carter (D-LA) met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel in Havana on Sunday. Miguel Díaz-Canel tweeted, “we address our differences and topics of common interest. The shared will to improve bilateral relations was ratified. I expressed the need to put an end to measures that harm the Cuban population.”

“In the past year, Cuban arrivals to the U.S.-Mexico border have skyrocketed, and a growing number of boats packed with migrants have been found off of Florida’s coast,” the AP has noted. “In October, Cubans replaced Venezuelans as the second most numerous nationality after Mexicans arriving at the border. U.S. authorities stopped Cubans 28,848 times, up 10% from the previous month, the latest data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection shows.”

Havana was a client of Moscow throughout much of the Cold War. Washington first sanctioned weapon sales to Cuba in 1958. Two years later, Cuba nationalized American-owned businesses. The US responded by placing an embargo on Cuba. 

In February 1962, Washington extended the blockade of Cuba to include nearly all exports. Eight months later, the US and USSR nearly engaged in a nuclear exchange over strategic missiles deployed in Cuba. 

Near the end of his second term, Barack Obama took a number of steps to normalize relations with Cuba. President Donald Trump walked back nearly all of Obama’s détente policies. The Trump administration justified the U-turn claiming American diplomats in Cuba were targeted with a mysterious weapon that caused a wide variety of symptoms.

The US government dubbed the so-called disease ‘Havana Syndrome.’ However, a recording of the alleged weapon was identified to be the sound of native crickets. Joe Biden was expected to adopt the policy of his former boss for Cuba, but the White House has been slow to return to diplomacy with Havana.

In July 2021, the US imposed sanctions on Cuba over human rights abuses committed by government forces. While the Cuban government is repressive, the worst human rights abuses in Cuba occur at Guantanamo Bay. The US military occupies a portion of the island and has operated the infamous torture prison at the base for two decades. 

In June, the White House eased some sanctions on Havana, signaling some loosening of the embargo. Last month at the UN, the US voted to keep the blockade against Cuba. Recent talks between Washington and Havana have focused on slowing Cuban immigration to the US.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant – unless you’re Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Gary Gensler – who scrubbed evidence of a meeting with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from his calendar, along with key details of a meeting with Billionaire leftist-operative George Soros.

He also concealed September 21 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and former Bill Clinton White House official-turned-DC consultant, Minyon Moore.

Gensler, a former Goldman Sachs executive, Obama administration official, Clinton’s 2016 campaign CFO, and FTX associate, essentially had two calendars. His public calendar showed that on Aug. 7, 2021, he only had a staff meeting, while his private calendar lists a meeting with Hillary Clinton, Fox News reports.

Thirteen days later on Aug. 20, 2021, Gensler’s public calendar does list a meeting with Soros, but the agenda was hidden. His private calendar reveals that the meeting was held to discuss an upcoming WSJ op-ed Soros was planning to write in which he slammed BlackRock for launching investment products for Chinese customers, while also applauding the company’s ESG policies.

Gensler’s private calendar revealing the discrepancies was obtained by the watchdog group Energy Policy Advocates and shared with Fox News Digital. The group was only able to obtain the internal records after filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the SEC.

In recent days, around the time Fox News Digital contacted the SEC, the agency updated Gensler’s public calendar to include his meeting with Clinton in August 2021. As recently as Wednesday the public calendar didn’t include the meeting, and archived copies of the webpage from April also list just a meeting with staff. -Fox News

When contacted for comment, the SEC initially lied – saying that the Clinton meeting was visible on Gensler’s public calendar. When confronted with screenshots to the contrary, the spokesperson said that the agency updates calendars “from time to time” when inaccuracies are discovered (by watchdog groups?). 

Gensler also concealed several September 2021 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Minyon Moore – both of which have been now updated on Gensler’s public calendar.

“That even George Soros is calling out progressive darling BlackRock for craven blundering is striking — even if it did carry the requisite, tribal praise for BlackRock’s truly damaging ‘ESG’ (environmental, social and governance) campaigning to impose their shared ‘climate’ agenda on the U.S., an agenda also much to China’s delight,” said Chris Horner, a lawyer representing Energy Policy Advocates. “That it appears Soros received counsel from Gary Gensler on the mega-donor’s call for more SEC powers as a result is truly astonishing.”

“This gives further credence to the widespread concern that Gensler is deeply politicizing a supposedly independent commission,” he continued. “He may have been Hillary Clinton’s ‘Progressive Beacon’ not long ago, but Gary Gensler is now the SEC chairman, and his calendar indicates he knew the purpose of the meeting. It seems important to know whose idea this was, why, what was said arranging it and through what channel.”

According to the SEC spokesperson, Gensler has never asked anyone to ‘draft or submit’ an op-ed, but declined to comment on the meeting with Soros.

Gensler has faced heavy criticism from business groups and Republican lawmakers for pushing progressive policies, including a climate disclosure rule that would require publicly traded companies to share carbon emissions data and other climate information.

Reps. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and Andy Barr, R-Ky., two top GOP members on the House Financial Services Committee, introduced legislation this month that would limit the SEC’s ability to require such climate disclosures. -Fox News

“That this and Gensler’s consultation with Hillary were scrubbed from the public version of his calendar is frankly the least surprising aspect of this,” Horner continued. “The SEC first told Energy Policy Advocates that the publicly posted calendars were all they would get.”

“Energy Policy Advocates challenged that, pointing out that these sanitized versions, typically posted months after the fact, were certainly not produced from memory and the group wanted the originals. Here you see the reason for the scrubbing these internal versions receive.“

Authored by Carmen Reinhart via Project Syndicate,

Few would doubt that, after 15 years of ultra-low interest rates, reining in inflation by restoring real positive rates will be difficult. And with 2023 expected to bring heightened global financial and economic risks, monetary tightening will almost certainly become even more complicated.

The advanced economies are experiencing their highest inflation in 40 years, with a median rate of nearly 9% for the 12 months ending in September 2022. For central banks and financial markets, the expectation – or, more accurately, the hope – that the inflation spike would be transitory has been broadly replaced by the sobering realization that price growth is a persistent problem that demands significant and sustained monetary tightening. With the exception of the Bank of Japan, the major central banks are now raising interest rates and moving to stabilize or reverse balance-sheet growth

Few would doubt that, after 15 years of exceptionally low interest rates, this policy shift will be difficult, especially with the global economy teetering on the edge of recession. But with 2023 expected to bring heightened global financial and economic risks – not to mention rising geopolitical tensions – it will almost certainly become even more complicated.

A historical perspective illuminates some of the challenges that are likely to emerge as international financial conditions tighten. Real policy interest rates (nominal interest rates minus inflation) in the world’s financial center, the United States, have been consistently negative since the 2008-09 global financial crisis.

Real interest rates have remained negative for multiyear periods in a global financial center only four times since the mid-1800s (at least). The first three episodes were during the two world wars and in the aftermath of the OPEC oil shock from 1974-1980. In these three cases, average inflation in the US ranged from 7% to 15%, and the restoration of positive real interest rates was part of an effort to tackle inflation.

The current period of prolonged negative real interest rates is the longest of the four. Moreover, real rates in other advanced economies have been even more deeply negative. In much of Europe and Japan, nominal interest rates were also negative – a historical novelty.

Yet another historically anomalous feature of the recent “low-for-long” interest-rate era is that, under the heading of quantitative easing (QE), advanced-economy central banks have purchased massive amounts of government (or government-guaranteed) debt, setting new peacetime records. While central-bank balance sheets shrank modestly after the global financial crisis ended, they remained far larger than they were before the crisis, and swelled to new highs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This exceptional accommodation explains why, despite significant rate hikes, the US federal funds rate remains well below the 12-month inflation rate of about 8%. Likewise, the European Central Bank’s policy rate remains well below the US federal funds rate, while eurozone inflation nears double digits.

Against this backdrop, restoring positive real interest rates – thereby stabilizing inflation – may require monetary policy to be kept tighter for longer than many policymakers and market participants seem to expect. Yet it is far from clear that central banks will maintain their commitment to tightening in the face of weakening economic activity. The persistence of inflation in the 1970s can be explained partly by the US Federal Reserve’s tendency to do too little too late or to waver in the tightening process.

Experience also points to another underappreciated risk: the return of volatility in fixed-income (bond) markets. The recent turmoil in the United Kingdom, which forced the Bank of England to launch an emergency bond-buying program, is a case in point.

Price volatility is standard in global commodity markets, regardless of the interest rate. But, in fixed-income markets, higher volatility is the handmaiden of higher and more unstable inflation rates. The variation in inflation rates across the major advanced economies was about seven times higher in 1974-89 than in 2008-21.

This means that, in the era of sustained ultra-low interest rates, fixed-income-market volatility declined steadily. Low and stable inflation rates across the advanced economies also contributed significantly to a reduction in exchange-rate volatility after 2008, as Kenneth Rogoff, Ethan Ilzetski, and I have shown.

Persistent ultra-low interest rates shaped balance sheets by encouraging private-sector and government borrowing and aggressive risk-taking in search of yield (increasing the likelihood of asset-price bubbles). While ultra-low rates technically strengthen government balance sheets, they may have created or aggravated off-balance-sheet losses, including by undermining pension-fund solvency (especially among local governments). “Low for long” has, in some cases, weakened fiscal discipline and delayed reforms.

For countries with very high debts (such as Italy), negative interest rates – together with massive debt purchases by central banks – may have replaced debt restructuring, which at least in principle can deliver faster and greater progress on debt reduction. It remains to be seen how that gap will be filled in an era of tighter monetary policy.

The message is clear: the risks posed by the exit from sustained negative real interest rates extend well beyond recession. The question is how central banks will respond when those risks manifest.

Central-bank independence seems to have eroded – not necessarily de jure, but possibly de facto, as officials weigh the broader consequences of their actions. If leverage (public and private) and risk exposures raise doubts about financial stability, will central banks return to accommodation? What if fears of a market crash emerge, or sovereign insolvencies seem imminent (as might occur in the eurozone)? In the 1970s, economies endured years of high inflation before the exit from negative real interest rates was complete.

And yet more risks loom in 2023. China – a key engine of global economic growth after the last global financial crisis – is grappling with financial and political fragilities. Tighter global financial conditions could severely damage emerging-market and developing economies in the short run. Those with large US-dollar-denominated debts will suffer even more. Already, more than 60% of low-income countries are either at high risk of distress or already there.

But just as the exit from the “low-for-long” interest-rate era raises grave risks, so, too, does persistent high inflation, which, among other things, exacerbates inequality within and across countries. To say that this is a challenging time for governments and central banks would be a massive understatement.