Oh, sweet irony, how you consistently amuse us…

Today’s episode of ‘consequences are best served cold’ comes from Democratic Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York, who according the Daily Caller received $40,300 from Sam Bankman-Fried, ex-CEO of FTX, and his brother, Gabriel Bankman-Fried.

Now, Torres is calling for an investigation of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for “failing to properly regulate the crypto exchange.” He has written a letter to the Government Accountability Office requesting the probe.

But just months ago, he was one of 8 members of congress to sign a letter calling into question the SEC’s authority to request disclosure of information by crypto companies. 

Gabriel Bankman-Fried had donated more than $31,000 to Torres For Congress, Torres Victory Fund and the Torres-affiliated La Bamba PAC just two weeks prior, the report says. 

Torres responded to the Washington Examiner earlier this month, telling the paper that he donated the cash he received from Bankman-Fried “to a local charity to assist with holiday food distributions to families in need.”

Prior to the March letter, the SEC was asking several crypto exchanges for more information about how they were managing customers deposits – information that could have obviously unearthed issues at FTX long before its blowup. 

NEW this morning — Rep. @RitchieTorres (D-NY) calls on the Government Accountability Office (@USGAO) to investigate the SEC’s “failure to protect the investing public from the egregious mismanagement and malfeasance of @FTX_Official” pic.twitter.com/BdT7ZVCM7X

— Alexander Grieve (@AlexanderGrieve) December 7, 2022

Now that FTX has made a complete fool out of Torres and other Democrats that it donated money to, Torres’ tone has changed significantly. 

“The SEC chose to dedicate scarce time and resources to investigating Kim Kardashian, rather than opaque crypto exchanges, leaving many to question whether the commission is operating efficiently and apolitically and whether it has its priorities in the right place,” he wrote in his letter. 

“If the SEC had done the due diligence of thoroughly investigating the financials of FTX, there would have been a greater likelihood of exposing the crypto exchange for what it truly is: a house of cars [sic] built on monopoly money printed out of thin air.”

Yeah, if only certain members of Congress weren’t questioning the SEC’s ability to “do the due diligence” in the first place…unreal.

The House Ethics Committee is investigating Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), according to a Wednesday press release.

“Pursuant to House Rule XI, clause 3(b)(8)(A), and Committee Rules 17A(b)(1)(A), 17A(c)(1), and 17A(j), the Acting Chairwoman and Acting Ranking Member of the Committee on Ethics have jointly decided to extend the matter regarding Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, which was transmitted to the Committee by the Office of Congressional Ethics on June 23, 2022,” reads the statement.

It is unclear what she is being investigated for, though the Daily Caller notes that shortly after she took office, conservative groups filed complaints alleging AOC had misused congressional resources – and that she has come under fire for her involvement with the Justice Democrats Super PAC.

BREAKING: The House Ethics Committee has opened an investigation into Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez pic.twitter.com/fccV52bPZz

— Katelyn Caralle (@Katelyn_Caralle) December 7, 2022

Authored by Ethel Fenig via AmericanThinker.com,

Today’s Japan has an aging population which is slowly declining, but 81 years ago, it was a powerful imperialist island nation. So powerful, so imperialistic, that on December 7, 1941 Japan launched an attack against the greatest nation on earth, and bombed Hawaii’s Pearl Harbor.

As morning colors were readied and sailors and civilians ate breakfast, the Japanese planes struck. In fifteen minutes, the main battle line of the Pacific fleet was neutralized. The active battleships USS California, USS Oklahoma, USS West Virginia, USS Nevada, and USS Arizona were sunk, as well as the old USS Utah, which was then being used as a target and antiaircraft training vessel. The battleships USS Maryland, USS Tennessee, and USS Pennsylvania were damaged.

Initially, the American response to the attack was sporadic, but within five minutes American vessels began to fire back in earnest against the attackers. Relayed to the fleet was this message, “Air raid Pearl Harbor, this is no drill!”

The assault of the first wave ended about 8:45 a.m. There was a momentary lull before the second wave of Japanese planes arrived at 8:50 a.m. No torpedo planes came with the second group of dive and high-altitude bombers.

As the second wave withdrew, Mitsuo Fuchida, the military pilot who led the first wave, circled Pearl Harbor and assessed the damage. Satisfied, he took a last look and signaled to his pilots to return to the Japanese carrier. The main objective of the attack —  demobilizing the Pacific Fleet — had been accomplished. More than 2,400 Americans were killed and 1,104 wounded. Twenty-one ships of the Pacific Fleet were sunk or damaged, and 75 percent of the planes at the local airfields were damaged or destroyed. The next day the U.S. declared war on Japan; just days after that, Germany too became an official enemy, marking the American entry into what turned out to be World War ll.

Bob Batterson, a 101-year-old Pearl Harbor survivor, relayed the horror of the 90-minute surprise attack – as reported yesterday at a local news outlet:

At first Batterson and his roommates thought the warning siren and loud noise was a drill, but he soon realized instead, it was a massacre.

‘It’s just a feeling of helplessness,’ remembered Batterson.

Still, he remembers the unbelievable sights of carnage and tragic sounds of fellow sailors trapped inside the belly of battleships.

‘They lived in that hell for three days,’ said Batterson.

Now, 81 years later, Batterson has some sound advice for his fellow Americans, and considers Pearl Harbor a teachable moment to never let our collective guard down, “To remind us that we’ve got to remain alert. We have got to get involved[.]”

In Batterson’s eyes, that future depends on whether we learn from all the lives lost on that “date which will live in infamy” or be vulnerable to yet another dark day for America. Additionally:

‘This is a good way to make sure that we remember those guys – we don’t forget,’ said Batterson.

‘They died for us, and we’ve got to protect this country as best we can.’

They died so others may live! Nearly four years later, in the wake of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese finally surrendered. But the cost of American lives was immeasurable. So, as you go about your day, remember, and say some words of gratitude to those who secured our freedom.

We are walking 50 miles from Kaneohe to Pearl Harbor to honor the 81st anniversary of the attack on #PearlHarbor, and our brothers and sisters who have paid the ultimate price. We honor all who serve & sacrifice to defend the safety, security and freedom of the American people. pic.twitter.com/Tq35dvsBMv

— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) December 7, 2022

The last few days been very interesting.

Coming into this week, SpotGamma expected that markets would grind ahead into next weeks key data points, starting with 12/13 CPI.

This view was driven by the fact that short dated volatility sellers should come into a positive gamma environment, taking advantage of the blackout in data-driven volatility triggers.

However, it seems like some flows were unlocked on Monday morning, and the options market was not anticipating or signaling the risks or size.

You can see this in the chart below wherein we plotted ES futures against the 2 year yield & crude oil futures. You can see there are synchronized moves in these assets around data from last week, but then there is this move that occurs early on Monday morning – before the 10AM ISM print.

Based on SpotGamma‘s metrics for identifying options hedging flows and positioning, the driver(s) of these recent selling flows in stocks are non-obvious, but appear large and smell like coordinated stock liquidations.

We’d note here that while we have no first hand knowledge, there are whispers around of tax loss selling, and funds unwinding energy positions.

Aside from Jay Powell’s apparently ‘dovish’ address which sent stocks exploding higher on a short-squeeze, the last two weeks have seen almost constant selling pressure during the day-session for stocks, and relative calm during the overnight session.

To us, something along these lines makes sense.

One of our first institutional roles was on a program trading desk.

This role was to implement large “programs” which are trading giant baskets of stocks.

For example – some pension fund will come in and need to sell $100mm of the S&P500 basket.

You don’t sell futures here, you actually spread out the $100mm over all stocks in the S&P500.

With big orders you cannot simply hit “market sell” because you move the market too sharply.

So, you the order into an algorithm like a VWAP.

The algo starts selling at 9:30 AM, and stops at the close.

And, for really large orders, you may spread it out over a few days.

This smells an awful lot like cash stock sales, and also syncs with the idea that the options market wasn’t privy to the catalyst.

In fact in the last month or so, the S&P has lost around 40 points during the open-to-close day-session (and that includes the 123 point surge after Jay Powell spoke ‘dovishly’) while the close-to-open night session has gained 70 points…

Nevertheless, there is hope for short-term bulls, as the upside here is that we believe that the options flows have been fairly positive over the last few days.

HIRO is not reflecting large put buyers – but some call buying. We did see some longer dated put positions added (and the VIX up a bit), the options flows generally don’t speak of major fear/protection.

In other words – we don’t see the options market as currently inducing volatility.

We think that if there was an options induced negative feedback look we’d get more “bounce” or mean reversion after larger drawdowns.

Instead, futures just drop and stick as shown above.

The S&P is stuck for now at its 100-day moving-average…

However, below 3900 Put Wall support, we think that volatility changes materially.

Update 2 (2:30pmET): This should answer our question whose side the local military/policy is.

• *PERU POLICE DETAIN PRESIDENT PEDRO CASTILLO: COMERCIO

* * *

Update (1:50pmET):

• *PERU CONGRESS APPROVES IMPEACHING PRESIDENT PEDRO CASTILLO
• PERU’S VICE PRESIDENT REJECTS ON TWITTER CASTILLO’S DECISION TO “PERPETRATE THE BREAKDOWN OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER WITH THE CLOSURE OF CONGRESS”

* * *

It turns out the US is not the only banana republic out there: moments ago, Peru President Pedro Castillo announced the dissolution of congress and called for legislative elections to draft a new constitution hours before an impeachment debate, greatly escalating a political crisis and putting the Latin American nation’s democracy under threat.

“We took the decision of establishing a government of exception toward reestablishing the rule of law and democracy,” Castillo said in a televised speech Wednesday, adding that the incoming congress will draft a new constitution within nine months. “From today and until the new congress is established, we will govern through decrees.”

Castillo’s move was met with nationwide protests and outrage by the Peruvian constitutional court which called the dissolution of Congress a coup, and said that Castillo is no longer president. Meanwhile, the Congress – which apparently did not get the memo that it has been dissolved – started the Castillo impeachment session early, and will most likely vote to remove the president.

Additionally, the Peruvian vice president Boluarte rejected Castillo’s “coup” while the country’s Attorney General said he would file a criminal complaint against Castillo.

Meanwhile Castillo also announced a curfew and the “reorganization” of Peru’s justice system including the top courts at the same time he pledged to respect private property and business freedom. The president also said all illegal arms in possession of Peruvians must be handed back to the police within 72 hours.

Castillo’s unexpected move comes as congress was preparing to discuss a third impeachment attempt against him after failing to remove him from power twice. The president has had a rocky relationship with lawmakers since the start of his administration in July 2021 yet the measure risks creating a backlash as it’s legality will be questioned. A sign of that came quickly after Castillo’s speech, when Finance Minister Kurt Burneo, Foreign Minister Cesar Landa, and Justice Minister Felix Chero presented their resignations.

The move brought back memories of the decision by former leader Alberto Fujimori in 1992 to dissolve congress. At that time, he was supported by his ministers and the military.

And just like then, what will matter at the end of the day is who controls the army.

Sure enough, as Rodolfo Rojas, a partner at Lima-based Sequoia political advisory group said, “the army’s attitude toward this will be decisive over the next hours. If they back Castillo, he could stay in power temporarily, but if not, he’s going to fall.”

What determines whom the army will back? Why money of course: the one who hands over more of it, will be left in charge after this.

Peru’s sol tumbled as much 1.7% against the dollar after the announcement, the biggest intraday decline since July last year. Dollar-denominated bonds were among the worst in emerging markets, with the nation’s century bond sliding 1.3 cents to 60 cents on the dollar after the news. Peru’s benchmark stock index dropping 2.4% to the lowest in over a month.

For those wondering, the US is not on the side of Castillo, despite his eagerness to confiscate all domestic weapons. Brian Nichols, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, said that the US “categorically” rejects any acts by Castillo to prevent Congress from carrying out its mandate.

“We strongly urge President Castillo to reverse his attempt to close Congress and allow Peru’s democratic institutions to function as outlined in Peru’s constitution,” Nichols, the top diplomat focused on Latin America, said in a statement. “This dissolution is completely illegal,” Andrea Moncada, a political analyst, said.

Former President Ollanta Humala said Castillo’s announcement was akin to that of a dictator and that he should be detained. He called on the Armed Forces to stand on the right side of the constitution.

“What should happen is that Castillo should be detained since he’s gone outside the law,” Humala told RPP Noticias. “This decision should have been supported by the cabinet of ministers, those who haven’t resigned yet are in the same situation as Castillo.”

Via SchiffGold.com,

Beyond allegations of mismanagement and outright fraud, the collapse of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange reveals a more fundamental problem — the power of speculative manias fueled by central-bank easy money.

Peter Schiff recently appeared on NTD Capital Report to talk about the collapse of FTX, saying ultimately it was the Federal Reserve’s fault. And it is a warning sign for the broader economy.

When FTX filed for bankruptcy, it sent shockwaves through the crypto world. As Mises Institute senior editor Ryan McMaken put it, “FTX’s collapse has exposed just how little due diligence is actually taking place among investors who are apparently willing to put large amounts of cash in whatever place looks like the hottest new thing and promises—without convincing evidence—big-time returns.”

Peter said he wished he had taken a deeper look into Sam Bankman-Fried earlier because he thinks he would have been able to ferret out the fraud pretty quickly. Peter pointed out that he called out Alex Mashinsky (CEO of the crypto lending and staking platform Celcius) for running a Ponzi scheme in a debate. Celcius filed for bankruptcy back in July. SchiffGold analyst Tony called Celcius the “canary in the coal mine” and said FTX was the coal mine — and it just collapsed.

Peter pointed out that Celcius was paying yield on cryptocurrency, as was FTX.

How could you do that? Cryptos don’t generate yield. The only way to generate yield is to take tremendous risk, which is exactly what [Mashinsky] did, except the people who were depositing their crypto didn’t appreciate the risk that was being taken. Of course, they were taking a lot of risks themselves just owning crypto because all of these currencies are basically worthless. They’re not even really currencies. They’re collectible tokens. But pretty soon, nobody is going to want a bitcoin collection, or any of these collections, and the prices are going to implode.”

Some people have expressed sympathy for Bankman-Fried, saying his naivete got him in trouble, and that he wasn’t intentionally trying to defraud people. Peter said he doesn’t know whether Bankman-Fried’s actions were criminal or just the result of gross incompetence and negligence.

But you would think some of these hedge fund managers who invested with him would have done a little bit of due diligence. But this just shows you the way investors will act when they’re drunk on cheap money. So, I would blame the Federal Reserve for a lot of people acting as foolishly as they did. Because maybe he was a kid, but there were a lot of grownups who were giving him money.”

McMaken wrote that the FTX collapse was a canary in the coal mine for the broader economy and that it could foreshadow the fate of other segments in the economy that have been pumped up by the easy money policies of the Federal Reserve over the last decade-plus.

Peter also talked about the overall state of the US economy during his interview, calling it “an absolute disaster.”

Thanks to Fed policy over the last decade or so, we have a gigantic bubble. We never had a real recovery. We just had a financial bubble. And we dug ourselves into a much deeper hole than the one the Fed put us in back in 2008 following the financial crisis that they also created with the same type of monetary policy that is creating the crisis that we are heading for, which is going to be far worse than what we experienced in 2008. Not only is inflation going to get much worse than it already is, but we’re going to have a worse financial crisis than the one we had in 2008. This is going to be the worst recession that the US has ever experienced. It may even be worse than the Great Depression. It will certainly feel worse for most people because in the Depression, people at least got the relief of falling prices. This time, consumers are going to feel the sting of dramatically higher prices.”

So why did we have solid GDP growth in the third quarter? Peter said it was just a function of the big improvement in the trade deficit. While the trade deficit was still huge, it wasn’t as big as it was in the previous quarters.

That was thanks to two factors. One – the strong dollar, which is now reversing. The dollar just had its worse month in 12 years. … So, that’s going to push the trade deficit up. In fact, the trade deficit in November swelled by 10%. It was a huge jump. But the other factor that helped bring down the trade deficit was all the oil that Biden released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Oil companies were able to buy that oil and then export it, and so, that artificially boosted our exports, which improved GDP. But pretty soon, we’re going to run out of the oil in this strategic reserve. There won’t be a reserve left, so we won’t be able to rely on that crutch.”

Peter pointed out that the economic data that came out last week was horrific.

I think we’re going to have a big negative number for Q4 GDP. So, we’re going to end the year on a low note. And I think we’re going to have another negative quarter in Q1 of 2023.”

The host asked Peter what he thought about the big jump in retail sales. Doesn’t that bode well for the economy?

Peter said they’re not really up.

Prices are up. So, if you factor in inflation, retail sales are down.”

Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge in Washington dismissed a lawsuit against Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on Tuesday for the 2018 murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, citing President Joe Biden’s grant of immunity.

U.S. District Judge John Bates decided to defer to the Biden administration’s mid-November decision to grant immunity to the Saudi crown prince, despite his hesitation.

According to Bates, any other option would “unduly interfere” with the executive branch’s power to make foreign policy.

“Despite the Court’s uneasiness, then, with both the circumstances of bin Salman’s appointment and the credible allegations of his involvement in Khashoggi’s murder, the United States has informed the Court that he is immune, and bin Salman is therefore ‘entitled to head of state immunity … while he remains in office,’” Bates wrote in his 25-page ruling (pdf).

Bates was referring to the fact that Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud only officially designated the crown prince as prime minister in September, four years after Khashoggi’s murder and after the lawsuit against the crown prince was filed.

A picture of slain Saudi journalist Jamal Kashoggi is displayed during a ceremony near the Saudi Arabia consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2, 2019. (Lefteris Pitarakis/AP)

Plaintiff Considering ‘All Options’

Khashoggi’s widow Hatice Cengiz and Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), an advocacy organization founded by Khashoggi, filed the legal action against the Saudi crown prince and other defendants in 2020.

“While we are disappointed in the decision, we will consider all options to continue our legal challenges to MBS’s criminal behavior,” DAWN Executive Director Sarah Leah Whitson said in a statement referring to the crown prince by his initials.

DAWN noted that the Saudi king’s royal decree appointed bin Salman prime minister six days before the Oct. 3 deadline for the Biden administration to intervene in the lawsuit, characterizing it as “a last ditch effort to escape the jurisdiction of the court.”

The organization also disputed the court’s ruling to dismiss DAWN’s case against two other defendants, Saud al-Qahtani and Ahmed al-Assiri, on jurisdictional grounds.

U.S. intelligence officials believe Khashoggi was tortured, killed, and dismembered at the Saudi consulate in Instanbul on Oct. 2, 2018, at the order of the crown prince, who has been the kingdom’s de facto ruler for several years.

Khashoggi had attended the consulate to obtain the papers required to wed Cengiz, a Turkish national. She waited outside the consulate for more than 12 hours “in a desperate and tormented state” for her fiance to return, the judge noted.

Although the prince has denied ordering Khashoggi’s murder, he later admitted that it happened “under my watch.”

Hatice Cengiz, fiancee of the murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, talks to Reuters outside Justice Palace, the Caglayan Courthouse, after attending a trial on the killing of Khashoggi at the Saudi Arabian Consulate, in Istanbul, on April 7, 2022. (Murad Sezer/Reuters)

Unduly Interfering

Bates noted in his ruling that the judicial branch believes it appropriate to defer to the executive branch’s foreign immunity determinations “when the conduct of foreign affairs is involved.”

“As the branch of government primarily responsible for international affairs and diplomacy, the Executive Branch may be hindered or embarrassed should the judiciary second-guess its foreign immunity decisions,” Bates wrote.

According to Bates, it is well-established in the “chess game that is diplomacy” that “judicial interference” is not advisable in such a situation where the executive branch may grant immunity “as a bargaining counter in complex diplomatic negotiations” and where denials could “preclude a significant diplomatic advance.”

“These considerations are no less present when the circumstances of a head of state’s appointment are suspect: the Executive Branch remains responsible for foreign affairs, including with Saudi Arabia, and a contrary decision on bin Salman’s immunity by this Court would unduly interfere with those responsibilities all the same,” Bates wrote.

“If the immunity determination was in front of the Court without input from the Executive Branch, the Court certainly would consider plaintiffs’ arguments about whether, as a substantive matter, bin Salman was entitled to head-of-state immunity,” the judge added.

“But because the United States has determined that bin Salman is so entitled, ‘the doctrine of the separation of powers under our Constitution requires us to assume that all pertinent considerations have been taken into account by the [Executive Branch] in reaching [its] conclusion.’”

Bates, therefore, dismissed the claims against bin Salman based on head-of-state immunity.

China relaxed its zero Covid strategies to prevent further public unrest and boost waning economic growth. The new measures allowing for home quarantines and entry into public areas without testing were announced after a meeting of the Chinese Communist party’s politburo. They outlined the importance of stabilizing the economy than combating Covid. 

“We will protect people’s safety and health to the greatest [extent] and keep the impact on social and economic development to a minimum,” the State Council Prevention and Control Mechanism said on Wednesday, which was quoted by South China Morning Post. 

The new measures from the communist government call for isolating asymptomatic or mild Covid cases at home rather than in quarantine camps or hospitals for seven days. Anyone in contact with the infected would have to quarantine at home for five days instead of eight days at a camp and then at home.

The State Council disbanded the rule for people to show negative Covid tests before entering public places. 

“People no longer need to show a negative PCR [polymerase chain reaction] result or a health code to enter public venues or to travel, except when entering hospitals, schools and homes for the elderly,” SCMP wrote. 

SCMP added: “The new policy stressed that basic social and medical services need to be provided. People’s movements, work and production should not be restricted in low-risk areas.” 

Today’s announcement is the most significant move to ease Covid policies since the Council announced a 20-point playbook for relaxing measures last month. 

Chinese has sounded the clarion call for the country to return to normal life. These measures are more resolute than the recent self-adjusting measures of various provinces. It is a reflection of the whole country’s determination to escape the shackles of COVID-19. pic.twitter.com/FuEQahBBGG

— Hu Xijin 胡锡进 (@HuXijin_GT) December 7, 2022

Liang Wannian, an epidemiologist, now a health official who once led China’s initial pandemic response, told Bloomberg that Beijing is more “proactive, rather than reactive” and would “ensure resources are utilized more efficiently and better coordinate outbreak control and economic development.”

In Hong Kong, the benchmark Hang Seng initially surged on the news, then sold through most of the session, closing down 3%. There was also trade data for November that showed Chinese exports were hit by weak global demand and Covid disruptions at factories. 

“Although the measures announced today are positive steps towards reopening, it appears some of the reopening exuberance is fading. Disappointing trade data is also a reminder of the slowing external demand heading into next year,” said Marvin Chen, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence.

“Though the market is still trading on the positive expectations we are not entirely out of the woods, as we still have to get past the panic that might come with the first wave of infections,” Ma Xuzhen, fund manager at Longquan Investment Management, said. 

China’s Covid outbreak is worsening as infections soar: 

One million Chinese people are at risk of dying from Covid-19 during the coming winter months if President Xi Jinping pursues his pivot to remove strict pandemic controls, new modeling shows. — Financial Times 

“The current propaganda messaging is that a reopening will be costless,” said Rodney Jones, principal at Wigram.

“The risk is that they are underestimating just how much work — and cost — the rest of the world has done and borne to get to the point of living with Covid.

“China has done nothing to prepare for this step, and Xi appears to be doing so on impulse as a reaction to the protests, rather than as part of a careful policy programme,” Jones said.

Deteriorating global economic growth will worsen into early 2023. China’s shift from zero Covid policies is a move to boost domestic demand over the medium term to stabilize its faltering economy. The next few months could be turbulent as the reopening process could be met with a wave of infections and deaths. 

Authored by Naveen Anthrapully via The Epoch Times,

A significant portion of American citizens are supportive of industrialist Elon Musk’s efforts to ensure freedom of speech on Twitter, according to a poll by Trafalgar Group.

The poll asked respondents whether they support Musk seeking to make Twitter a “more free and transparent platform.” According to the survey, 52.3 percent responded positively, while 31.3 percent were not supportive of Musk’s actions at Twitter. The remaining 16.3 percent were “not sure.” Without the “not sure” option, support for Musk jumped to 62.6 percent, while those against such changes only made up 37.4 percent.

Among Democrats, 59.3 percent were against Musk, 23.5 percent were unsure, and just 17.1 percent extended support. Among Republicans, support for Musk’s actions was 84.8 percent, which is the highest in the survey. Only 10.2 percent were unsure about the matter, while just 5 percent rejected Musk’s attempts.

As to respondents who are not associated with any party, 54.2 percent extended support to Musk strengthening free speech and transparency on Twitter, while only 30.5 percent rejected such developments.

The survey, which saw the participation of 1,085 likely general election voters, was conducted between Nov. 30 and Dec. 3.

The Trafalgar Group poll comes as Musk had admitted last month that Twitter used to have an anti-conservative bias before he took over.

“It is objectively the case that ‘conservative’ political candidates were more negatively affected than ‘progressive’ candidates. Anyone using Twitter knows this. Question is simply one of magnitude,” Musk commented in a tweet on Nov. 24.

Conservative Suppression

Musk had recently shared a Twitter threat by independent journalist Matt Taibbi who detailed a series of internal communications at the social media platform that provided insight into the actions taken by the staff to suppress the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Musk later responded to the issue, suggesting that the suppression is a violation of the First Amendment. In an interview with Fox, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the GOP ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, called for an official look into the matter.

“Every employee at Twitter who was involved in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story will have an opportunity to come before Congress and explain their actions to the American people,” Comer said.

In November, Musk reinstated the undercover journalism organization Project Veritas, which was banned last year after it did a series of exposes on major companies like Twitter and CNN.

In 2018, an exposé by Veritas using undercover reporters caught several Twitter employees admitting on camera that the platform had an anti-conservative bias. One employee revealed that discussions on topics like America, guns, and God were classified as bot-like behavior.

On Wednesday Russian President Vladimir Putin gave a wide-ranging public war update during a televised session of his Human Rights Council, which at least one independent regional outlet said was tightly controlled in terms of the kind of questions Kremlin officials could ask.

Among the more important topics he addressed related to the now 10-month long “special military operation” in Ukraine was future plans for broader mobilization and the prospect of deployment of nuclear assets. On the latter point, Putin lashed out at the United States and NATO, saying “Russia does not have tactical nuclear weapons in other countries, unlike the US.”

This was in reference to the fact that some NATO members in Europe, including extending as far east as Turkey, do act as host countries to many of the US’ tactical nukes under the NATO defense umbrella. “Our nuclear forces are in a more advanced state than any other country in the world,” he boasted at one point.

Importantly, given the ratcheting US-NATO arms pipeline to Ukraine’s forces, which has lately involved transfer of increasingly sophisticated and longer range missiles, Putin warned that the “risk of nuclear war in the world is rising.” 

He further took the opportunity to restate Russia’s ‘defensive’ nuclear doctrine, stressing that nuclear weapons would be considered as a response to an attack on Russian territory, while also stating that he stands ready to defend Russian territory “using all available means”. 

According to a translation of Putin’s remarks in Sky News:

“We didn’t speak about usage of nuclear weapons.” Then, he said: “Russia has not gone mad.”

“We have the most advanced weapons, but we do not want to wave it around.”

But in taking a swipe at Washington’s nuclear deployments in Europe, he seemed to suggest that it’s precisely the US side doing the nuclear saber-rattling. 

“Yes, we will do this by various ways and means. First of all, of course, we will focus on peaceful means, but if nothing else remains, we will defend ourselves with all the means at our disposal,” Putin said.

Western mainstream media will more than likely run with the comments as a fresh “threat” that Russia stands ready to conduct a nuclear attack if cornered in Ukraine, and yet just like the previous time he made similar statements, the Russian leader was in fact articulating the defensive nature of the country’s official nuclear policy against ‘existential’ threats to Russian territory.

Putin at the meeting with Human Rights council of Russia: the threat of nuclear war is increasing, but Russia will not use the nuclear weapons first, however it will not use the nuclear weapons second, because it will not be possible after nuclear strike at Russia pic.twitter.com/IrgLe9EWiM

— Liveuamap (@Liveuamap) December 7, 2022

Among the more important new commentary from Putin, however, was the following: 

In rare comments on the status of the war, Mr Putin admitted it would likely be a “long process” – suggesting Russia has no plans to abandon the conflict any time soon.

Last month into this month has already seen some ambiguous signals from Washington that the Biden administration could be ready to at least contemplate pushing Kiev to the negotiating table. Moscow too has said it remains “open” to talks – however, Putin’s projection of a “long” conflict strongly suggests the warring sides are nowhere close to establishing a process for ceasefire dialogue.

Elsewhere in the Human Rights Council meeting with top officials, Putin sought to quash persistent rumors of a second military mobilization across society next year. He expressed there was no need, after the prior 300,000 reservists which were called up for Ukraine operations. 

He emphasized determination to see the operation through to achieve previously stated goals: “Russia could be the only guarantor of Ukraine’s territorial integrity. But it’s up to the new leaders of Ukraine,” Putin said.