Universities Are Raising a Generation of Trumplets: New at Reason

Free speech is increasingly triggering.

A. Barton Hinkle writes:

That dull roar you heard a few days ago? It came from the countless gasps of horror when The Washington Post reported that the Centers for Disease Control had discouraged the use of certain words.

According to The Post, policy analysts were told not to use seven particular terms: fetus, transgender, vulnerable, entitlement, diversity, evidence-based, and science-based. This led to stern editorials about “thought control, Trump-style,” warnings that the directive was an “attack on science,” and so on. Having the government tell people which words they may and may not use is doubleplusungood, was the widespread consensus.

And of course it is. But to borrow from Kipling, “you need not stop work to inform us; we knew it ten seasons before.” Those exercised over the news about the CDC are coming rather late to the party.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2l9199O
via IFTTT

Headlines Like These are Why Trump Isn’t Worried…

Via The Daily Bell

What does desperation look like? This:

The weird thing about trees is that someday, like all of us, they die.

This tree was on its way out. In fact, the tree was removed in order to protect anyone standing under it from danger. Who usually stands under it? The press. Melania was trying to protect the same press that now attempts to skewer her over landscaping.

(Of course, if the tree broke and killed a member of the press, then they could all have a field day reporting that Trump is responsible for killing a journalist.)

The tree will actually be removed on the advice of the National Arboretum. It is only held in place by an intricate maze of cables. And Melania actually made sure they saved cutting from the tree to replant.

I felt very silly writing the past few paragraphs because the issue is so trivial. This is not important news. The media that originally reported this story (starting with CNN) should be laughed out of town. And in one way or another, they will be.

It’s not so much the reporting of this non-news that is a problem. I suppose it may be of some interest to someone somewhere. Perhaps a side link, or maybe a half page in Arborist Monthly. But the headlines! That is what really does it.

You know, the tree was actually planted by Andrew Jackson. So the media could have said, “Melania Orders Removal of Symbol of Racism,” or “Two-Hundred Year Old Monument to the Trail of Tears to Be Cut Down.”

The substance of the article missed an opportunity too. The White House had to call in tree experts, who made a report which was delivered to Melania, who sat down with the arborists and staff to thoroughly explore every option before making the call to remove the tree.

If that’s not a metaphor for the government, I don’t know what is! A dying tree, being held up by cables to preserve some remnant of a long-gone past. The desperate bid to save a symbol, to hold onto something rotting and dangerous. And then the intricate process, bureaucracy, time, and money that it takes to just cut down the freakin tree!

The media is absolutely desperate to criticize the Trump administration over anything they can get their hands on. Except that this is exactly the type of coverage Trump relishes in. Big nothing-burgers which keep his name in the news, but don’t hurt him in the least. Only anti-Trump zealots will latch on to a story like this. The rest of us, not even just the Trump supporters, will roll our eyes and stop paying attention.

And that is the dangerous part of these types of stories. What are they masking?

Did you hear about Trump’s terrible picks for the Federal Reserve Board?

Or about how Trump’s Justice Department settled the old IRS Tea Party targetting lawsuits for peanuts?

While this story played out, and Trump was “caught” golfing by CNN, here’s some other stuff that happened:

Did the FBI Conspire to Stop Trump?

Ironically the FBI investigation into the Trump Russian collusion charges has done a 360 and now points to the Democrats and FBI agents as the real criminal manipulators. But they are in too deep and have overplayed their hand.

But how bad has this government gotten that this sort of corruption at the FBI is considered boring? The FBI has long been a political tool of suppression.

Police in China Target Bloggers and Profile Communities for DNA Collection

China is a big red flag to the rest of the world on how not to govern. They intimate journalists and dissidents and monitor every aspect of their citizens’ lives. A “social credit” system has even started to score citizens based on things like patriotism and neighborliness.

But Melania approved a tree getting cut down, and that is just too fun an opportunity for the media to ignore! It fits the scorched-earth-Republican narrative too well.

She also ordered all the tree’s progeny uprooted and burned. As for the tree itself, she plans to fashion a throne, from which she will rule for a thousand years.

via http://ift.tt/2E2k4Lm TDB

10 Injured After Explosion In St.Petersburg Shopping Mall

A week after Russian President Putin thanked US President Trump and the CIA for their warnings about a possible terror attack in St.Petersburg, TASS reports that an explosion in a storage locker in a busy supermarket in St. Petersburg has left 10 injured and dozens more evacuated.

The explosion occurred on Wednesday evening in the Perekrestok store in the shopping center on Kondratyevsky Avenue in the northern part of St. Petersburg. As reported by TASS in the main department of the Ministry for Emergency Situations in St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region, the place is pulled by the operational forces, the evacuation of the building has already been carried out.

"There was a clap in the building, the rescuers are already working on the spot, the evacuation is made, there is no fire," the administration said.

The strength of the explosion is unknown.

Live Feed from the area of the explosion…

According to a source in the emergency services, ten people were injured.

"The explosion of an unidentified device occurred in the entertainment complex" Giant Hall "on the ground floor in the area of the cells of the store" Perekrestok "(without ignition)," the source said.

According to preliminary information, four people have already been hospitalized. Six more are examined by doctors. There is no damage to the load-bearing structures. On-site sappers are working explosives.

via http://ift.tt/2BJqRZ1 Tyler Durden

The #BitcoinBreakdown: Demigod in the Details

First Appearing on HedgeAccordingly.com

Sixth in a series. Part 1Part 2Part 3, Part 4Part 5

By @sellputs

Seems like everybody wants to buy in on bitcoin, and if you do, brace for a gut-tossing rollercoaster ride and another drawback, as well:  Trading costs in crypto are astonishingly high. 

Comparison: on TD Ameritrade, you can do a $10 million transaction in stocks on the New York Stock Exchange and it will cost you as little as $6.99; sell $10 million in bitcoin, and the transaction fee could come to $100,000 or more. And stocks are safer!

Opening an account with Coinbase (see Part 3 of this series), is more of a beginner’s way, admittedly, to go to the market to “buy” crypto-coins.  It also is the better option for buy-and-hold fans of bitcoin, though holding anything too long in cryptos may be risky on its face.

Coinbase imposes a fee on every transaction you undertake, charging 1.5% of the total value of the purchase or sale. And if you want to use your credit card to set up an account, Coinbase will charge you a 4% fee for the pleasure.  That’s $400 to hand ’em $10,000.

The GDAX trading platform is the more advanced way to play, ideal for day trading and high-frequency trading if you have the nerve.  It assesses no transaction fees at all as you trade, and it allows more sophisticated techniques that Coinbase doesn’t enable, such as limit orders letting you set stop-losses (sell when the price falls to a particular level) and buy limits letting you trigger a “buy” only when a coin hits the price you specified.

The platform exacts an ample vig, however, once you take cash out of your GDAX account, whether it’s an exponential windfall or the remaining shreds of cash from a bitcoin beating. GDX charges a fee of 25 to 100 basis points, or 0.25% to 1.0% of the total sum you withdraw. In some cases the fees run even higher than that.

Plus, on Coinbase and GDAX the only way to bet on bitcoin et al is to bet their prices will rise—so far, you cannot hedge that gamble by actively betting that bitcoin will actually go down in price, by selling short.  At least, you can’t do that on Coinbase and GDX and their rivals. Now, though, you can short elsewhere, via futures contracts on both CBOE and the CME

One futures contract on the CBOE involves one full bitcoin, while at the CME, one contract covers five bitcoins. Thus, the CME contract has higher leverage than the CBOE contract. The CME contract is based on the average price taken from five exchanges, while the CBOE’s contract is priced off of a single exchange, run by Gemini Trust Co. 

Those differences create gaps and fleeting, short-lived anomalies, and professional traders and their Ph.D. mathematicians will be brainstorming this one, figuring out new algorithms aimed at exploiting those spreads between the two markets.  It is unclear how much bitcoin prices could gyrate around as a result of such computerized trading.

As you read this—most of you didn’t get down this far, and for those of you who did—I’d bet you some holders of real bitcoins are slowly converting a portion of them into dollars and investing the cash in new bitcoin futures on CBOE and the CME.  In some ways that may be the ultimate sign of how bitcoin gradually will get co-opted by Wall Street and superseded by trading in derivatives-of-derivatives based on bitcoin prices.

Hold on to your hats for this ride.

Next: A new way to predict bitcoin’s pricing patterns.

via http://ift.tt/2BK7S06 HedgeAccordingly

Russia Establishes Two Permanent Bases In Syria To Host Nuclear Warships And Warplanes

Russia's defense ministry has announced it is now in the process of establishing two permanent military bases in war-torn Syria after President Putin authorized prior deals with the Syrian government to move forward. Though Russia maintains merely up to ten military bases on foreign soil, the installations in Tartus and Khmeimim will be the most strategically located, allowing for a growing and permanent Russian presence on the Mediterranean, something which has already raised eyebrows in the West.

Though Putin formally announced the planned withdrawal of Russian forces from active operations in Syria in early December, there were parallel plans going back to at least early summer to maintain a smaller permanent presence based on an agreement with the Damascus government to host Russian forces for at least 49 more years, which includes the option of being prolonged further. Personnel and military hardware will be stationed at permanent Russian bases in Tartus and Khmeimim – both of which are on or near the Mediterranean. 

Satellite image of Russia's facility at Tartus Navy docks. Left: (Source: WikiMapia); Right: (Source: GoogleMaps)

According to Russian media reports, Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu stated at a ministry meeting on Tuesday, “We have started the process of formation of our permanent forces [in Syria]." Though Tartus has operated as a Russian naval port since 1971 (referred to as a Material-Technical Support Point and not a "base") and was until recently minimally staffed mostly by civilian contractors, it will reportedly undergo a massive transformation and expansion, which is to include the capability of hosting nuclear-powered ships.  

Notably, though mainstream media is currently reporting the permanent Russian military presence as something "new" and dangerous in terms of an enduring Russian footprint in the Middle East, the Russian military relationship with Baathist Syria goes back decades into the Soveit era with the Tartus facility having been long key to Russian naval movements in the Mediterranean. 

According a summary of the planned expansion in RT News:

Under the agreement with Syria, the future base would be allowed to host up to 11 Russian warships, including those with a nuclear power plant. At the moment there is only one Russian nuclear-propelled military surface ship, the 24,000-ton battlecruiser ‘Pyotr Velikiy’, although Russia will soon have a nuclear icebreaker – albeit which is unlikely to be given a mission in the Mediterranean – while a brand new Lider-class destroyer project is at the design stage.

Khmeimim is located near Latakia – the major northwest Syrian city on the Mediterranean, and was built adjacent to the civilian Bassel Al-Assad International Airport to serve as "the strategic center of Russia's military operation against Islamic State." It has primarily served as an airbase and prime troop logistical support location out of which Russian sorties have been flown since 2015, which ultimately served to overwhelmingly shift the momentum of the war in favor of the Assad government, which has now taken about 90% of all territory formerly held by terrorists, though the future of the country's northeast – held by the Kurdish dominated and US-backed SDF remains to be seen.

Deployed Russian forces, via Lancashire News

Meanwhile as plans for the permanent bases have been confirmed, Russia says that the bulk of its forces in Syria have already been reduced, though this is currently being contested by both the Pentagon and Syrian opposition groups, who say Russian airstrikes and operations have actually been on the increase of late. On Wednesday the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) stated that over 48,000 Russian military personnel were deployed to Syria between 2015 and 2017, and that at least half of this number have been withdrawn after Vladimir Putin’s visit to the Khmeimim Military Airport earlier this month. And according to a previous statement from the Russian MoD, their forces claimed to help eliminate more than 62,000 militants during their two years inside the country.

However, the Pentagon remains predictably skeptical of Russian effectiveness against ISIS and other terrorists, with the US recently claiming that it alone is responsible for the defeat of the terror group, which resulted in Moscow pushing back against such claims. Washington hawks are likely to argue that Russian permanent bases in Syria are justification enough for the Pentagon to perpetually maintain its own more than dozen small military bases in the country's north and northeast. 

At the same time from the Russian perspective, American policy as well as that of major regional US allies like Israel have been aggressive and erratic, and appear to still include regime change as a long-term policy goal in Syria. An equally long-term Russian military presence will allow Moscow to immediately deploy or build-up its forces in Syria should Damascus come under direct threat from external countries at any point in the near or distant future.

via http://ift.tt/2CcdvaX Tyler Durden

The Ghost Of W.D.Gann: Another Crash Is Coming

Authored by Philip Soos & Lindsay David via RenegadeInc.com,

The original wizard of Wall Street, W.D Gann was a finance trader and wealthy speculator that spent decades investigating cyclical trends in equity market patterns and found that prices could be predicted long in advance. He successfully predicted the crashes in the 1929 and Dot-Com stock market bubbles.  And according to his analysis, the US stock market is due for another crash in 2020.

Every movement in the market is the result of a natural law and of a Cause which exists long before the Effect takes place and can be determined years in advance. The future is but a repetition of the past, as the Bible plainly states…

After suffering through the worst economic and financial crisis since the 1930s depression when the real estate and stock markets crashed in 2007, the United States’ bubble economy is back into full swing. Residential and commercial real estate prices are growing strongly, along with equities.

The US stock market, as defined by the S&P500 index, has boomed after collapsing to a trough in 2009. The market ‘recovered’ more quickly than anyone thought it would, and has continued surging from thereon in.

This has led to a lot of commentary and media coverage that the S&P500 is in the thrall of yet another bubble that will burst. Despite the many predictions of collapse, the bubble has powered on unhindered.

Like all asset bubbles, the primary cause is speculators taking on debt to bid up prices to ever-higher levels, generating a stream of greater fools willing to purchase at inflated valuations. In the case of equities, the type of debt used is margin debt.

The trends in the S&P500 index and margin debt are obvious. The name of the game is capital gains; income is increasingly sidelined as yields become compressed to record lows.

The annual change in margin debt (the first derivative) closely tracks that of the S&P500 index. In Australia, this was true of our largest equities bubble on record, which peaked in 2007 and then burst, declining by 55% from peak to trough.

Margin debt all too coincidently rose rapidly during the boom.

In the case of the S&P500 bubbles which peaked in 2000 and 2007, margin debt also peaked a few months beforehand in terms of absolute values, annual growth and acceleration (the second derivative).

It is therefore worth closely tracking the trends in margin debt to understand where equity prices are heading.

Another metric to watch out for is private non-financial business debt because the very low interest rates on business bank loans makes it easy for corporate executives to drive up stock prices by loading up on debt to engage in stock buybacks.

As prices are often linked to executive remuneration, they have every incentive to engage in this unproductive strategy.

The peaks in the annual change of non-financial business debt correspond with those of the equities market. It should be noted that non-financial business debt is also used to speculate on commercial land, which is why land prices cycle in tandem with debt.

The yield curve is one of the best leading indicators of recession and equity market downturns. The yield curve inverted a few months before both peaks in 2000 and 2007. Currently, the yield curve is 108 basis points above zero, and could take a while before it inverts.

While the metrics noted above can accurately indicate the peak of an equities bubbles several months in advance, they cannot tell us anything years ahead of time. For this, we must turn to the research of the original wizard of Wall Street, W.D. Gann. He was a finance trader who developed technical analysis tools and forecasting methods based on geometry, astronomy, astrology and ancient mathematics.

He was a successful and wealthy speculator, spending decades investigating patterns in equities markets. He concluded that equities exhibited a cyclical trend over decades and thus prices could be predicted long in advance.

In 1908, Gann constructed his financial timetable, which tabulated the booms and busts, peaks and troughs of the US equities market. Just like the Geoist land market cycle, there is a repeating 18-year average between every major cycle.

Gann managed to predict the crash of 1929 years in advance. He realised that the timetable would have to be recalibrated on the 25th December 1989.

The updated timetable is amazingly accurate from that date onward, predicting the Dot-Com bubble peak in 2000 and its collapse. The GFC peak was off by one year; 2007 instead of one year earlier in 2006. The trough was in 2009, followed by a minor panic in 2015, when the S&P500 dipped but has since boomed.

According to the timetable, 2020 will be the peak of the equities bubble, followed by a major crash similar to that of the Dot-Com bubble.

To the economists we’ve spoken to, the peak could range between 2019M09 to 2020M03. Given how large the S&P500 bubble has become, it is worth treading very carefully during this period for those exposed to US equities.

Gann is famous for saying: “Every movement in the market is the result of a natural law and of a Cause which exists long before the effect takes place and can be determined years in advance. The future is but a repetition of the past, as the Bible plainly states…”

Due to the ETF revolution, it is a straightforward matter to gain exposure to the S&P500, including leveraged and inverse instruments. It would be even better if the government would enact policies to prevent speculation and subsequent bubbles in the first place. This can be done by banning margin debt and other securities-based loans, and heavily taxing capital gains based on the length of time they were held for (the longer, the less tax).

While the equities market boom has added a great deal of wealth to the balance sheet of US households, it is merely the latest instance in a long line of asset bubbles. No doubt many speculators believe that ‘this time is different’ but the ghost of Gann would argue otherwise.

via http://ift.tt/2pJNVoQ Tyler Durden

Senators Warn DHS About Using Facial Scans on Americans at Airports

face scanningSens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) are teaming up to try to stop the Department of Homeland Security from violating Americans’ privacy with facial recognition scanning programs at airports.

The two senators sent a letter to the DHS over the holiday weekend pointing out that the pilot project begun by President Barack Obama’s administration and continued under President Donald Trump was not intended to be used on U.S. citizens and expressed concerns about flaws with the systems that could result in Americans being denied access to flights.

The DHS has begun scanning the faces of people boarding international flights at a handful of U.S. airports, ostensibly to catch illegal immigrants still in the states on expired visas. There are plans to roll out scanners to all airports eventually.

This program includes scanning the faces of American citizens, not just foreign travelers. This necessarily means the government is attempting to order citizens to participate in intrusive biometric scanning in order to truly prove who we are. Suddenly, passports are not enough.

Americans are permitted to opt out and the images are stored for just two weeks. But over the summer DHS warned that biometric scanning could eventually become mandatory and the images could end up being used for other purposes.

As the letter from Lee and Markey note, Congress authorized the pilot program to scan foreign travelers, but specifically declined to authorize biometric scanning of U.S. citizens.

The two senators are further concerned about the failure rate and flaws with the technology that could result in as many as one in 25 travelers being misidentified by the facial recognition tools and possibly denied the ability to travel.

Their letter coincides with a new report on problems with implementation of biometric scanning in airports by Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy and Technology. The report notes the implementation of the screening program could cost $1 billion, “Yet curiously, neither Congress nor DHS has ever justified the need for the program.”

The explanation for the program has been to help fight visa overstay travel fraud, where a foreign visitor arranges to stay in the country by having an impersonator leave with his or her visa. But, the report notes, the DHS has not adequately studied the extent of this problem nor explained how implementing additional biometric scanning would is needed to stop the problem. In fact, DHS officials have themselves questioned whether such scanning would be useful. It still has not completed a planned study to report on the extent of visa overstay problems and the value of biometric scanning to stop it.

In the meantime, there are obvious and predictable concerns that the images of American citizens collected from biometric scanning will bleed out of DHS’s control and be used for other purposes. American citizens make 50 million trips of year and the Georgetown Law report notes the DHS might extend biometric scans passively into the airports themselves in order to track and identify people.

One neither has to be cynical nor paranoid to see this system being used for purposes other than what the government intended. Just as intrusive searches by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are more likely to help the feds fight its foolish war on drugs rather than a war on terrorism, this scanning would most certainly be applied to other purposes. Every surveillance tool that the government insists is used to protect Americans from foreigners ultimately gets used on Americans too.

Read the Georgetown study here. And check out Shikha Dalmia’s story from Reason magazine’s December issue about how overzealous and misguided immigration law enforcement screws over American citizens.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2l6HoQq
via IFTTT

THE U.S. SHALE OIL INDUSTRY: Swindling & Stealing Energy To Stay Alive

SRSrocco

By the SRSrocco Report,

While the U.S. Shale Energy Industry continues to borrow money to produce uneconomical oil and gas, there is another important phenomenon that is not understood by the analyst community.  The critical factor overlooked by the media is the fact that the U.S. shale industry is swindling and stealing energy from other areas to stay alive.  Let me explain.

First, let’s take a look at some interesting graphs done by the Bloomberg Gadfly.  The first chart below shows how the U.S. shale industry continues to burn through investor cash regardless of $100 or $50 oil prices:

The chart above shows the negative free cash flow for 33 shale-weighted E&P companies.  Even at $100 oil prices in 2012 and 2013, these companies spent more money producing shale energy in the top four U.S. shale fields than they made from operations.  While costs to produce shale oil and gas came down in 2015 and 2016 (due to lower energy input prices), these companies still spent more money than they made.  As we can see, the Permian basin (in black) gets the first place award for losing the most money in the group.

Now, burning through investor money to produce low-quality, subpar oil is only part of the story.  The shale energy companies utilized another tactic to bring in additional funds from the POOR SLOBS in the retail investment community… it’s called equity issuance.  This next chart reveals the annual equity issuance by the U.S. E&P companies:

According to the information in the chart, the U.S. E&P companies will have raised over $100 billion between 2012 and 2017 by issuing new stock to investors.  If we add up the funds borrowed by the U.S. E&P companies (negative free cash flow), plus the stock issuance, we have the following chart:

Thus, the U.S. E&P companies tapped into an additional $212 billion worth of funding over the last six years to produce uneconomical shale oil and gas.  Now, this chart is an approximation based on the negative free cash flow (RED color) from the four top U.S. shale fields and the shale equity issuance (OLIVE color).  So, how much money would these U.S. E&P companies need to make to pay back these funds?

Good question.  If we assume that the U.S. shale oil companies will be able to produce another 10 billion barrels of oil, they would need to make $21 a barrel profit to pay back that $212 billion.  However, they haven’t made any profits in at least the past six years, so why would they make any profits in the next six years?

Okay, now that we understand that the U.S. shale industry has been burning through cash and issuing stock to continue an unprofitable business model, let’s take it a step further.  If we understand that the U.S. shale energy industry is not making enough money from producing the oil and gas, then it also means that it takes more energy to produce it then we are getting from it.  Sounds strange… but true.

We must remember, investors, furnishing U.S. shale energy companies with funds are another way of providing ENERGY.  These U.S. shale energy companies are taking that extra $212 billion (2012-2017) and burning the energy equivalent to produce their oil and gas.  For example, it takes a lot more water to frack oil and gas wells.  To transport the water, we either do it by truck or by pipeline.  While this extra water usage is a Dollar Cost to the shale energy industry, it is really an ENERGY COST.  Think about all the energy it took to either transport the water by truck, or the energy it took to make the pipelines, install them and the energy to pump the water.

Moreover, if we add up all of the additional costs to produce U.S. shale oil and gas, the majority of it comes from burning energy, in one form or another.  Again, investor funds translate to burning energy.  Thus, the U.S. shale industry needs more energy to produce the oil and gas than we get from it in the first place.

Unfortunately, investors don’t see it this way because they do not realize they will never receive their investment back.  It was spent and burned years ago to continue the Great U.S. Shale Energy Ponzi Scheme.

Let me put it in another way.  The U.S. and world economies are based on burning energy.  When we burn energy, we create economic activity and hopefully growth.  If the U.S. shale energy industry needed $212 billion more to produce the oil than they made from operations, then it means it burned more energy than it sent to the market.  Do you see that now??

So, the U.S. shale energy industry is STEALING & SWINDLING energy wherever it can to stay alive.  This is the perfect example of the Falling EROI (Energy Returned On Investment) forcing an industry to CANNABLIZE itself (and the public) to keep from going bankrupt.

Lastly, as time goes by the U.S. shale energy industry will behave like a BLACK HOLE, by sucking more and more energy in to produce even lower and lower quality oil and gas.  At some point, the shale energy industry will collapse upon itself leaving one hell of a mess behind.  While it’s hard to predict the timing of the event, it will likely occur within the next 2-5 years.

Check back for new articles and updates at the SRSrocco Report

via http://ift.tt/2l5qBgE SRSrocco

“This Could Not Have Been Suicide” – Judge Agrees That Argentine Prosecutor Was Murdered

After a team of forensic experts ruled in September that the 2015 shooting death of Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman was, indeed, murder – not suicide as the authorities had initially ruled – a federal judge has validated those findings in a lengthy ruling that seems to point the finger at former Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.

The ruling is the latest blow to Fernandez, who won her bid for a senate seat in October. Though Fernandez has publicly said her decision to run is part of a political comeback, others have speculated that she ran for her senate seat to help insulate herself from accusations of money laundering and corruption, as well as her suspected work to cover up Iran’s role in financing the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires – a bombing that killed 85 people.

Alberto Nisman

Years later, Nisman was assigned to investigate a possible cover-up of Iranian officials’ role in the bombing. But he was found dead of a gunshot wound to the head in January 2015, hours before he was due to testify against former President Fernandez The ruling comes after a prosecutor recommended last year that the case be investigated as a murder.

In another stunning decision, Tuesday’s ruling by the Argentine judge also charged that Diego Lagomarsino, a former employee of Nisman’s, was an accessory to his murder, after a gun owned by Lagomarsino was found near Nisman’s body, as Reuters reported.

In a 656-page ruling, judge Julian Ercolini said there was sufficient proof to conclude that the shot to the head that killed Nisman in January 2015 was not self-inflicted. That marked the first time any judge has said the case was a murder.

 

Fernandez and others had suggested the death was a suicide, but a prosecutor investigating the case last year recommended it be pursued as a murder probe.

 

“Nisman’s death could not have been a suicide,” Ercolini wrote in Tuesday’s ruling, which also charged Diego Lagomarsino, a former employee of Nisman‘s, with accessory to murder.

Lagomarsino has acknowledged lending Nisman the gun that killed him the day before he was to appear before Congress to detail his allegation against Fernandez. But he has said Nisman asked him for the gun to protect himself and his family.

Earlier this month, Fernandez was formally charged with treason by a federal judge, and a federal judge called for her arrest. But before her arrest, Congress would have to vote to strip Fernandez of her immunity.

Meanwhile, her former Foreign Minister, Hector Timerman, was placed under arrest and confined to his home, where he wrote this New York Times op-ed professing his innocence and claiming to be a political prisoner.

In an unrelated case, Fernandez and her two children were indicted back in April on corruption charges related to deals involving a family owned real-estate company.

After leaving office in December 2015 following eight years in power – a period where Argentina’s economy experienced continued decline.

Her successor, the center-right former Mayor of Buenos Aires Mauricio Macri, has swiftly implemented pro-growth economic reforms like abolishing the country’s capital controls and reaching a settlement with a group of US hedge funds led by Paul Singer’s Elliott Management Corporation.

Now, the possibility that Fernandez will be held accountable for her actions is looking increasingly likely.
 

via http://ift.tt/2BYJc8l Tyler Durden

Warren Buffett’s Favorite Indicator Just Flashed a Major Warning

It is clear stocks are in a massive bubble based on their Price to Sale (P/S valuation).

What about the economy?

Warren Buffett once famously stated that his favorite means of valuing stock was the stock market capitalization to GDP ratio.

Below is a chart for this metric. As you can see, the stock market today is as overvalued relative to the economy as it was at the peak of the 1999 Tech Mania.

GPC122717

So stocks are overvalued based on the most reliable corporate data point (revenues) and they are also overvalued relative to the economy. Scratch that, they’re not overvalued… they’re trading at 1999-Tech Bubble insanity levels.

We all remember what came after that…

What's coming will take time for this to unfold, but as I recently told clients of my Private Wealth Advisory report, we're currently in "late 2007" for the coming crisis. However, there is one main difference between 1999 and today…

Namely, that the Fed has been INTENTIONALLY creating bubbles for nearly 20 years today… and it's out of more senior asset classes to use!

Let me explain…

The late ‘90s was the Tech Bubble.

When that burst in the mid-‘00s, the Fed created a bubble in housing.

When that burst in ’08 the Fed created a bubble in US sovereign bonds or Treasuries.

And because these bonds are the bedrock of the US financial system, the “risk-free rate” of return against which ALL risk assets are valued, when the Fed did this it created a bubble in EVERYTHING (hence our coining of the term “The Everything Bubbleand our bestselling book by the same name).

On that note, we are putting together an Executive Summary outlining all of these issues as well as what’s to come when The Everything Bubble bursts.

It will be available exclusively to our clients. If you’d like to have a copy delivered to your inbox when it’s completed, you can join the wait-list here:

http://ift.tt/2zOZC2f

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research

via http://ift.tt/2E28Fem Phoenix Capital Research