Month: July 2024

Thousands of Marylanders are discovering firsthand the dark side of ‘The Next AI Trade,’ in which power grids must be upgraded and expanded to handle increased load demand from AI data centers and other electrification trends. This expansion involves eminent domain and the destruction of farmland and forests.

Strict climate change rules from progressive lawmakers in Annapolis are some of the main drivers in the chaos unfolding across three counties in the blue state, as these rules discourage the development of new fossil fuel power plants, forcing power companies to expand transmission systems to import electricity from surrounding states versus building clean NatGas power generators with carbon capture systems near areas where AI data centers are being constructed. 

Pro-subs are all too familiar with our ‘powering up America’ theme dubbed the “The Next AI Trade.” However, the situation playing out in Maryland has revealed a dark side to this theme, which we were the first to report last week in a note titled “Dark Side Of ‘The Next AI Trade’: Seizing Private Property For Transmission Lines.” 

The evolving situation in Maryland involves a group called “Stop MPRP.” MPRP stands for “Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project,” which is a project that plans to upgrade the region’s 500,000-volt transmission system that runs across three counties: Frederick, Baltimore, and Carroll. The upgrades will ensure enough power is imported from surrounding states to supply new AI data centers coming online in southern Frederick County. 

Stop MPRP has over 8,000 furious Marylanders who are quickly organizing to oppose the MPRP project because they say it’s a massive “land grab that will not benefit our community while devastating businesses, farms, and property values.” 

In recent weeks, hundreds of Marylanders, if not more, in all three counties have met with local government and power company officials to discuss the project – as many are concerned about plunging land values, destruction of farms and forests, and high risk of eminent domain. 

I’m here at another PSEG event about the proposed 70-mile transmission line. The session officially starts at 2, but the lines are already long, and residents are in the building talking w/ reps. Many are concerned about what this project means for their properties & losing money pic.twitter.com/XZMxKhoqvr

— Jessica Babb (@jess_babb) July 11, 2024

Local news WMAR interviewed second-generation farmer Brandon Troy, who said the high-voltage power lines will run directly through his farm. 

“What they basically want to do is come from over the hill there and come straight across everything, come across the crop land, across the wetlands and up in here to our pastures to basically cross us,” Troy told WMAR, adding, “You couldn’t pick a wider swath through our farm.” He warned his property value would tank if these power lines were built. 

In a recent note titled “Maryland ‘Can’t Import Itself Out Of Energy Crisis’ Amid Urgent Need To Boost In-State Power Generation,” we discussed Maryland’s struggling energy utility system. Due to strict green policies, the state attempts to resolve its power crisis by importing energy from neighboring states rather than developing in-state power generation capabilities.

The dark side of the Next AI Trade will involve land grabs, and Marylanders are some of the first to figure out this unfortunate reality. However, we suspect if Annapolis had common sense, there wouldn’t be a need for new massive transmission lines because NatGas power generators could be built down the street from the data centers. 

“Current views along the proposed route,” one landowner said. 

Another person said, “Here is what they intend to ruin for me…” 

“Just a couple of views that we will lose if this happens,” another landowner said. 

Great job, Democrats. Your green policies are backfiring, causing anxiety among landowners.

Just hours after President Biden mentioned in an interview that he would consider dropping out of the presidential race if diagnosed with a “medical condition,” the elderly president tested positive for Covid-19 this afternoon. 

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said President Biden was delivering speeches in Las Vegas when he “experienced mild symptoms.” 

KJP said the president “will be returning to Delaware, where he will self-isolate and will continue to carry out all of his duties fully during that time.”

She noted, “The White House will provide regular updates on the President’s status as he continues to carry out the full duties of the office while in isolation.”

Biden’s doctor reported that the president developed a runny nose and a “non-productive cough” on Wednesday afternoon.

“He felt okay for his first event of the day, but given that he was not feeling better, point of care testing for COVID-19 was conducted, and the results were positive for the COVID-19 virus,” the doctor wrote in a statement shared by the White House. 

The doctor said, “The President has received his first dose of Paxlovid,” adding that Biden’s symptoms “remain mild.” 

Earlier today, the president said in a pre-taped interview with BET News: 

“If I had some medical condition that emerged, if somebody, if doctors came to me and said, you got this problem and that problem.” 

PredictIt data shows Biden’s election odds are cratering once again. 

 

*Developing…

Rare earth mineral companies in China have been stung by declining prices at the same time the government “tightens its grip” on the industry, according to Nikkei Asia.

Companies like Rising Nonferrous Metals, a rare-earth miner listed in Shanghai, are losing money this year, a stark contrast to last year’s profitability. 

The company is blaming “drastic slide in sales prices of its major rare-earth products,” according to the report. They sell dysprosium, terbium and didymium, a mix of neodymium and praseodymium.

This company belongs to central government-owned platform China Rare Earth Group, which was established in December 2021 when three state owned miners merged. It was then designated a “central company”, designating it as controlled by the State Council.

Nikkei reports that another arm of the central company, China Rare Earth Resources and Technology, is also expecting a net loss for 1H 2024. Fuijan province controlled Xiamen Tungsten also said revenue had dropped 22% on the year. 

China holds the world’s largest reserves of 17 rare-earth elements, vital for tech products like smartphones, electric vehicles, wind turbines, and missile defense systems. 

Amid rising U.S. tensions, China is increasingly leveraging these resources. Last month, the central government mandated state control over rare-earth resources to ensure national resource security and industrial security.

This new directive aligns with President Xi Jinping’s focus on a “holistic approach to national security.”

Despite increased sales, suppliers are struggling. Shenghe Resources Holding, supported by the Finance Ministry, forecasts a significant interim net loss, citing a “substantial decline” in rare-earth prices. Shenghe is expanding through acquisitions, notably purchasing Strandline Resources UK for 43 million Australian dollars to gain control over Tanzanian mineral projects.

China Northern Rare Earth (Group) High-Tech, the top rare-earth miner by volume, barely turned a profit in the first half of the year, with a sharp profit decline of 95% to 97%. The company’s board attributes this to falling prices due to higher production, increased imports, and more recycling, while demand growth has lagged.

Authored by Mark Ford via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Years ago, I argued with my libertarian friends about the value of a college education. They saw it as a waste of time and a senseless expenditure of money. They thought this was especially true for anyone who majored in the liberal arts, which was my chosen field.

My argument came from my own experience. In studying literature for nearly seven years, I had developed skills that I believed were invaluable to becoming successful in life, regardless of one’s chosen occupation: analytical thinking, for example, which is necessary for problem-solving, and the ability to speak and write effectively, which is necessary for getting one’s ideas accepted in any competitive environment.

I still believe in the value of those skills and of a liberal arts education in general. But back then, a degree from a public college cost less than $10,000 and a private college might have cost five or six times that much.

Today, it is much, much more expensive. And because it is so high compared with the financial benefits it provides, the cost is no longer justifiable.

So I find myself sympathetic to the charge that a college education has become, for many, a scam.

The Jaw-Dropping Cost

According to U.S. News & World Report, the average tuition for the 2023–2024 school year for a public college is $10,662 for in-state students, with out-of-state tuition averaging $23,630. For private colleges, the average is $42,162, and for elite private colleges, the numbers are worse. On average, elite private colleges exceeded the $90,000-per-year threshold. That’s for one year!

Millions of college students are taking out loans to finance all or part of their expenses. Many of those loans come with relatively high interest rates (6.5 to 7 percent), which makes it increasingly difficult for them to keep up with the payments. Some are simply giving up and declaring personal bankruptcy. Thus, in 2023, bankruptcy filings by young college graduates in the United States hit an all-time high. This is happening at a very inconvenient time—just a few years post-graduation, when these young people are trying to begin their careers and their families.

You might argue that the investment in a college degree, however expensive, will eventually “pay off” because college graduates typically earn more than high school graduates. And that’s true. Male college graduates earn, on average, about $500 per week more than male high school graduates, which amounts to about $900,000 over their lifetimes. (The financial advantage of a college education for women is less, just $630,000 over a lifetime. One study suggests that gender differences in occupation and industry are important to explain the gap, and so are women’s workforce interruptions and shorter hours in high-skilled occupations.)

On the face of that, you might think that getting into $200,000 to $500,000 worth of debt is still “worth it” because of the lifetime financial advantage. However. the debt figures reported are misleading. They don’t include the cost of interest, which, depending on the interest rate and length of the loan, can add another 30 percent to the total indebtedness.

Furthermore, these are gross numbers. And like the numbers used to demonstrate a pay gap between men and women, the comparison is between the average compensation of all men and all women, without accounting for the fields that men choose to enter as compared with women, or how many hours men work as compared with women.

When you measure the pay gap correctly—comparing like professions and like hours—you discover that there is no gap at all.

If, instead of comparing the gross numbers, we compare the average compensation of college graduates versus high school graduates with skills—such as the mechanical trades or the dangerous jobs that are predominantly done by men—it’s a different story. Here’s an example: plumbers versus doctors.

On top of that, some of the world’s biggest companies—including Google, Apple, and Netflix—no longer require a college degree for most new employees. This, according to those businesses, is because so many young people today are able to self-educate in the necessary entry skills and then fill in the gaps after they have been hired.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Authored by Sam Dorman via the Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the Justice Department’s classified documents case against former President Donald Trump on July 15, ruling that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment violated two key provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

In a 93-page ruling, Judge Cannon wrote that Mr. Smith’s prosecution of the former president “breaches two structural cornerstones of our constitutional scheme—the role of Congress in the appointment of constitutional officers, and the role of Congress in authorizing expenditures by law.”

The ruling raises questions about the Justice Department’s use of special counsels.

Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mr. Smith, said the Justice Department had authorized an appeal.

“The dismissal of the case deviates from the uniform conclusion of all previous courts to have considered the issue that the Attorney General is statutorily authorized to appoint a special counsel,” Mr. Carr said in a statement provided to The Epoch Times.

Here are some key takeaways on the ruling and its implications.

Special Counsels and the Appointments Clause

Judge Cannon ruled that Mr. Smith’s position was unconstitutional under the appointments clause of the Constitution, which states that Congress can, through law, allow department heads to appoint “inferior” officers.

The judge ruled that Mr. Smith was an inferior officer, which requires Congress to authorize the attorney general to appoint him as special counsel, which didn’t happen.

Her ruling pointed to how Congress let the Independent Counsel Act, which allowed the Justice Department to appoint special prosecutors, expire in 1999. While Mr. Smith pointed to other laws to justify his appointment, Judge Cannon rejected those arguments.

Judge Cannon’s ruling conflicts with a 2019 judgment by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which upheld former special counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment.

The Florida judge also declared his funding illegitimate in her opinion.

“Special Counsel Smith’s office—since November 2022—has been drawing funds from the Treasury without statutory authorization, in violation of the Appropriations Clause,” she wrote.

The appropriations clause reads, “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”

Judge Cannon said the court “has difficulty seeing how a remedy short of dismissal would cure this substantial separation-of-powers violation, but the answers are not entirely self-evident, and the caselaw is not well developed,” she said.

The ruling is limited to the prosecution of former President Trump in the Southern District of Florida but could be cited in other cases.

Appeal to 11th Circuit

Mr. Smith is expected to appeal Judge Cannon’s decision to dismiss the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. The 11th Circuit will likely hear the case with a three-judge panel, which could either affirm or reject Judge Cannon’s ruling.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if her order is overturned by the Eleventh Circuit or the Supreme Court,” Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, told The Epoch Times in an email. “Justice [Clarence] Thomas is the only justice who seems persuaded by this type of argument.”

Mr. Rahmani was referring to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurrence in Trump v. United States, which held that the former president enjoyed some immunity from criminal prosecution. That concurrence focused on the legality of special counsels and was quoted by Judge Cannon in her July 15 decision.

By contrast, John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both Bush administrations, told The Epoch Times that Judge Cannon’s opinion was “well-reasoned and well-written.”

If the 11th Circuit rejects Judge Cannon’s ruling, it will presumably send the case back to the district court level to continue pretrial proceedings.

Replacement Prosecutor?

While Mr. Smith pursues an appeal, Attorney General Merrick Garland could assign a U.S. attorney to bring charges against the former president in Florida. Doing so would require that attorney to once again obtain an indictment from a grand jury.

The U.S. attorney for that district is Markenzy Lapointe.

Mr. Shu said appointing Mr. Lapointe would be problematic from a public relations perspective for the Justice Department, given that Mr. Garland had justified his appointment of Mr. Smith on the grounds of maintaining “both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters.”

With the appeals process afoot, even if the decision is overturned by a higher court, it is now extremely unlikely that a trial will occur before the November election.

Mr. Shu, who is also a former clerk for the 11th Circuit, said that “if Smith appeals, there’s no way the 11th Circuit can hear this case before the election; it’s not logistically possible.”

Supreme Court Appeal

Mr. Smith could also request that the Supreme Court skip the appellate level and take on Judge Cannon’s dismissal in an expedited fashion. It seems unlikely, however, that the top court would grant that request, given that it refused to do the same for former President Trump’s immunity appeal in his federal election case.

In the event that the 11th Circuit overturns Judge Cannon’s ruling, it is likely that former President Trump will appeal to the Supreme Court.

If the high court takes up an appeal, it would mark the third time that it has taken up a major constitutional question surrounding former President Trump in the 2024 election cycle.

Judge Cannon’s decision added to a year of major court rulings on the nation’s separation of powers.

The 6–3 Supreme Court decision in the Trump v. United States presidential immunity case ordered reconsideration of the issue by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. That case involves former President Trump’s reaction to the 2020 election, as well as his actions leading up to and on Jan. 6, 2021.

“If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people,” Justice Thomas wrote in the majority opinion, referring to the prosecution in Washington. “The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding.”

Read the rest here…

Apple, Nvidia and Salesforce are using content on YouTube to train their AI. 

Subtitles from 173,536 YouTube videos spread across 48,000 YouTube channels were used by these companies as training data despite YouTube’s rules against harvesting information, according to Proof News and Wired. 

The dataset – called YouTube Subtitles – includes transcripts from educational channels like Khan Academy, MIT, and Harvard, as well as media outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, NPR, and the BBC.

Late-night shows like The Late Show, Last Week Tonight, and Jimmy Kimmel Live were also used, thge report says.

Additionally, Proof News found that popular YouTubers like MrBeast, Marques Brownlee, Jacksepticeye, and PewDiePie had their videos included. 

David Pakman, host of The David Pakman Show, which sports more than 2 million subscribers and more than 2 billion views, commented: “No one came to me and said, ‘We would like to use this.” 

“This is my livelihood, and I put time, resources, money, and staff time into creating this content. There’s really no shortage of work,” he added, arguing that if AI companies are paid, he should be compensated for his data.

Dave Wiskus, the CEO of Nebula, didn’t mince words: “It’s theft. Will this be used to exploit and harm artists? Yes, absolutely.” 

The data was part of ‘The Pile’, a compilation of data released that includes content from YouTube, the European Parliament, English Wikipedia and corporate emails. 

Apple utilized the Pile for OpenELM before adding new AI features to its products. Bloomberg and Databricks also leveraged the Pile, according to their publications. Anthropic, an AI company backed by a $4 billion Amazon investment, confirmed its use of the Pile for its AI assistant, Claude, while emphasizing compliance with YouTube’s terms, Wired wrote. 

Salesforce used the Pile for an AI model intended for academic and research purposes, releasing it publicly in 2022. This model has been downloaded over 86,000 times. 

Litigation against companies using unauthorized data for AI training is ongoing. Authors have sued over the use of works in datasets like Books3, another Pile component. Tech companies argue their actions fall under fair use, but legal battles are ongoing.

Read Wired’s full story here. 

Authored by Robert O’Brien & Neil Auerbach via RealClearEnergy,

Energy policy is not just a matter of governing approach, it is fundamental to our national security posture and economic resilience. The United States stands at a crossroads, and it is imperative we adopt an energy strategy that prioritizes our national interests, promotes clean air and water and economic growth, and ensures America’s global leadership. As the former National Security Advisor to President Trump, I have seen firsthand the critical importance of energy policy in safeguarding our national security and economic prosperity. President Trump stands poised to reshape the nation’s energy posture through an “all-of-the-above” energy policy that is right for America.

We cannot ignore the central role that domestic oil and gas production plays in our nation’s economy and that it will continue to do so long into the future.  Thus, we must facilitate further growth of this vital industry by confronting the impact of regulations that stymie growth. In a world where Europe and Asia are striving to stabilize their energy supplies amidst growing demands, the United States’ decision to pause new Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) export approvals has serious implications for global stability. American energy dominance over our adversaries necessitates an approach that spans all sectors. This policy must include dramatic increases in drilling for oil and gas, the restoration of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), which was needlessly drained for political reason, the revitalization of our nuclear power industry, particularly through encouraging the building of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), and a reclaiming of American leadership in the clean energy sector. Such a strong all-of-the-above energy strategy ensures a diversified and secure energy supply and will foster peace and prosperity for America and our allies.

Domestic Production and Regulation

Global energy demand is poised to grow significantly as AI growth, crypto mining, and emerging markets lead to demand for more energy. Despite recent increases in domestic oil production—gains which have occurred in spite of the Biden administration’s policies, not because of them—the United States must continue to increase petroleum production. Under the current administration, we have seen a slew of regulations and prohibitions on drilling on federal lands and offshore. These constraints have stifled what could be a significantly higher American production rate. Without these suffocating regulations, the United States could be producing millions of barrels more per day, reinforcing our energy security and reducing dependency on foreign oil. Energy independence is not just an economic issue, it is a national security imperative given our geopolitical struggles with global production giants – Russia and Iran – and the world’s largest consumer and polluter – China.

Rebranding as an Energy Exporter

The current pause on new LNG export approvals is both an environmental and geopolitical disaster. LNG is a cleaner alternative to coal and oil, and its export can help reduce global carbon emissions while providing a strategic advantage to the United States in global energy markets. Cleaner air and water in the world is dependent on US LNG leadership. Restarting and expanding LNG exports should be a priority for any administration that truly values both the environment and our geopolitical standing. By resuming LNG exports, we can provide our allies with a reliable and clean energy source, reduce their dependence on hostile nations, and strengthen our own economic position. Furthermore, expanding LNG exports will create jobs across the energy and transportation sectors while boosting our GDP, enabling the U.S. to reduce its debt and enhance its economic resilience. Failure to support the growth of the LNG market will be a gold-plated gift to Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Keystone XL Pipeline

One of the first actions of a future Trump administration should be the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, with the goal of completing it by December 2025. This pipeline is crucial for transporting Canadian crude oil to U.S. refineries cleanly, efficiently and safely, enhancing North American energy integration and security. The alternative will be the shipment of Canadian oil from North America across Canada and the Pacific Ocean to be refined in China by the world’s biggest polluter. The Keystone XL pipeline not only represents a significant infrastructure investment but also a step toward energy independence and renewed strength in North American security. Its completion should be a day-one priority and accomplished by the end of the first year of the administration. President Trump demonstrated his ability to lead innovative and complex projects in his first term. A future Trump administration will deliver success for America thru completing the Keystone XL pipeline.

Strategic Petroleum Reserve

The SPR is a critical component of our national security infrastructure. It serves as a buffer against global supply disruptions and ensures that we have access to energy in times of crisis. The Biden administration’s decision to raid the SPR was a shortsighted and politically motivated move to lower gas prices for a news cycle or two, jeopardizing our national security. We must stop raiding the SPR and focus on replenishing it to optimal levels. By maintaining a robust reserve, we can safeguard our energy security and protect our economy from volatile global markets.

Low Carbon Economy and the Role of Nuclear Power

In 2023, low carbon energy sources supplied 40% of global electricity supply, 30% of which came from renewable energy and 10% of which came from nuclear energy. The growth in renewables over the last decade has been spectacular and has been accompanied by significant reductions in cost. Market forces will continue to propel the growth of renewables for decades to come. The share of global electricity supply coming from nuclear energy, on the other hand, has been stagnant, despite the advances in nuclear technology, particularly with SMRs. Fueled by advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and coupled with additional demand from crypto mining, global energy demand is expected to skyrocket through 2050. If the U.S. and the rest of the world are serious about emissions reduction, increasing investment in SMRs is an essential part of a low carbon power generation portfolio. SMRs provide a reliable, low-carbon energy source that can support the increased baseload needs from data centers and other technology-driven sectors. By embracing nuclear power as an integral part of the low carbon economy, we can ensure a stable and sustainable energy supply with incredible flexibility in meeting tomorrow’s energy needs.

All-of-the-Above Approach to Energy Dominance

Embracing an all-of-the-above energy strategy means that the U.S. is true to its core value of promoting competition in markets, and benefits consumers as well as efficient producers. Our fossil fuel industry is the envy of the world and has produced incredible advances in fracking technology. The U.S. also happens to lead the world in reducing the CO2 emissions intensity of its oil and gas sector. The U.S. can and must continue to invest in expanding our global leadership in oil and gas production, which remains a cornerstone of our energy supply, and expand domestic production of clean energy and low-carbon emission solutions, such as wind, solar, hydropower, hydrogen and nuclear—all produced in the United States with equipment manufactured in the United States.

The world needs more energy and fossil fuels will remain the largest contributor to the global energy supply for the foreseeable future. Interestingly, that future holds the exciting possibility that carbon capture and methane abatement technology may effectively erase the dividing line between low-carbon and fossil fuel energy sources as continued technology advances decrease cost and improve efficiency and reliability.

There is no economically rational way to eliminate fossil fuels from our global energy supply. However, as the energy industry continues its inexorable shift in favor of low-carbon energy, the U.S. would be wise to diversify its own energy portfolio.

By diversifying our energy portfolio, we can ensure a stable and affordable energy supply for all Americans. This approach also aligns with our national security interests by reducing our dependence on foreign energy sources and enhancing our energy resilience. The United States has the potential to be as dominant a force in low carbon energy as we are in fossil fuel energy production.

A look back at the history of U.S. involvement in the clean energy sector makes it clear that we took our eye off the ball to our national detriment.  The United States is the birthplace of both the solar and wind industries, dating back to the 1950s and 1980s, respectively.  The U.S. was also once the dominant player in the extraction of rare earth minerals.  However, over the past decade, we have all but ceded dominance of this multi trillion-dollar industry to China for a variety of reasons, including IP theft and unfair trade practices. China’s use of slave labor and currency manipulation has made matters even worse.

As of 2011, the U.S. still maintained a lead over China in installed solar and wind energy, but by 2023, China had installed over three times the capacity as the U.S.  Almost none of that installed capacity in China had U.S. made components whereas China had sizable chunks of our domestic market.  The U.S. must recognize both the threat and the opportunity created by the emergence of China as the dominant clean energy manufacturer and rare earth mineral producer. 

Addressing China’s Role in Global Emissions

China is the root of global CO2 emission problems. While the United States has been a leader in reducing carbon emissions, China continues to be the world’s largest polluter. The United States should not pursue unachievable climate initiatives that harm our national and economic security. Instead, we should focus on pragmatic solutions that enhance our energy security and maintain our leadership in emission reductions. By holding China accountable for its emissions and promoting American innovation, we can lead the world in sustainable energy practices.

The United States has abundant mineral resources critical to the low-carbon economy. Chinese dominance of both manufacturing and mineral extraction and processing for the low-carbon economy is a geopolitical concern that is rapidly becoming a geopolitical threat to the future. By unleashing American innovation and production of clean technologies, we can export these products around the world, both reducing emissions globally and reducing China’s stranglehold on clean energy supply chains. President Trump’s record proves he is the right person at the right time to address the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party and Chairman Xi.

Conclusion

Republicans can adopt a winning energy policy and political strategy by emphasizing market-driven solutions that support our national interests over government mandates. The United States has been blessed from on high with abundant energy resources in both fossil fuels and renewables, and a diverse energy policy will lower domestic energy costs while strengthening our position as a net energy exporter. By focusing on energy security and pragmatic environmental stewardship, we can ensure a prosperous and secure future for America and our friends.

Market realities must drive Republicans back to a renewed sense of enthusiasm for an “all-of-the-above” energy policy that recognizes the importance of the low-carbon sector to our economy without forsaking oil and gas resources, as the Biden administration has. This approach will allow the United States to dominate the world’s energy markets once again. This strategy will lead to cleaner air and water for our people, while at the same time delivering economic prosperity and national security to our country. Ours is a commonsense approach to integrating our national security, energy security, economic and environmental interests, and is certain to appeal to voters across the political spectrum. It is a winning message for the GOP to take into November.

Robert O’Brien served as the 27th U.S. National Security Advisor from 2019-2021.

Neil Auerbach is the founder and CEO of Hudson Sustainable Group, an investor in sustainable energy, and a former partner of Goldman Sachs. Neil is a senior advisor for the American Conservation Coalition. 

So much for the “broadening out of the rally” bullshit!

Semis were slammed – their biggest drop since the COVID lockdowns – as the market had trouble with weaker than expected 3Q guidance from European semi bellwether, ASML (and headline chatter of further crackdowns on chip exports to China)

Source: Bloomberg

The Nasdaq damn broke today as it suffered its biggest single-day drop since Dec 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

Small Caps actually had a down day today (though outperformed Nasdaq) as The Dow hit a new record high…

The last five days have seen Small Caps (Russell 2000) outperform Large Caps (Russell 1000) by the largest amount in history (going back to 1979)…

Source: Bloomberg

The Magnificent 7 stocks have lost a staggering $1.1 Trillion in market cap in the last five days…

Source: Bloomberg

But that’s still a drop in ocean in context of how far they have come…

Source: Bloomberg

Under the hood, Goldman’s trading desk noted that volumes +17% vs the trailing 20 days and can feel it flow-wise on the desk. S&P top of book tracking much higher as well +11%. Our floor is skewed much better for sale (-8%) with most moving their feet in TMT. Across Semis, we have seen significant supply most concentrated in AI winners. We have also seen supply across rideshare names (UBER, LYFT) + ADRs.

• LO activity concentrated in tech, followed by Hcare but slow elsewhere.

• HFs also moving their feet in tech, but also active across Consumer Discretionary on the buy side, vs selling Fins, and Hcare. Short ratios elevated across staples.

For context, in cumulative notional terms, the de-grossing activity over the past 5 sessions is the largest since Nov ’22 and ranks in the 99th percentile on a 5-year lookback…

Dovish comments from Fed’s Waller were largely ignored – though did provide some juice for the initial short squeeze on Small Caps at the cash open…

Source: Bloomberg

Treasuries were mixed today with the long-end very modestly outperforming overall (2Y +1bps, 30Y -1bps). Weakness overnight gave way to a strong bid during the US session as equities sold off…

Source: Bloomberg

Rate-cut expectations remained dovish with 2025 expectations rising today…

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar tumbled further below June Payrolls lows today, back near two-month lows…

Source: Bloomberg

Much of the dollar weakness was the further implosion of the yen carry trade (which strengthens the yen vs the dollar)…

Source: Bloomberg

Crude prices soared today, helped by a big inventory decline…

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin ETFs continued to see stronger inflows…

Source: Bloomberg

But bitcoin was weighed down modestly today by the overall tech turbulence (notably strong relative performance though)…

Source: Bloomberg

Gold dipped back from record highs but spot found support at $2450…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, if you thought you had a bad day in the markets, President Biden’s odds of getting the nomination collapsed… again…

Source: Bloomberg

Kamala’s awful quiet, eh?

You know it’s bad when…

While California Democratic Party Rep. Adam Schiff may not be the most honest broker of information (to say the very least), he is an almost perfect indicator of the ‘Deep State’ narrative direction. And given that is the case, President Biden has a problem – a big problem.

Following President Biden’s reportedly ‘unhinged rant’ last night, Schiff said, in a statement reviewed by the Los Angeles Times:

The “choice to withdraw from the campaign is President Biden’s alone… A second Trump presidency will undermine the very foundation of our democracy, and I have serious concerns about whether the President can defeat Donald Trump in November.“

Furthermore, according to a report from the New York Times, Schiff said during a private meeting with donors on Saturday:

“I think if he is our nominee, I think we lose… And we may very, very well lose the Senate and lose our chance to take back the House.”

Schiff called on Biden to “pass the torch,” joining a growing number of Democratic heavyweights urging Biden to step aside in favor of a nominee better able to beat former President Donald Trump.

Of course, Schiff is not alone, as Axios reports, a whopping 65% of Democrats believe President Biden should withdraw from the 2024 presidential race and let the party pick a different nominee, according to an AP-Norc poll out Wednesday.

The results based on a survey of 1,253 adults also fly in the face of Biden’s own claim that the “average voter” wants him to stay in the race.

Matt Margolis reports, via PJMedia that in response to Schiff’s comments, Biden’s campaign highlighted strong support from members of Congress, noting that only a few have publicly opposed his candidacy.

The campaign also emphasized backing from groups like the Congressional Black Caucus – essentially proving the point Schiff made to donors in criticizing the Biden campaign for ignoring outside pollsters and experts and only listening to those who are telling the campaign what it wants to hear.

Several Democratic strategists have also said that the presidential election has “ended” and are urging Democrats to focus on down-ballot races in the hopes of flipping the House and holding the Senate.

And the prediction markets’ odds for Biden as the nominee have plunged today, post-Schiff comments:

Meanwhile,Trump enjoys high support from within his own party.

Only 26% of Republicans think he should exit the race and let the GOP pick a different candidate, while 73% of Republicans want him to keep running.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

President Joe Biden and the Democratic Party insist that “Democracy is on the ballot” this election.

While some of us have challenged that hyperbolic claim, one thing that may not be on the ballot is choice, if the defenders of Democracy have anything to say about it.

Georgia Democrats have joined counterparts in other states to prevent citizens from being able to vote third-party candidates.

Months ago, I wrote a column about how Democrats have continued to try to block voters from being able to vote for candidates while claiming the mantle of the defenders of Democracy.

This effort not only included Democratic Secretaries of State attempting to remove former president Donald Trump from the ballots, but efforts in the primary from the ballot.

Many of these Democrats now calling for a “blitz primary” previously said nothing as voters were barred from having a choice in the primary.

North Carolina joined this effort recently to block third-party candidates to avoid “mischief.”

Georgia Democrats are challenging efforts to place Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and three other candidates on the state’s presidential ballots.

With Biden struggling in the polls and the vast majority of voters viewing him as too enfeebled to serve another four years, Democrats are rushing to reduce the choices for voters.

Democratic Party of Georgia Executive Director Tolulope Kevin Olasanoye insists that Kennedy, independent Cornel West, Claudia De la Cruz of the Party for Socialism and Liberation and Jill Stein of the Green Party “have not faithfully observed the state of Georgia’s election laws.” 

All of them must go.

For voters who may not be thrilled with Trump, the Democrats insist that all is well.

To paraphrase Henry Ford, you can have any choice of candidate so long as it is Biden.