Month: February 2025

Authored by Paul D. Thacker via The DisInformation Chronicle,

I can’t tell you exactly what is going on, whether politics has so blinded Francis Collins and other researchers to the law, or whether scientists now feel comfortable and relaxed about behaving like criminals and lying to Congress. But something is definitely wrong. When I was a Senate investigator 15 years back, researchers were careful to not lie to Congress.

But since both Tony Fauci and Scripps Kristian Andersen have been caught lying to Congress without facing consequences, this has apparently emboldened Francis Collins to also lie. Collins remains employed at the NIH so I contacted him at his government email, asking him to explain the false information filed with Congress.

Collins did not respond to explain himself.

Collins sent a letter to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic filled with ticky-tacky complaints about their final report that concluded the National Institutes of Health, through Tony Fauci, funded gain-of-function virus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology—the same lab the CIA believes likely started the pandemic.

Filing material misrepresentations with Congress is illegal and actionable under the law so I can’t explain why Collins sent this letter filled with falsehoods. Normally when Congress releases a report people named in that report just hide, hoping nobody notices they were named.

But I’m guessing Collins sees himself as clever and thinks he is creating a paper trail that he can cite as “proof” that Congress is wrong and he was right about several documented mistakes he made handling the pandemic.

Here’s how Collins’ lawyers frame the intent of this ridiculous letter they sent to Congress:

We do so to highlight some of the Final Report’s material misrepresentations regarding the public health mitigation strategies employed during the pandemic and its mischaracterizations of Dr. Collins’ actions and motivations during the pandemic.

Sending this letter was ill-advised, because the letter itself contains “material misrepresentations regarding the public health mitigation strategies employed during the pandemic”—the very issue that Collins pretends to address. Tony Fauci actually had two referrals sent to the Justice Department because he got caught lying to Congress.

Here’s the paragraph filled with numerous misleading statements in Collins’ letter:

The Final Report also fly-specks studies to support its broad conclusion that face masks do not work at all to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. See, e.g., Final Report, p. 204. To support this conclusions [sic], the Select Subcommittee’s Final Report relies heavily on a review by the Cochrane Collection, published in January 2023. Despite the authors cautioning that “[t]he high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions,” that is precisely what the Final Report does. The Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, Dr. Karla Sores- Weiser, has herself provided clarifications about that study that correct the types of misinterpretations in the Final Report.4 Specifically, Dr. Soares-Weiser noted that while “[m]any commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that ‘masks don’t work’” such statement is “an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.”5 Dr. Sores-Weiser went so far as issuing an apology for the wording of the Report which was “open to misinterpretation.”6 The Final Report compounds this misinterpretation by ignoring the weight of evidence regarding masking. A systematic review of mask-related studies reveals that: (1) more studies determined that masks and mask mandates reduced infection, and (2) wearing masks generally reduced COVID-19 transmission.7

Several false and misleading statements stray from reality. Let’s examine.

COLLINS: ….the Cochrane Collection, published in January 2023. Despite the authors cautioning that “[t]he high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions,” that is precisely what the Final Report does.

REALITY: The Cochrane Review examined whether masks stopped viruses and did conclude that it was difficult to draw “firm conclusions.” But Collins’ inverts the meaning of this finding and deceptively implies this means “go ahead use masks.” This is false and misleading.

Both Kristian Andersen and Tony Fauci were caught lying to Congress–a 1001 violation. Francis Collins joins this esteemed group.

Of course, there’s a new administration, @USAEdMartin and they might just prosecute this time. https://t.co/XHmdkO22AQ pic.twitter.com/lbb2Kfaxin

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) February 27, 2025

For example, if a systematic review finds no “firm conclusions” that a drug stops heart attacks, that finding doesn’t mean “keep giving people the drug.” That finding means “stop giving the drug, because there’s no evidence that the drug stops heart attacks.”

Because every drug has unforeseen side effects, and if it’s not benefitting it could actually be harmful.

This is the same with masks. The Cochrane finding of no “firm conclusions” masks stop viruses means stop using masks to stop viruses. In fact, we know they can be harmful to child development and the CDC concluded years ago that wearing masks can cause harm in other ways.

COLLINS: The Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, Dr. Karla Sores- Weiser, has herself provided clarifications about that study that correct the types of misinterpretations in the Final Report.4 Specifically, Dr. Soares-Weiser noted that while “[m]any commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that ‘masks don’t work’” such statement is “an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.”5 Dr. Sores-Weiser went so far as issuing an apology for the wording of the Report which was “open to misinterpretation.”6

REALITY: Again, more misleading statements about Cochrane.

Dr. Karla Soares-Weiser did issue a statement about the Cochrane mask review, but emails show she did this only because she was facing pressure from columnist Zeynep Tufekci, a film studies major now pretending to be a pandemic expert for the New York Times. Furthermore, Soares-Weiser’s statement was also misleading, and this pissed off scientists inside Cochrane.

The editor of the Cochrane mask review even sent an email to Cochrane officials pointing out that the review was scientifically sound and changes that Soares-Weiser suggested were only being considered because of media pressure from people like Tufekci. Here’s his email:

Collins also failed to tell the Committee something else about the Cochrane mask review. Earlier this year, Soares-Weiser backtracked, issuing a second statement that confirmed there would be no changes to the mask review.

So why did Collins fail to give a complete and honest explanation of the Cochrane mask review? Why did he mislead the Committee? I can’t answer that. And Collins refuses to explain.

However, Cochrane’s lead author on the mask review sent a letter to the Committee, appraising them of several misleading statements in Collins’ letter and walking them through Collins’ falsehoods. “Therefore, I consider the statement on the public record by lawyers acting on behalf of Dr. Francis S. Collins regarding our Cochrane review is misleading and requires correction,” wrote Dr. Tom Jefferson to the Committee.

I sent Jefferson’s letter to both lawyers at Arnold and Porter —Catherine A. Brandon and John N. Nassikas—asking them about the false and misleading information they had filed with Congress. “As I’m sure you’re both aware,” I wrote, “misleading statements are actionable under 1001.”

But neither lawyer responded.

It’s strange that Collins would send a letter to committee filled with lies. And it makes no sense because it doesn’t do anything but create more potential headaches if the Department of Justice decides to take action. But maybe scientists feel so confident after getting away with lies during the pandemic, they now see no other path in front of them that is not littered with other lies as well?

However, Trump officials may feel it’s time to put an end to these lies and start prosecuting people for misleading Congress.

The negative economic fallout from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is beginning to take hold and could unleash a severe financial crisis across the Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia area—home to the federal bureaucracy of Deep State elites. Jobless claims in DC are soaring, a surge in the number of homes and condominiums is hitting the market, and DOGE spending cuts will ricochet through the local economy.

Earlier this week, Dominic Konstam, head of macro strategy at Mizuho, asked: “DoGE-led recession risk?” 

The market is focused on a negative economic fallout from Federal spending cuts. The level of potential Federal job losses is too small to derail growth, but overall government spending has been egregiously high in recent years. There has also been excessive job growth in the “government” sectors, including federal, state, and local government, as well as in education and health. If DoGE sets a precedent on jobs and achieves spending cuts that ricochet through the quasi-public sector, it is likely that new economic headwinds will develop. ​​

To answer Konstam’s question above, absolutely! 

On Thursday morning, Torsten Slok, chief economist at Apollo, joined Bloomberg TV, warning, “The consensus expects total DOGE-related job cuts to be 300,000 … However, studies show that for every federal employee, there are two contractors.” He added: “As a result, layoffs could potentially be closer to 1 million.” 

Now apocalyptic government data reveals a dramatic collapse in US government transfer payments “to the rest of the world” (say goodbye to USAID). Reduced transfers mean higher savings and a fiscal shift ahead—a strong step toward taming inflation and reining in out-of-control Washington spending (or money laundering). However, this shift comes at a steep cost: DC recession for political elites. 

The first step to fixing the US economy is here: US govt transfer payments “to the rest of the world” collapse (i.e. goodbye USAID), and the overall US savings rate soars

More of this. Much more of this pic.twitter.com/LHSTKDeXoC

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 28, 2025

DOGE cuts will likely add pressure to the Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia commercial real estate in office. 

CRE data company Trepp shows the federal gov’t accounts for about 10% of all CRE buildings across the DC metro area. 

“The DC office market is wiped out,” Ben Miller, CEO of Fundrise, a Washington-based property investment platform, told Bloomberg. “Almost no office has equity value.“

Miller said the DOGE-related downturn in the area will only make things worse for the CRE DC office market. He compared the situation unfolding to what happened in the 2008 financial crisis in New York City. 

“The biggest employer in DC is shutting down the government,” he said, adding, “So where other cities have only one problem — work from home — DC has two.”

Nationwide, the US General Services Administration, which oversees the leasing and management of government buildings, spends about $5 billion annually on rent for roughly 144 million square feet of office space—one-third the size of Manhattan’s entire office market.

According to Bloomberg’s analysis of GSA data, DOGE-related office cuts totaled about $100 million, and a billion dollars of active office leases have either expiration or termination dates before 2025. GSA data shows another $385 million of US office leases could be on the cutting block later this year.

Thanks. 

Cool https://t.co/tzWZ6hYDcH

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 28, 2025

This is what draining the swamp looks like—a mandate the American people gave to President Trump. All signs point to economic storm clouds rapidly gathering over DC for the political class.

Just days after calling him a ‘dictator without elections,’ President Donald Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House on Friday, where the two discussed US efforts to end the war in Ukraine, and discuss the minerals deal.

According to Trump, there’s a ‘very fair deal’ on the table, which would allow the US to use Ukraine’s rare earths for AI and military applications. Trump said that once the minerals deal is done, the war will be over, and “Russia won’t want to return.”

Zelensky, apparently not a historian, said that Putin ‘began the war’ and ‘has to pay,’ while Trump says he’s “in the middle” regarding the war, adding “I’m for both Ukraine and Russia.” Trump also added that he’s committed to NATO.

More headlines from the meeting:

• TRUMP: WE ARE GOING TO TAKE RARE EARTHS AND USE IT FOR ALL WE DO, INCLUDING AI AND MILITARY WEAPONS
• TRUMP: WE WILL HAVE ARMS TO UKRAINE
• TRUMP: HOPEFULLY WE WON’T HAVE TO SEND MUCH
• TRUMP: YOU WON’T GO BACK TO FIGHTING
• TRUMP: WILL SIGN MINERALS DEAL TODAY
• ZELENSKIY: MINERALS DEAL IS NOT ENOUGH
• ZELENSKIY: DOCUMENT IS A GOOD START BUT NOT ENOUGH

The day before the meeting, Trump softened his tone on the ‘dictator’ comment, saying that he now has a “lot of respect” for the Ukrainian leader (who’s canceled elections, banned the Orthodox Church, and outlawed non-USAID propaganda media).

Earlier, Zelensky said he met with a bipartisan US Senate delegation, which he described as “an important visit to the United States.”

“We take pride in having strategic partners and friends like the United States. We are grateful for the unwavering bicameral and bipartisan support for Ukraine throughout all three years of Russia’s full-scale aggression,” he said on X.

An important visit to the United States. In Washington, I met with a bipartisan delegation from the U.S. Senate.

Our discussions focused on the continued military assistance for Ukraine, relevant legislative initiatives, my meeting with President Trump, efforts to achieve a just… pic.twitter.com/KJcosUpygc

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) February 28, 2025

Developing…

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

There is a chilling case of censorship out of Clarksdale, Mississippi, where a court ordered a local newspaper to delete a publication that the city claimed was libelous. 

It is not clear that The Clarksdale Press Register editorial by publisher Floyd Ingram did constitute libel. Ultimately, the city backed down, but the actions of both the local officials and the court remain troubling.

Ingram’s article, “Secrecy, Deception Erode Public Trust,” criticized the mayor and city council of Clarksdale for the lack of public notice before it passed a resolution to establish a 2 percent tax on retailers selling alcohol, tobacco, hemp, and marijuana.

Ironically, Ingram supported the “sin tax” to support “public safety, crime prevention, and continuing economic growth in the city.” 

However, he objected that, before the government “sent [the] resolution to the Mississippi Legislature,” it “fail[ed] to go to the public with details about this idea.” 

He added,  “Maybe [city commissioners] just want a few nights in Jackson to lobby for this idea—at public expense.”

The city went ballistic. 

The city council voted unanimously to sue the Press-Register for libel. Mayor Chuck Espy declared “I would like for the record to reflect, even though I did not vote, I am in full support, and I am fully vested in the decisions that the four commissioners unanimously said.”

Of course, these politicians could set the record straight by simply responding publicly to the allegations. Interestingly, the clerk appeared to confirm that the public notice on the resolution was a snafu. During the litigation, the clerk confirmed that “I customarily e-mail the media any Notice of Special Meeting. However, I inadvertently failed to do so.”

So, the premise of the column was confirmed. While I understand the sensitivity over the suggestion of a desire to travel to Jackson, that line is clearly protected opinion.

On February 13, the city council voted unanimously to sue the Press-Register for libel over its editorial. “I would like for the record to reflect,” added Mayor Chuck Espy, “even though I did not vote, I am in full support, and I am fully vested in the decisions that the four commissioners unanimously said.”

Judge Crystal Wise Martin of the Chancery Court of Hinds County ruled in favor of a temporary restraining order that required the paper to “remove the article…from their online portals and make it inaccessible to the public.”

Epsy celebrated the decision, posting “THANK GOD! The City of Clarksdale WON today! The judge ruled in our favor that a newspaper cannot tell a malicious lie and not be held liable….Thank You, God, for a judicial system.”

The role of the government in bringing a libel action is particularly controversial and chilling. In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court observed that “for good reason, ‘no court of last resort in this country has ever held, or even suggested, that prosecutions for libel on government have any place in the American system of jurisprudence.’”

The Court added that such a role “has disquieting implications for criticism of governmental conduct…A State cannot under the First and Fourteenth Amendments award damages to a public official for defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves ‘actual malice’—that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false.”

The actions of both the city council and the court run counter to this precedent, and in my view, they could have been appealed successfully.

H/T: Joe Lancaster

A recession is imminent…

The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNOW model  – forecasting US economic growth – just downgraded its estimate of Q1 2025 GDP growth (or lack of it) from +2.3% to -1.5%…

After recent releases from the US Bureau of Economic Analysis and the US Census Bureau, the nowcast of the contribution of net exports to first-quarter real GDP growth fell from -0.41 percentage points to -3.70 percentage points while the nowcast of first-quarter real personal consumption expenditures growth fell from 2.3 percent to 1.3 percent.

Put a different way, spending less on transsexual Guinea pigs in Bora Bora means US GDP gets hit.

It does make us wonder how a ‘model’ of economic growth can swing 380bps into contraction from trend growth in a week… but hey, propagandists gonna propaganda.

Who could have seen this coming?

Well we did!

Here’s the bigger play at hand, and why there is only token pushback to DOGE.

You cut enough spending – even if it’s all grift and fraud – you eventually get a recession, guaranteed. That’s all Congress is waiting for cause then they use the “emergency” to vote through a far…

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 8, 2025

And here is Mizuho’s Dominic Konstam just yesterday confirming the narrative perfectly…

DoGE-led recession risk?

The market is focused on a negative economic fall out from Federal spending cuts. The level of potential Federal job losses are too small to derail growth but overall government spending has been egregiously high in recent years. There has also been excessive job growth in the “government+” sectors including federal, state and local government and in education and health. If DoGE sets a precedent on jobs and achieves spending cuts that ricochet through the quasi-public sector, it is likely that new economic headwinds will develop.

The Fed is not cutting rates anytime soon but that restrictive policy stance bodes well for inflation containment.  There are clearly still “seasonal” related bumps in inflation but we are a far cry from any trend rise in inflation. We remain confident that the disinflationary process is intact, more so with the Fed on hold.

The real focus is on what kind of “new” economic order is in store for the global economy. We lay out a framework for Trump 2.0 that rests on two key principles: rebalancing trade and lowering rates.  We see a tariff regime with different dollar outcomes as juxtaposed to a more cordial Bretton Woods 2 (BW2)/ Mar-a-Lago accord that overlays new (global) fiscal priorities and includes the debt-for-security swap. We show that market pricing is not too far off assigning a relatively large weight to a tariff outcome with stronger dollar. With growth headwinds the Fed will be able to get-off-pause, easing once disinflation resumes.

The curve has retained much of its steepness despite the belly more recently driving curve direction (bullish flattening/bear steepening 210s). We think the recent flattening “relief” reflects an appropriate repricing against the bear steepening fears initially triggered around Trump 2.0. Our yield curve analysis in the context of likely net supply outcomes and Fed reaction do allow for further curve re-steepening but only bullishly, on a sustained basis. Net supply alone doesn’t (bearishly) steepen the curve much. A proper bear steepening with the Fed priced not to cut much, requires a shift higher in Fed expectations. This in turn would likely need to reflect rising inflation expectations and a Fed unwilling to hike. At least for the Powell Fed this seems unlikely, in our view.

Our preferred view is that we will get more tariffs with a strong dollar. Despite the headline rhetoric, the effective tariff rate is still likely to be diluted (closer to 10 than 30 percent, that’s what reciprocity means!) – the one-off price impact is less than otherwise. With growth headwinds mounting, we think investors should accumulate duration on yield set back with the curve still being pressured flatter. Come q2 we expect this to segue into bullish steepening on resumed disinflation.

February was an absolute shitshow for macro data with inflation surprising to the upside and growth drastically surprising to the downside. Put together, they form the Fed’s nemesis – Stagflation!

All of which could be seen as good news for Trump: he can impose tariffs (inflation) AND the Fed will be forced to cut rates (growth).

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Trump adviser Elon Musk and the White House have criticized media reports about 21 civil service employees resigning from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on Feb. 25.

DOGE, created by Trump by renaming the existing United States Digital Service (USDS), is tasked with rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse in federal operations. Reducing staff numbers and limiting hiring are also part of the targeted cost-cutting efforts.

In a joint resignation letter, a copy of which was obtained and reported on Feb. 25 by The Associated Press (AP), the 21 staffers said they were refusing to use their technical expertise to “dismantle critical public services.”

“We swore to serve the American people and uphold our oath to the Constitution across presidential administrations,” they wrote. “However, it has become clear that we can no longer honor those commitments.”

Musk, who leads DOGE, responded to the AP report on social media platform X, calling it “fake news” and “propaganda.”

“These were Dem political holdovers who refused to return to the office,” the businessman wrote. “They would have been fired had they not resigned.”

In a statement, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was dismissive of the mass resignation.

“Anyone who thinks protests, lawsuits, and lawfare will deter President Trump must have been sleeping under a rock for the past several years,” Leavitt said.

“President Trump will not be deterred from delivering on the promises he made to make our federal government more efficient and more accountable to the hardworking American taxpayers.”

In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, Harrison Fields, the White House principal deputy press secretary, said the issue was an example of inaccurate reporting.

“Democrats and the mainstream media have once again gone off the deep end with their breathlessly inaccurate reporting on President Trump’s widely popular mission to rid the federal government of waste, fraud, and abuse,” Fields said.

“DOGE has effectively become part of the USDS as a component of the White House, and any leftover career bureaucrats who don’t align with the President or DOGE are neither advised nor welcomed to be a part of this never-before-seen mission to make the government more efficient.”

Musk and DOGE have been hit with multiple lawsuits seeking to stymie its operations.

Musk also recently drew criticism after the Office of Personnel Management sent an email to government workers over the weekend asking them to provide a bullet-point list of their accomplishments, with Musk commenting on social media that those who do not respond will face termination.

There is no official tally for the total firings and layoffs to date. Still, a review of various reports suggests that it is at least 20,000 people, with an additional 75,000 people accepting deferred resignations, bringing the total affected to nearly 100,000.

The Associated Press and Tom Ozimek contributed to this report.

Authored by Aaron Gifford via The Epoch Times,

Feb. 28 is the deadline for public school districts to end all DEI-related practices, policies, and curricula or risk losing federal funding under President Donald Trump’s executive order enforcing Civil Rights protections.

The U.S. Department of Education has not yet specified the next steps for sanctioning schools following the deadline and hasn’t disclosed whether any districts proactively contacted the federal agency with proof of compliance.

“Additional guidance on implementation is forthcoming,” Craig Trainor, the agency’s acting assistant director for Civil Rights, wrote via email to The Epoch Times.

Trainor’s Feb. 14 letter provided to states and school districts noted the 14-day deadline for ceasing DEI programs.

He called race-based preferential treatment, crude racial stereotypes, and practices that promote segregation within a school “a shameful echo of a darker period in this country’s history.”

“The department will no longer tolerate the overt and covert racial discrimination that has become widespread in this nation’s educational institutions,” the letter reads.

“The law is clear: treating students differently on the basis of race to achieve nebulous goals such as diversity, racial balancing, social justice, or equity is illegal under controlling Supreme Court precedent.”

That prompted a lawsuit from the American Federation of Teachers and the American Sociological Association.

The Feb. 25 complaint, filed in a Maryland federal court, seeks to bar enforcement of Trump’s anti-DEI policy on grounds that it is overly vague and violates free speech rights.

The Epoch Times has previously reported that the five largest school districts in the nation (serving New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Las Vegas) collectively stand to lose more than $5 billion in federal funding if they don’t end DEI practices.

The deadline falls at the same time that many public school districts are planning their 2025–2026 budgets. Federal money typically makes up about 10 percent of a local district’s annual spending plan.

Federal funding from the U.S. Education Department is provided to schools with low-income student populations and covers special education programs.

The agency has also provided billions of dollars in competitive grants for curricula and staffing, many of which were centered on DEI and prioritized under the Biden administration.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture funds free and reduced meals for low-income students at school.  During the 2022–23 academic year, more than half of K-12 public school students were eligible for free or reduced meals, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

The Virginia-based Parents Defending Education organization constantly monitors public school activities related to DEI and transgender ideology.

As of Feb. 25, 22,805 schools serving more than 14 million students across 46 states and Washington, still maintain DEI policies, practices, and plans, according to the organization’s website.

The website provides links to DEI-related materials on the websites for each of the districts identified.

“School districts need to end diversity, equity, and inclusion policies and return to the original charter of educating children,” Rhyen Staley, a PDE researcher, wrote in a public statement.

“DEI has been a disaster for K–12, and the results are evident, as roughly 70 percent of American K–12 students are not proficient in reading or math.”

Authored by Peter Tchir via AcademySecurities.com,

Tariffs, AI, Crypto, Sentiment, Rates and the Economy

We plan to cover much of this in the weekend report, but given the magnitude of the moves this week, we want to review where we stand ahead of Friday’s trading.

We did get to cover some of this on Wednesday on Bloomberg TV (starts at the 52 minute mark)…

…but here is a quick summary.

Tariffs

A lot of confusing messaging this week, some of which has to be corrected. 

The negative news is that tariffs seem likely to be imposed, and even if they get relieved later on, some damage to the economy will be done. Mexico did deliver some cartel leaders to the U.S., so maybe they get another reprieve, which would be good for markets, but as a whole, my view is that no matter how tariffs  play out, they are impacting the global economy negatively. Decisions are being made to front run them (which artificially propped up some data) but will leave companies somewhat frozen in terms of hiring decisions.

AI

The risks and rewards in the AI space are shifting. Speaking with Academy’s General (ret.) Groen (former head of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Committee) he pointed out two trends, which are very good for companies and the economy, but I think will shift how investors invest:

• The shift to “inference” models from LLM’s. LLM’s were all the rage, but despite some excitement about how quickly they can summarize things and improve search, it is unclear how much impact they have in the real world. Add in hallucination risk and it is even less clear. Inference models are not as fast, but are more detailed.

• Custom designed tactical implementations. We don’t need to base decisions on everything in the world wide web. We need to run this factory, for example, more efficiently. What can AI do that either humans cannot do, cannot do quickly enough, or we don’t have enough humans to do?

AI is growing and evolving rapidly as is how it is used. That could continue to reshape how investors invest and who gains and who loses from that shift. Cheaper AI should in theory let more companies, including smaller companies benefit.

Crypto

The wealth effect from crypto is real, and all too often ignored by “traditional” economists. Bitcoin is down a lot, but the “alt” coin world has been hit even harder. I think there will be continued pressure on bitcoin until a couple of things are “resolved”

• Is MSTR trading at an “appropriate” valuation relative to its bitcoin holdings. This is crucial because the premium was pumped by inclusion in the Nasdaq 100 (forced buying) and the popularity of the single stock leveraged ETFs (MSTU and MSTX have a combined $1.5 billion in AUM, even after major price declines). An allegedly popular arbitrage trade is to short the company and own bitcoin (or the bitcoin ETFs, which is the preferred method for margining, mark to market, etc.). As the premium declines, people take off that trade, putting pressure on bitcoin.

• Are “only” meme coins, rug pulls? The backlash against meme coins is real. It, ironically, pushed some people into bitcoin, which the maximalists tout s the only way to invest in crypto. That could provide support, or could, investors start asking what the difference between bitcoin is and the coins that have rug pulled of late? Again, if you want to make your head hurt, look for tweets about bitcoin gain and bitcoin yield in relation to publicly traded companies and delve into the comment section. The tweets themselves are confusing (to me) but the comment sections are something to digest.

With crypto weak, it is going to be difficult (not impossible, but difficult) for some segments of the stock market to do well. Those that tend to have cross ownership with crypto. It may also hurt the economy as significant wealth has dissipated in recent weeks.

Sentiment

According to indicators like the CNN Fear and Greed Index and AAII Investor Sentiment Survey we have moved to high levels of fear. Normally positive as a contrarian.

However, when I check on some of the frothiest ETFs (see the aforementioned 2x etfs, amongst others) I see evidence that investors have been buying the dip all week.

Maybe buy the dip will work, but we haven’t seen a good capitulation in quite some time, so maybe this is the time the next leg or two down takes out the dip buyers? Investor cash on the sidelines, at least when looking at mutual fund cash holdings, is quite low.

Messaging screams bearish, but actual trading doesn’t seem to reflect that. So for now I’m going to largely ignore these contrarian signals. Thinking about them, but not acting on them.

Rates and the Economy

Rates and the economy are both telling us the same thing. Ignore the rising concerns about inflation because there are a lot more negatives to discuss about the economy than positives. But that we can delve into in more detail this weekend.

Bottom Line

Have to admit, I cannot be bearish interest rates here. I’ve basically capitulated on where I think 10’s should be and how many rate cuts we will. The capitulation is not so much because the administration seems to be focused on them (which is a good thing) but because no matter the end game, I see a lot of bumps in the coming weeks and months for the economy.

I’m less bearish overall on equities (it has been a good move), though my portfolio recommendation remains bearish large cap momentum/ QQQ while spreading risk across other sectors and factors. Getting back to pre-election levels for the S&P and Nasdaq remains my target, though I won’t be pounding the table quite as hard today, as we did coming into recent weeks.

Credit spreads are due to start feeling the pinch. While the equity move was primarily a valuation issue, spreads could remain stable. As this spreads to an economic risk, look for spreads to finally start to widen. Not yet exciting enough to dedicate a lot of time to credit spreads, but I suspect that in the coming days and weeks, credit will go from being dull and boring, to at least mildly intriguing. Issuers should be issuing into this low yield, low spread, high demand environment!

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge declined on Thursday to grant a temporary restraining order that would have extended a block on the termination of dozens of CIA officers who worked in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) programs, which President Donald Trump had ordered to be dismantled.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga in Virginia previously issued an administrative stay to pause the firings following a lawsuit filed by career intelligence officers who had been assigned to DEIA-related assignments temporarily within the CIA and the Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).

In the Feb. 27 order, Trenga said that he had denied the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction, which could have prevented the agencies from firing them while the case was ongoing.

The judge extended a deadline for the plaintiffs to take on a deferred resignation program, which would allow them to receive pay until Sept. 30.

Trenga did not provide a specific reason for his decision in the order. The judge stated that the ruling was made after considering “the filings, the record in this case, and oral argument” presented to the court.

Kevin Carroll, a former CIA undercover officer representing the plaintiffs, told reporters on Thursday that Trenga has ruled CIA Director John Ratcliffe holds “sweeping statutory authority” to terminate CIA officers if he deems it necessary for the national interest.

The Epoch Times reached out to Carroll and the CIA for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

Carroll previously revealed that the plaintiffs were among the 51 CIA officers placed on paid administrative leave on Jan. 22, after Trump issued an executive order that labeled existing DEIA programs “illegal and immoral.”

According to the court filing, the plaintiffs were instructed on Feb. 14 to report to the CIA visitors’ center with their intelligence community (IC) access badges and were given three options: retire immediately, accept a deferred resignation program, or be terminated on May 20. They were required to decide by Feb. 19.

The plaintiffs alleged that their imminent termination was not based on national security reasons but rather due to their temporary DEIA-related assignments and “a domestic political dispute between the Republican and Democratic parties regarding the efficacy and legality of DEIA initiatives” within the federal government.

They alleged that the firings were “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion” and lacked factual justification, which they claimed violated their constitutional rights under the First and Fifth Amendments.

“None of these officers’ activities was or is illegal. At no time have the agencies employing plaintiffs contended that they individually engaged in any misconduct, nor are they accused of poor performance,” they stated in the court filing.

In his order, Trump said the previous administration forced “illegal and immoral discrimination programs” into virtually “all aspects” of the federal government through DEI initiatives.

The order mandates that federal agencies terminate all offices and positions related to environmental justice, as well as any equity-focused action plans, grants, and contracts within 60 days of the order’s issuance.

It also requires agencies to compile a list of grantees who received federal funding to implement DEI and environmental justice programs since Jan. 20, 2021, and federal contractors who have provided DEI training to their employees.

Following the order, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a memo on Jan. 21 instructing federal agencies to place DEI employees on paid leave by Jan. 22 and to remove all websites and social media accounts associated with DEI initiatives by that date.

Trump’s order aligns with his campaign pledge to eliminate factors such as race and sex in HR decisions in favor of merit-based selection processes.

Speaking Jeffrey Epstein and things being kept under wraps (more on that later), a prosecutor with a famous last name quietly joined the sex trafficking case against Sean “Diddy Combs late last year…

In a thinly covered news story from December that’s suddenly relevant again (read on), New York Prosecutor Maurene Comey – whose father James Comey famously refused to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information & then participated in the Russia collusion hoax – joined the prosecution against Combs. The younger Comey has previously worked as lead prosecutor on both the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases, as well as that of former Epstein cellmate Nicholas Tartaglione. More on that below…

Combs is currently facing multiple serious legal charges, including sex trafficking, racketeering, and transportation for purposes of prostitution. These charges stem from allegations that, from at least 2008 to the present, the impresario led a criminal enterprise aimed at exploiting and abusing women, protecting his reputation, and concealing his conduct. The alleged crimes encompass sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and obstruction of justice.

Multiple allegations of sexual misconduct involving minors have been made. Last October, attorney Tony Buzbee announced he was representing 120 individuals accusing Combs of sexual misconduct; 25 of these accusers were minors at the time of the alleged incidents – while he’s also been accused of drugging and sexually assaulting a 10-year-old boy in a New York City hotel in 2005 and a 17-year-old boy in 2008 who aspired to be on the reality TV show “Making the Band.”

According to former dancer Adria Sheri English, who claimed she was “pimped out” by Diddy, the embattled rapper would hold sex-crazed “freak offs” that often took place away from the “main party” but were kept a secret.  

In addition to dozens of celebrities, including Jay-Z, Leonardo DiCaprio, Ashton Kutcher, Usher, Kanye West, and Pharrell Williams, several famous politicians are alleged to have attended Diddy’s extravagant parties, including:

• Bill and Hillary Clinton
• Kamala Harris
• Donald Trump
• Sen. Cory Booker 
• Andrew Cuomo
• Al Sharpton

How many of these figures were at the ‘main party’ vs. the ‘freak off’ rooms is unknown, however questions have been raised over whether Diddy was running an blackmail operation similar to what Epstein is suspected of.

According to a TMZ documentary about the Diddy raid “They have 250 cameras they took from his houses. A lot of people may be running from that tape,” said rapper Mark Curry, a former Bad Boy Records artist. TMZ executive producer Charles Latibeaudier said that Combs was “allegedly obsessed with recording everything that went on in his home.”

“I don’t think it’s just celebrities that are going to be shook,” said Combs’ former bodyguard, Gene Deal. “He had politicians in there. He had princes in there. He also had a couple of preachers in there.”

And so it suddenly becomes very interesting that the daughter of James Comey is now involved in the prosecution. Is she handling depositions? Or determining which witnesses are involved in the case?

A Brief Timeline

Maurene Comey becamse a US attorney in the Southern District of New York in 2015.

In 2019, when she was just 30-years-old, Comey became one of the lead prosecutors in the Jeffrey Epstein case before he was found dead in his jail cell in August 2019.

Two years later, she became one of three lead prosecutors in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s partner in crime and daughter of suspected Mossad operative Robert Maxwell. 

Before becoming a US attorney, Comey clerked for US District Court chief judge Loretta Preska of the SDNY – who notably oversaw a long-running defamation case filed by Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre against Maxwell.

Comey was also involved in the case of Nicholas Tartaglione, a former NYPD officer who was convicted of killing four men in 2016, and who was briefly Epstein’s cellmate in the Manhattan Metro Correctional Center. Tartaglione claims to have helped Epstein after ‘finding him unconscious’ (and totally not trying to kill him) prior to Epstein’s actual death.

In 2016, Tartaglione suspected a man named Martin Luna had stolen money from him – for which “Tartaglione tortured Martin and then forced one of Martin’s nephews to watch as he strangled him to death with a zip-tie,” according to a statement by the US Attorney’s Office.

Two days after Epstein’s death, NY Times reporter James B Stewart, who had spent 90 minutes with Epstein a year prior, wrote “The overriding impression I took away from our roughly 90-minute conversation was that Mr. Epstein knew an astonishing number of rich, famous and powerful people, and had photos to prove it. He also claimed to know a great deal about these people, some of it potentially damaging or embarrassing, including details about their supposed sexual proclivities and recreational drug use.

And so, whether this is just a case of ‘it’s a small world’ or something a little (or a lot) less innocent, James Comey’s daughter is now involved in a second case where high-profile celebrities and politicians may have been secretly filmed engaging in sexual activity with minors.