Boeing Busts Dow Win Streak As Bitcoin, Bond Yields, Bullion & Big Tech Rise

Who’s buying?

 

Early strength in China gave way to an ugly day for small cap tech after Friday’s market vacation…

 

Spanish stocks lagged along with Germany’s DAX as UK, Italy, and France ended unchanged…

 

 

US Small Caps (Russell 2000) and Mega Caps (Dow Industrials) underperformed today as tech lifted Nasdaq and S&P…

 

 

AAPL bagged $200.00 for the first time since early November…

 

Dow was weak due to Boeing (accounting for more than the entire point loss of the index)…

 

GE also tumbled…

 

The S&P 500 Information Technology Sector reached a new record high today (taking out the Oct 3rd highs)…

 

Treasury yields rose modestly on the day but failed to erase Friday’s post-payroll yield drop (almost note huge Aramaco deal likely weighed on TSY complex sentiment)…

 

10Y holds above 2.50%…

 

The dollar extended its dump from 120 (Bloomberg Dollar Index)

 

Bitcoin and Ethereum extended recent gains as Bitcoin Cash held the big surge…

 

Bitcoin tagged $5350 intraday before fading…

 

WTI just won’t stop, but the dollar weakness spurred gains across commodity-ville today…

 

Gold gained modestly, with front-month futures back above $1300…

 

Finally, since October 3rd – the last time the S&P 500 was here – earnings expectations and macro-economic data have collapsed…

Is it time for a recoupling?

 

via ZeroHedge News http://bit.ly/2OUURZ4 Tyler Durden

Elon Musk Cancels Meeting with Ben Baller Days After Jeweler Winds Up Trapped in His Model X

It was just days ago that we pointed out when celebrity “jeweler to the stars” Ben Baller, who had months prior gifted Elon Musk a $40,000 diamond encrusted Tesla ring, found himself involuntarily trapped inside of his Tesla Model X. Now, Baller is back on Instagram, proclaiming that his Tesla Model X is “not the car for [him] or [his] family” and also sharing that Tesla cancelled a scheduled meeting that the celebrity had with CEO Elon Musk. 

A couple weeks ago, Baller took to social media to share his experience of being locked in his Tesla, exclaiming in a video:

“I wish this was a fucking joke. I’m locked inside my fucking TeslaI know I’ve been the Tesla fan, I’ve said so many good things about Tesla. But I’ve been locked in the car now for 37 minutes fucking waiting for roadside assistance. The electronic door – the door is handled by the push button or the key or opening the door handle – and nothing’s fucking working.”

Prior to the incident, and ostensibly as a result of his “gift” and praise for Musk, Baller had already set up a meeting with Elon Musk for this upcoming Tuesday in the Bay Area at the company‘s headquarters.

But Baller recently took to Instagram to tell his followers that, subsequent to posting his complaint, his meeting with Elon Musk had been canceled by the company and that Musk’s assistant recommended that he contact her with future complaints, instead of posting them online.

Loosely paraphrased, “we cancelled your meeting because you publicly complained about our product online.”

In an Instagram post dated April 4, 2019, Baller writes that he will now be auctioning off the ring he made for Musk and donating all of the proceeds to charity. He also said that he turned his Tesla in after the incident and that it is “not the car” for him or his family.

To those who been asking about an update on #Tesla. I have to say, They reached back out to me somewhat quickly as it was a weekend and by Monday they did their due diligence and allowed me to terminate my lease early without any penalties or fees out of my pocket. Thank you for that. 

FYI: Most leases for a Model X #P100D are $2000-$2400 a month and my lease was $1,078 a month. So it was in my best interest to keep the car as long as possible because a lease that low for a $165,000 car isn’t common.

But yeah. F that I’m good. Sorry for the rant. But I got thousands of DM’s even emails about an update of my situation. I’m going to auction off the ring and donate all proceeds to charity. And again. I’m not saying I’m against Elon or Tesla. I’m only saying it’s not the car for me or my family.

Baller wrote on his new Instagram post that due to being stuck in his Model X for 47 minutes and having to exit through the trunk, he was going to be switching vehicle brands. We’re not luxury car elitists, but that’s as good a reason as any to switch, we’re guessing. 

Baller also talked about being frightened because his child, London, has severe asthma that has landed him in the emergency room over 26 times in the last 6 years. Fearing a deadly situation involving his child where he may get stuck in the car, Baller said he would “never allow my kids to ever get into a Tesla again”.

Tesla has been striking out with celebrities lately. Just days earlier, Sheryl Crow also found herself stuck inside of her Tesla in a parking lot, unable to get assistance. Her issue was handled directly by Elon Musk on Twitter, as we predicted it would be, and Baller’s issue was escalated directly to Elon Musk’s assistant, it appears.

But for the thousands of laypeople experiencing issues with their Teslas nationwide, who is helping them? And more importantly, how long can Tesla go if it loses the backing of the California and Hollywood liberal elite that have helped spearhead its cause and lend gravitas to Musk’s company to begin with?

via ZeroHedge News http://bit.ly/2GcwjZ7 Tyler Durden

Is the Phrase ‘Open Borders’ a Libertarian Mistake?: Podcast

||| First SecondThe past 24 hours have seen two unrelated events tethered to America’s ever-contentious immigration debates: (1) President Donald Trump reportedly forcing out Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, on the grounds that she somehow wasn’t tough enough, and (2) the launch announcement by pals o’ Reason Bryan Caplan and Zach Weinersmith of their new graphic nonfiction paperback Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration. (Pre-order here!)

So what happens if you mash up these two events? Well, if you’re the Editors’ Roundtable edition of the Reason Podcast, you get into a spirited debate over whether the phrase “open borders” actually describes your immigration worldview, let alone is an effective way of selling it. Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, Peter Suderman and yours truly argue about that, plus President Donald Trump’s interest in increasing family separations, whether the phrase “military-industrial complex” is for hippies, and how a show with a name like Love, Death & Robots could have managed to escape Katherine’s attention.

Subscribe, rate, and review our podcast at iTunes. Listen at SoundCloud below:

Audio production by Ian Keyser.

‘When You’re Gone’ by Bombay Laughing Club is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

Relevant links from the show:

DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen Is Leaving Wednesday. Will Her Replacement Be Worse?” by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

Kirstjen Nielsen and John Kelly Keep Lying About ‘Zero Tolerance’ and Child Snatching, While Donald Trump Tells the Truth,” by Jacob Sullum

Trump Says Kidnapping Unauthorized Immigrants’ Children Is an Effective Deterrent,” by Jacob Sullum

Child Separation Policy at Border Led to Procedural, Personal Chaos, Says Inspector General Report,” by Brian Doherty

Bryan Caplan’s New Book on Open Borders,” by Ilya Somin

Bernie Sanders Reminds Voters That He Is Absolutely Against Open Borders,” by Robby Soave

Debate: Nations Can and Should Control Their Borders,” by Jonathan H. Adler and Shikha Dalmia

Rand Paul and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Found Something They Can Agree On,” by Joe Setyon

Trump Ain’t Dismantling the American Empire,” by Shikha Dalmia

Sens. Rand Paul, Tom Udall Introduce Bill to End the War in Afghanistan,” by Christian Britschgi

Washington Imperialists Fret Over Trump’s Troop Withdrawals,” by Matt Welch

Netflix’s Love, Death and Robots Is a Sci-Fi Demo Reel For the Untapped Potential of Animation,” by Peter Suderman

Bret Easton Ellis on American Psycho, Hollywood Hypocrisy, and the Excesses of #MeToo,” by Nick Gillespie and Paul Detrick

Don’t miss a single Reason Podcast! (Archive here.)

Subscribe at Apple Podcasts.

Follow us at SoundCloud.

Subscribe at YouTube.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

from Hit & Run http://bit.ly/2U4jnb2
via IFTTT

Felicity Huffman, 13 Others To Plead Guilty In College Admissions Scam

In the latest development in the “largest college admissions scam uncovered in U.S. history,” on Monday afternoon actress Felicity Huffman and 13 others agreed to plead guilty in the scandal, signaling that prosecutors are aggressively wresting deals from the wealthy parents, according to Bloomberg.

The 14 are among 50 people accused by Boston federal prosecutors of engaging in schemes that involved cheating on college entrance exams and paying $25 million in bribes to secure their children admission at well-known universities. Federal prosecutors announced the deals on Monday afternoon, identifying the parents and a University of Texas men’s tennis coach who have negotiated plea bargains.

It’s not yet clear what their sentences will be: according to one New York lawyer, Huffman and Lori Loughlin could end up serving time in prison for their alleged involvement in the high-profile college admissions cheating scandal. Last Wednesday, the Full House and Desperate Housewives stars appeared alongside other wealthy parents in U.S. District Court in Boston for the first time since they were charged in March. During their preliminary hearings, they were both read the federal felony charges they face after their arrests in March: conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud.

And while the charges carry a potential maximum sentence of five years for each actress, it is more likely that as a result of the plea deal, the celebrities will avoid prison time and be slapped with substantial penalties instead.

* * *

Huffman, who starred in “Desperate Housewives,” was among 33 parents charged in March with participating in the scheme in hopes of getting their children into universities including Yale, Georgetown and the University of Southern California. Prosecutors dubbed it the “largest college admissions scandal the U.S. has ever prosecuted.”

“With deep regret and shame over what I have done, I accept full responsibility for my actions and will accept the consequences that stem from those actions,” Huffman said in a statement. “My daughter knew absolutely nothing about my actions, and in my misguided and profoundly wrong way, I have betrayed her.”

She wasn’t alone: “No words can express how profoundly sorry we are for what we have done,” two of the parents, Bruce and Davina Isacksons, said in a statement on Monday. “Our duty as parents was to set a good example for our children and instead we have harmed and embarrassed them.” They added that they have also let down their “entire community” and said they have cooperated with prosecutors and would continue to do so.

Also last Friday, Gordon Caplan, the former co-chair of Willkie Farr & Gallagher and one of the highest-profile parents in the scandal, also said he would admit his guilt.

Authorities said the scheme was overseen by California college admissions consultant William “Rick” Singer, who has pleaded guilty to facilitating the cheating scam and bribing coaches to present the parents’ children as fake athletic recruits.

Huffman, who is married to the actor William H. Macy, is accused of making a $15,000 contribution to Singer’s foundation in exchange for having an associate of Singer’s in 2017 secretly correct her daughter’s answers on an SAT college entrance exam at a test center that prosecutors say Singer controlled.

Yet while the rich and famous taking advantage of their wealth to get further ahead in life – or help their children to do so – is hardly surprising, what is most bizarre about this entire fiasco is that some still believe that students are still admitted purely on their merits, which is quite delightful in a time when hedge fund managers, politicians and public figures donate tens of millions of dollars to their alma maters not for some giant vanity project, but to extract benefits in exchange for their “donations.” And as the US judicial system is preoccupied with Huffman, Loughlin and the like, far greater crimes take place every day on Wall Street, Washington and, of course, the Marriner Eccles building, and will continue to do so without any DOJ intervention, until one day a revolution finally does break as the population demands real justice for everyone.

via ZeroHedge News http://bit.ly/2FYwHJm Tyler Durden

Labor Force Slack Or Full Employment And Resultant Recession?

Authored by Chris Hamilton via Econimica blog,

According to the BLS data, the 25 to 54 year old labor force participation rate it currently at 82.6%, a full 2% below the 2000 peak and 1% below the ’88 through ’08 average.  The implication is that there should be millions of 25 to 54 year olds ready and willing to enter the labor force, given the right incentive.  This is the much touted labor force “slack” that is ready and waiting to become new employees, homeowners, tax payers, etc..

But interestingly, when pulling the historical 25 to 54 working age population data versus the 25 to 54 employee data, seems worth noting that the data doesn’t quite square up.  Based on historical data from the OECD (US 25 to 54yr/old working age population, BLS 25-54yr/old employment level…both available from St. Louis FRED), population growth and jobs growth among the prime age population that drives the US economy has stalled for over a decade.  The discrepancy may have something or everything to do with the usage of Census overestimated population growth…which I have detailed HERE.

By simply dividing the total working age population of 25 to 54 year olds versus those 25 to 54 year olds employed, a different picture emerges.  The chart below suggests that the most economically critical population segment is essentially very near or at full employment.  No “slack”.

Looking solely at 25 to 54 year old employment (black line) and year over year change (blue column), a clear precursor is visible of full employment…a flattening in total 25 to 54 year old employees is underway signaling peak employment, as has happened prior to every previous recession.  Absent “slack” (ready and willing 25 to 54 year olds not already engaged in parenting, caregiving, further  education, etc. etc.), the economic engine has stuttered and backfired without the necessary fuel for growth, more potential workers and subsequent potential consumers.

And what happened in ’89, ’00, and ’07 when the 25 to 54 year old population hit peak employment coinciding with rising interest rates?  Recession, rate cuts, and massive growth in federal debt.  No reason to believe this time will be different!?!

As the chart below details, the end of each interest rate cycle ushered in a new wave of federal debt issuance.  Given the massive debt issuance in ’18, interest rate cycle peak in ’18, and the White House is now calling for rate cuts (and QE4), it appears this cycle is already underway.

But things change and to broaden out the picture, the chart below shows all the groups that make up the 15 to 64 year old working age population.  While the 25 to 54 year olds are essentially at historical full employment, the 55 to 64 year olds are setting new records for employment.  Conversely, the 15 to 24 year old segment is almost 11% below historical peak employment and appears to have peaked for this cycle and is now rolling lower.  The lower employment among 15 to 24 year olds is in part due to the record portion of young attending college and a myriad of factors limiting their participation.

Given we are nearing or at peak employment, a quick look at the relationship of population growth, by age group, versus employment growth among the same group is helpful.  The chart below shows the year over year change in the 15 to 64 year old US population (black line) versus year over year change in employment among 15 to 24 year olds (yellow columns), 25 to 54 year olds (blue columns), and 55 to 64 year olds (red columns).  Noteworthy is the decelerating working age population growth since 2000 and the shifting employment growth from the 15 to 24 year olds to the 55 to 64 year olds.

Getting a little more granular, a look at the 25 to 54 year over year population change (red line) versus 25 to 54 employment change (blue columns).  The relationship and limiting factor of population growth to employment growth should be fairly obvious (the large population bump in ’00 was a Census adjustment…not sudden growth).

Checking the 55 to 64 year over year population change (red line) versus 55 to 64 employment change (blue columns).  It should be clear that this segment has been carrying the load from both a population and employment growth standpoint.  However, demographics deem that time is nearly up for this segment.

And looking at 55 to 64 population versus employment…the cresting wave of population growth is now visible.

As for the 15 to 24 year olds, they are a declining population and not surprisingly, likewise, the employed among them are now falling.  A record percentage are now attending universities (rather than working) and undertaking record debt to do so.

The declining population of young and a declining labor force participation rate among them spells declining employment among the youngest portion of the labor force.

As for the 65+ population (detailed below), the 65 to 74 year olds have a 27% labor force participation rate.  But where the bulk of the population growth is taking place, among the 75+ year olds, they have just an 8% labor force participation rate!!!  They will not be supplying much, if any, labor force “slack”.

Conclusion:

If the data I show, rather than that offered by the BLS, is correct and the prime aged population is at full employment, get ready for rate cuts, recession, and new jaw dropping record debt to GDP levels.

via ZeroHedge News http://bit.ly/2uVYIMy Tyler Durden

GMU Student: ‘The Hiring of Brett Kavanaugh Threatens the Mental Well-Being of All Survivors on Campus’

GMUA group of George Mason University students is demanding that Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh not take a position as a visiting law professor—and some professors are voicing support for them.

“The hiring of Kavanaugh threatens the mental well-being of all survivors on this campus,” said one female student during the public comment period of GMU’s board meeting last week, according to video footage obtained by The College Fix.

Another student, a survivor of sexual violence, claimed that her mental health had already suffered as a result of the Antonin Scalia Law School’s decision to hire Kavanaugh. “It is affecting my mental health knowing that an abuser will be part of our faculty,” she said.

A third student said, “As someone who has survived sexual assault three times, I do not feel comfortable with someone who has sexual assault allegations walking on campus.”

But Kavanaugh, who was accused of sexual misconduct by several women during his confirmation hearings, will not actually be present on GMU’s campus. He is slated to teach a summer course on “Creating the Constitution” in Runnymede, England, where the Magna Cart was signed.

During a meeting with the Faculty Senate last week, GMU President Angel Cabrera sounded perplexed about the opposition to Kavanaugh. He correctly noted that it would be insane to pass up an opportunity for students to learn from one of just nine current Supreme Court justices.

“This is not a crazy appointment,” said Cabrera. “This is a Supreme Court justice who is going to be teaching about the United States Constitution….The students have signed up for the class.”

At the meeting, Professor Bethany Letiecq, president of GMU’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors, wondered why the university had not investigated the charges against Kavanaugh. Note the exchange, according to The College Fix:

“Well, should we investigate that? I mean, should we investigate that,” Letiecq said to Cabrera as snaps of approval rose out in the room. (Snapping has largely replaced clapping on college campuses as a way to show support.)

“He’s been accused, and there has not been a full investigation as far as I’m…that I can see,” she said.

Cabrera responds: “So, I mean, George Mason University…investigate a Supreme Court justice who has been confirmed by the United States Senate?”

“Yes,” a woman calls out.

“We do our due diligence on all hires. This is a hire,” a man added, drawing more snaps as someone else calls out “agreed!”

It’s hard to imagine what such an investigation would even look like, given that the incidents in question do not involve GMU, were made three decades ago, and were already explored by the federal government and the news media.

But even if an investigation were to take place, this would hardly placate the student activists: They want the university to #CancelKavanaugh immediately. This follows from the fourth-wave feminist presumption that all self-proclaimed survivors of sexual misconduct must be telling the truth—even though at least one of the Kavanaugh accusations is extremely dubious.

It would be a terrible blow to the principles of fairness and academic freedom if a university were to un-person one of the foremost judicial figures in the country over this. Cabrera should continue to reject the activists’ demands.

from Hit & Run http://bit.ly/2I8bCPU
via IFTTT

Retail Investors Dump FAANGs, Adding To Nasdaq Mystery

Ever since tumbling into a bear market in Q4 2018, the Nasdaq has exploded higher – led by the FAANG names – and surging more than 30% since Christmas, trading just shy of all time highs and nobody on Wall Street can explain why…

… because as Bloomberg put it, aside from the stock price itself, “everywhere else you look in the industry, bad news is overwhelming the good.”

As we further discussed last night, here are some of the reasons why Wall Street is puzzled: even as tech stocks soar, with the Nasdaq up 5 of the last 6 trading sessions (and set to make it 6 of 7 today) tech profits are shrinking “at an alarming pace”, valuations are reflating and politicians want to break the companies up. Worse, last week Samsung previewed a dismal quarter for semiconductor orders which have collapsed, while spending on infrastructure to support the all-important “cloud” is sliding. And yet, as Bloomberg framed it, the addiction to tech just won’t break.

And so, one explanation for this historic divergence between deteriorating fundamentals and soaring stock prices, is that as the economy sank and central banks turned more dovish, investors – the Pavlovian dogs of central planners everywhere for the past decade – rushed into growth names, eager to ride the rebound once the economic rout stabilizes (that this optimism may be unwarranted is what Morgan Stanley warned about earlier, warning that the earnings contraction set to emerge with this quarter’s earnings will once get worse and become a full blown earnings, if not economic, recession).

However, the mystery only grew deeper today, when according to TD Ameritrade’s Investor Movement Index, after a three-month rally that added approximately $800 billion to the market cap of FAANG stocks since Christmas Day, retail investors joined their institutional peers, and decided it’s time to cash out of these ultra high-flying names.

This is perplexing because as Bank of America showed two weeks ago, retail investors (and buybacks, of course) were long seen as the buyer of last resort, while institutional investors, hedge funds, high net worth clients and funds in general were dumping tech stocks en masse.

Well, now we can eliminate retail investors from the group of potential buyers too, because as clients at discount brokerage TD Ameritrade modestly increased their overall exposure to equity markets for a second consecutive month in March, they sold shares of Amazon, Facebook, Netflix and Apple. These four core FAANG members have gained at least 35% since stocks bottomed on Christmas Eve, one-and-a-half times the S&P 500’s return, even as it increasingly appears that investors were aggressively selling their shares…

… suggesting that the only marginal buyer were… the companies themselves (it is hardly surprising then that over the weekend Goldman warned that should stock buybacks be banned, the market could crash).

Speaking to Bloomberg, JJ” Kinahan, chief market strategist at TD Ameritrade, said that “taking profits isn’t the worst idea in the world,” noting clients had been buyers of Amazon for eight straight months. “What it makes me wonder is, they were the momentum stocks, so where do we get our new momentum?” Actually, before we answer that, a better question is if retail investors were – like everyone else – dumping tech names, who was buying (beside buybacks of course).

Aside from the dump in FAANGs, the IMX reading for the five-week period ending March 29, 2019 showed investors were once again increasing their risk exposure, but ranks “Moderately Low” relative to the historic level of exposure investors took to the market.

“Major decisions surrounding key political concerns like Brexit and the China trade deal are on hold for the time being and remain overriding factors,” said JJ Kinahan, chief market strategist at TD Ameritrade. “In the short term, we’ve seen hope of a positive resolution on trade issues and that helped the overall markets go higher in March.”

And while retail investors may have enough of tech for a while, they appear to have zeroed in on the next mini bubble: cannabis companies, as many TDA clients were buyers of Aurora Cannabis and CVS Health, which recently announced that it will begin selling CBD-infused products at more than 800 of its stores. Millennial clients also scooped up shares of Canopy Growth Corp., according to a statement from TD Ameritrade. Finally, while dumping FAANGs, retail investors were also large buyers of Tesla (oops), NIO (oops), and AT&T.

 

via ZeroHedge News http://bit.ly/2D2R3jG Tyler Durden

Allison Mack Pleads Guilty In NXIVM Sex-Cult Case

Former Smallville actress Allison Mack wept in a Brooklyn federal courtroom on Monday as she pleaded guilty to charges that she manipulated women into becoming sex slaves for the leader of a purported self-help group tied to the Clintons

Allison Mack​​​​

The 36-year-old Mack apologized to the women who prosecutors say were exploited by the group’s leader, Keith Raniere, within the “inner sanctum” of his NXIVM self-help business known as “dominus obsequious sororium” – Latin for “master over the slave women.

Mack arrived for her bail hearing in Brooklyn on May 4. According to one of her alleged sex slaves, Mack threatened that if she refused sex with Raniere she would be destroyed.

Mack allegedly occupied the second-most-senior position in the group.

“I believed Keith Raniere’s intentions were to help people, and I was wrong,” Mack told the judge as she pleaded guilty to racketeering charges. “I know I can and will be a better person,” she added. Her sentencing was set for September 11. 

Keith Raniere

Mack allegedly procured women for Raniere – who required that prospective “slaves” upload compromising collateral into a Dropbox account. One such recruit-turned-coach was India Oxenberg – daughter of Dynasty actress Catherine Oxenbergwho met with prosecutors in New York in late 2017 to present evidence against Raniere

Mack’s guilty plea will mean she doesn’t have to stand trial with Raniere, wealthy Seagram’s heiress Clare Bronfman, and another NXIVM inner circle member, Kathy Russell – all of whom have pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing, according to the Hollywood Reporter

Most recently, Raniere was accused of having sex with children and producing kiddie pornto which he has pleaded not guilty.

Raniere, 58, is accused of having a child “engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing one or more visual depictions of such conduct, which visual depictions were produced and transmitted,” reads a new indictment released Wednesday.

Raniere’s co-defendants, “Smallville” actress Allison Mack, Seagram heiress Clare Bronfman, Lauren Salzman and Kathy Russell were allegedly aware of his predilection for predation, and even facilitated it, according to prosecutors, who have now charged them for that conduct under a racketeering count.

His co-defendants “were aware of and facilitated Raniere’s sexual relationships with two underage victims: (1) a fifteen-year-old girl who was employed by Nancy Salzman and who – ten years later – became Raniere’s first-line ‘slave’ in DOS,” the filing reads. –New York Post

Both Mack and Bromfman sought a separate trial in the wake of the pedophilia charges. 

A 2009 photo of Raniere in Albany, New York, where Mack bought a house to be closer to the Nxivm founder.

After being run out of Arkansas in the early ’90s by then-Governor Bill Clinton’s attorney general on charges of fraud and business deception, Raniere and NXIVM executives emerged a decade later only to donate $29,900 to Hillary Clinton’s 2006 presidential campaign a decade later. At least three NXIVM officials are (or were) “invitation-only” members of the Clinton Global Initiative, according to the New York Post

As we noted in late March, while NXIVM describes itself as a self-help business that has helped thousands of people “reach their potential” through various courses, the women’s-only “inner sanctum” led by Raniere is known as ‘DOS’, which whistleblower Frank Parlato said stands for “dominus obsequious sororium” – Latin for “master over the slave women”. Once they are a member – or “slave” – they are allegedly encouraged to recruit new women into their “slave pods”, stop dating, and be on call 24 hours a day after being branded with Raniere’s initials below the hip using a cauterizing iron. 

According to a 2010 Vanity Fair report, Clare and her sister Sara Bronfman, who joined NXIVM in 2002, contributed approximately $150 million of their trust fund to NXIVM, while Claire bought 80% of Wakaya island off the coast of Fiji for $47 million in 2016.

[I]n the last six years as much as $150 million was taken out of the Bronfmans’ trusts and bank accounts, including $66 million allegedly used to cover Raniere’s failed bets in the commodities market, $30 million to buy real estate in Los Angeles and around Albany, $11 million for a 22-seat, two-engine Canadair CL-600 jet, and millions more to support a barrage of lawsuits across the country against nxivm’s enemies. Much of it was spent, according to court filings, as Sara and Clare Bronfman allegedly worked to conceal the extent of their spending from their 81-year-old father and the Bronfman-family trustees. –Vanity Fair

Edgar Bronfman Sr. receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Bill Clinton in 1999 

The 39-year-old Clare – daughter of late Seagram CEO Edgar Bronfman (whose funeral Hillary Clinton spoke at) pleaded not guilty last July to charges of racketeering, money laundering and identity theft for NXIVM – fainted in court last month in response to being asked if she’d secretly retained lawyer Michael Avenatti.

Michael Avenatti and Seagram heiress Clare Bronfman 

Now that Mack has pleaded guilty, we wonder what the future holds for her co-defendants. According to the Hollywood Reporter, “The jury questionnaire covers several topics, including asking candidates for their opinions about “rich individuals” and people who “engage in relationships with multiple sexual partners” and whether they “believe that people under the age of 17 should be able to consent to sex with adults.“”

via ZeroHedge News http://bit.ly/2uUcMWM Tyler Durden

Despite Congressional Approval, Selling Hemp and CBD Remains Legally Perilous

At the end of last year, Congress passed a farm bill that legalized hemp, defined as cannabis containing no more than 0.3 percent THC by weight, and its derivatives, including cannibidiol, a nonpsychoactive but medically promising compound that has been openly sold online and in brick-and-mortar stores throughout the United States for years. Yet in January, state troopers in Idaho seized 7,000 pounds of industrial hemp from a truck on Interstate 84. The following month, state troopers in Ohio seized 55 gallons of CBD oil from a truck on Interstate 70. Last month, local police raided a smoke shop in Duncanville, a Dallas suburb, and seized “hundreds of pounds of CBD oil in various forms.”

This situation is the reverse of the one encountered by state-licensed suppliers of marijuana, which remains completely illegal at the federal level. In this case, hemp and hemp-derived CBD seem to be legal at the federal level, but they may still be prohibited by state law. Even under federal law, states have “primary regulatory authority over the production of hemp” only after their rules are approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which proved to be a sticking point in the Idaho case. And although the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) no longer has authority over hemp under the Controlled Substances Act, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may still take action against CBD products that are sold based on medical claims.

The hemp seized in Idaho was part of a 13,000-pound shipment produced by Boones Ferry Berry Farms in Hubbard, Oregon, and purchased by Big Sky Scientific in Aurora, Colorado. It was on its way from Oregon to Colorado when it was intercepted by the Idaho State Police. Neither the seller, the buyer, nor the trucking company made any attempt to conceal the hemp, which they thought was legal to transport through Idaho.

Idaho officials took a different view. Idaho law, unlike federal law as revised by the 2018 farm bill, defines marijuana as “all parts of the plants of the genus Cannabis, including the extract or any preparation of cannabis which contains tetrahydrocannabinol.” In other words, Idaho does not recognize a distinction between marijuana and hemp. “Our troopers adhere to Idaho law,” Idaho State Police spokesman Tim Marsano told the Idaho Statesman. “Substances with any amount of THC are illegal in this state.” The driver of the truck carrying Big Sky’s hemp was charged with marijuana trafficking, which carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence under Idaho law.

Big Sky cited a provision of the farm bill that says “no state or Indian Tribe shall prohibit the transportation or shipment of hemp or hemp products produced in accordance with subtitle G of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946…through the State or the territory of the Indian Tribe.” But Idaho argued that the hemp en route to Big Sky Scientific did not qualify for that protection because Oregon had not received federal approval for its regulatory system. In a February 2 ruling, U.S. Magistrate Judge Ronald Bush rejected Big Sky’s emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Idaho’s seizure, saying “the Court cannot conclude on this record that Big Sky has a likelihood of success on the merits.”

Bush said he might reach a different conclusion “after the record is more fully developed.” Big Sky has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to overturn Bush’s ruling, and on March 18 the Idaho House of Representatives approved a bill that would legalize hemp in that state. “It might be said that Big Sky was taking a gamble that it thought was worth taking,” Bush wrote. “In another view, it might be said that Big Sky did not realize that Idaho might take a different position about whether Big Sky was free to move industrial hemp around the country.”

A similar clash of expectations explains the seizure of CBD oil in Ohio, which defines marijuana in a way that tracks the unrevised federal definition: “all parts of a plant of the genus cannabis, whether growing or not; the seeds of a plant of that type; the resin extracted from a part of a plant of that type; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of a plant of that type or of its seeds or resin.” Ohio’s definition excludes “the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oils or cake made from the seeds of the plant, or any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks, except the resin extracted from the mature stalks, fiber, oil or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant.”

While CBD derived from cannabis stalks arguably does not fit that definition, the Ohio State Highway Patrol treats all CBD oil as a Schedule I substance. Hence the two men who were transporting the CBD oil seized in February were charged with felonies punishable by a maximum penalty of 11 years in prison and a $20,000 fine. Ohio has a medical marijuana program that started operating last week, but the CBD oil in this case was not part of it.

The situation is similar in Texas, which defines marijuana as broadly as Ohio does. It makes a narrow exception for CBD oil produced by three state-licensed companies for treatment of epilepsy. Those licensees do not include GM Tobacco, the Duncanville shop that was raided in March. “When the officers were asked why you are taking this stuff, they said because it’s marijuana,” Daniel Sullivan, a Dallas attorney who represents the store’s owners, told the Fort Worth Star Telegram. “Which is either profoundly ignorant or dishonest. If they don’t know the difference between CBD and marijuana, they need to study more.”

But under Texas law, that distinction does not matter except for suppliers licensed under the state’s Compassionate Use Program. “Our investigations revealed criminal activity occurring at GM Tobacco in Duncanville, and our responsibility to protect the community is paramount to the health, safety and welfare of our citizens,” said Mark LiVigni, Duncanville assistant police chief. “Marijuana is illegal in the state of Texas.”

CBD sellers face additional risks under federal law. “With passage of the Farm Bill,” DEA spokeswoman Mary Brandenberger says in an email, “any part of the marijuana plant (including seeds, derivatives and extracts) that have a THC concentration of no more than 0.3% THC will be defined as ‘hemp’ and accordingly will not fall under DEA’s purview.” But the only CBD product that is recognized as a medicine by the FDA is Epidiolex, an oral solution that the agency approved last year for treating two rare forms of epilepsy.

Before stepping down as head of the FDA last week, Scott Gottlieb told a House subcommittee his agency would take a “risk-based approach” to CBD products. “We’re going after places where CBD is being marketed in situations where we think the claims are either misleading to the point of encouraging a patient to forgo otherwise effective therapy for a medical condition or being marketed in a formulation and in a dose that’s at a level that creates significant safety concerns,” he said. On March 28, for instance, the FDA sent warning letters to three CBD vendors, warning that selling the compound for “the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease” violates the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Gottlieb also has expressed concern about plans by CVS and Walgreens to begin carrying CBD products. “We now see big box stores seeking to market CBD products for some uses where the claims seem to be potentially over-the-top claims for the treatment of pain,” he said in his congressional testimony. “We’re not allowing this. What’s happening is we see a burgeoning market, and we can’t boil the ocean, so we’re trying to take a risk-based approach to our enforcement like we do on all matters.”

Yet Gottlieb suggested the FDA wants to create rules that would allow the sale of CBD products. “I recognize Congress wants there to be a pathway here,” he said, “so we’re trying to work at the same time expeditiously to create a viable pathway that can differentiate between potentially appropriate use of the product if we can have scientific evidence to support its appropriate use and use of the product that creates safety risks for the consumers.” The FDA has scheduled a May 31 public hearing to “obtain scientific data and information about the safety, manufacturing, product quality, marketing, labeling, and sale of products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds.”

from Hit & Run http://bit.ly/2G1Li6A
via IFTTT

Achievement Gap Between Rich and Poor Public School Students Unchanged Over 50 Years

FailBradCalkinsDreamstimeHalf a century of trying hasn’t closed one of schooling’s most vexing achievement gaps. According to a new paper, the gap in educational achievement between public school students in the bottom 10th socioeconomic status (SES) percentile and those in the top 90th SES percentile has remained essentially unchanged over the last 50 years.

“In terms of learning, students at the 10th SES percentile remain some three to four years behind those in the 90th percentile,” report a team of researchers led by the Stanford economist Eric Hanushek in their disheartening new National Bureau of Economic Research study, “The Unwavering SES Achievement Gap.”

It would be one thing, the researchers note, that “if all achievement were rising, i.e., if a rising tide was lifting all boats.” But that’s not what’s happening. Young adolescents’ performance has risen over the past 50 years, but their scores drift downward once they reach high school. The upshot is that there has been no significant improvement in the overall education achievement scores of American high school student cohorts born since the 1950s.

The researchers draw upon data from four periodically administered assessments of U.S. student performance: the Program for International Student Assessment, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Survey, and two versions of the National Assessment of Educational Progress. They then divvy up the student cohorts based their parental socioeconomic status.

The researchers calculate the standard deviation between the scores of each socioeconomic cohort to compare how far the average achievement scores of students clustered in the top 10 and 25 percent of SES percentiles are from the scores of those students aggregated into the bottom 10 and 25 percentiles of SES. A declining standard deviation would mean that the gaps between the cohorts’ scores are closing. That is not what they find.

As they report at Education Next, the socioeconomic achievement gap among the 1950s birth cohorts is very large—about 1.0 standard deviations between those in the top and bottom deciles of the socioeconomic distribution (the 90–10 gap) and around 0.8 standard deviations between those in the top and bottom quartiles (the 75–25 gap). Measuring cohorts of students born since the 1950s, the SES gap closes by about 0.5 standard deviations for students under age 14. But those gains among young adolescents disappear almost entirely by the time students reach age 17.

The persistence of the SES gap remains when the researchers compare only white students over time, and they take into account such factors as the changing ethnic makeup of American school children.

The researchers note that these disappointing results occurred despite the fact that “overall school funding increased dramatically on a per pupil basis, quadrupling in real dollars between 1960 and 2015.” In addition, pupil-teacher ratios declined from 22.3 in 1970 to 16.1 in 2014.

Why do these gaps persist? The authors suggest that any negative impacts stemming from rise of single-parent families may well be offset by factors that correlate with better educational outcomes, such as fewer siblings and the fact that today’s parents in general are better educated. They hypothesize that a steep decline in the quality of teachers is likely a big factor.

“Because cognitive skills as measured by standard achievement tests are a strong predictor of future income and economic well-being, the unwavering achievement gaps across the SES spectrum do not bode well for improvements in intergeneration mobility in the future,” they observe. “Perhaps more disturbingly, the U.S. has introduced and expanded a set of programs designed to lessen achievement gaps through improving the education of disadvantaged students, but they individually and collectively appear able to do little to close gaps beyond offsetting the probable decline in teacher quality in schools serving lower SES students.”

In light of these findings, Washington Post columnist Robert Samuelson makes some useful suggestions: “The national strategy of controlling the country’s schools—through subsidies and regulatory requirements—has prevailed for half a century. It has failed. The federal government should exit the business of overseeing K-12 education.

Samuelson adds, “We should let states and localities see whether they can make schools work better. The grandiose fix-it national plans are mostly exercises in political marketing. We need solutions, not slogans.”

But much more needs to be and can be done. As former Reason Foundation director of education policy Lisa Snell has pointed out:

Private school students have performed higher on NAEP exams and increasing evidence shows that both charter schools and private choice programs are improving student performance—especially for the most disadvantaged students.

We’ve seen little change in school performance for our pubic high school seniors, despite soaring education costs in traditional public schools. But school choice and competition show promise to improve outcomes for students by allowing families to find the schools and education services that best match their needs. Healthy competition can keeps schools focused on improving the quality of their services to students.

Competition drives continuous improvement in the quality of goods and services in every other part of our economy. It can do the same for educating America’s children too.

from Hit & Run http://bit.ly/2IlFhVl
via IFTTT