Category: zerohedge

Authored by Jeffrey M. Jones via Gallup

* * *

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Sixty-one percent of Americans say they are better off than they were three years ago, a higher percentage than in prior election years when an incumbent president was running. In the 1992, 1996 and 2004 election cycles, exactly half said they were better off. In three separate measures during the 2012 election cycle, an average of 45% said they were better off.

The current results, from a Jan. 16-29 Gallup poll, echo record highs, measured earlier in January, in Americans’ satisfaction with the way things are going in their personal life and in their assessments of their personal finances.

Relatedly, 52% of U.S. adults say it is easier for them to “go and buy things in the stores” than it was three years ago, higher than in the 1992, 1996 and 2004 election cycles, when the figures were closer to 40%.

Americans’ perceptions of whether they are personally better off, and whether it is easier to buy things, appear to be influenced much more by their party leanings than by their economic situations. Sixty percentage points separate Republicans’ (89%) and Democrats’ (29%) assessments of whether they are better off than three years ago. Independents are essentially in the middle of the two groups, at 60%. Meanwhile, 64% of those in both upper- and middle-income households say they are better off, as do 49% of those in lower-income households.

The Republican-Democratic gap is smaller — 44 points — when people indicate whether it is easier for them to buy things than it was three years ago: 76% of Republicans versus 32% of Democrats say it is, as do 49% of independents.

The party gaps on the “better off than three years ago” question were much smaller in the past, partly because supporters of the incumbent president’s party were less upbeat about their situations than Republicans are today.

In addition to higher ratings among Republicans, today’s higher figures are also driven by more positive ratings among independents — 60% today, compared with ratings near 50% in prior years.

Assessments of U.S. International Standing Similar to Past Elections

The majority of Americans do not believe the U.S. is as respected throughout the world as it was three years ago — 38% say it is and 59% say it is not. The percentage who think the U.S. is as respected is no worse than in past election years, with only as many as 40% saying so (in 1992 and 2000).

Additionally, 51% say the nation is as safe and strong as it was three years ago, while 43% say it is not. These readings are similar to what Gallup measured in the 2004 and 2012 election cycles, but lower than in 1992.

As on the economic items, wide party gaps exist on the international items. Seventy percent of Republicans, but only 9% of Democrats, believe the U.S. is as respected throughout the world as it was three years ago. Thirty-two percent of independents hold this view.

Also, 76% of Republicans, 51% of independents and 22% of Democrats believe the nation is as safe and strong as when President Donald Trump took office.

Trump Given More Credit Than Obama for Economic Improvements

Sixty-two percent give Trump a great deal or fair amount of credit for improvement in the state of the economy in the past few years — more than the 51% giving former President Barack Obama the same level of credit.

In 2000, Americans gave Bill Clinton slightly more credit for the economy (68% great deal or fair amount) than they give Trump today.

In January 2018, Gallup asked Americans a similar question about Trump and Obama, albeit with a different question wording. At that time, more Americans gave Obama (56%) than Trump (49%) a “great deal” or “moderate amount” of credit.

The economy will likely be as potent an election issue as any other, but there is no dominant issue in the public’s minds. In December, the economy was among the top six issues that U.S. adults rated as “extremely important” to their presidential vote. The latest poll, which asked Americans to choose among those six issues as the single most important to their vote, finds 29% choosing the economy and 25% healthcare. Fewer indicated that immigration (14%), gun policy (13%), education (11%) or terrorism (6%) is their top overall issue.

Bottom Line

If Trump asks Americans whether they are better off than before he came into office, most would say they are. Trump also gets more credit for recent economic improvements than Obama does, though majorities give both credit.

Trump was clear during his State of the Union that he plans to make the strength of the economy a major focus of his reelection campaign. Given Americans’ generally positive ratings of the economy — including a 63% job approval rating for Trump on the issue — it is a sensible strategy. But with Trump’s overall job approval rating still below the majority level, the ultimate question is whether his economic success will mean more to voters than the more controversial aspects of his presidency.

Learn more about public opinion metrics that matter for the 2020 presidential election at Gallup’s 2020 Presidential Election Center.

View complete question responses and trends.

Learn more about how the Gallup Poll Social Series works

* * *

Meanwhile, the impeachment totally backfired – as predicted.

Though all eyes are on the deadly coronavirus pandemic, another dangerous military close encounter just played out off Taiwan’s coast on Wednesday.

“Three U.S. Air Force planes, including two B-52 bombers, flew near Taiwan on Wednesday, the island’s defense ministry said, after Taiwan’s air force scrambled earlier in the week to intercept Chinese jets,” Reuters reports. 

The prior Sunday and Monday incidents involved Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) bombers and fighters approaching the self-declared Republic of China (Taiwan), before Taiwan scrambled its own US-supplied F-16 fighters to shadow the ‘invading’ aircraft. 

A senior US State Department official in the region called China’s behavior “completely inappropriate” and condemned the “aggressive act.”

Wednesday’s “response” by the Americans consisted in the following: 

Taiwan’s Defense Ministry said one U.S. MC-130, a special mission aircraft based on the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft, flew down the Taiwan Strait in a southerly direction on Wednesday.

The two U.S. B-52 bombers skirted Taiwan’s east coast, also in a southerly direction, the ministry added.

Beijing has been engaged in provocative “island encirclement drills” somewhat routinely over the past half decade, resulting in multiple close encounters with US and Taiwanese forces, especially in the air and water, especially the contested Taiwan Strait.

Taiwan Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Joanne Ou pledged that such Chinese aggression will only “deepen cooperation with countries with similar ideals, including the United States, in response to the rising Chinese military threat.”

There’s little new here in such provocations and reactions, and counter-statements out of Taipei; however, Taiwan officials have tapped into a new argument sure to add insult to injury amid its ongoing standoff to assert territorial control in the face of much larger and more powerful China.

Reuters reports of a deeply provocative statement amid China’s worst crisis in years: 

Taiwan has urged China to focus its efforts on fighting the new coronavirus rather than menacing the island.

No doubt this will do little to east tensions, and will only exacerbate them, likely only giving further invitation for China to “save face” and attempt to show that its military is stronger than ever and remains ‘undistracted’ by the deadly and society-threatening pandemic in its midst. 

Authored by Larry Johnson via Sic Semper Tyrannis blog,

In the wake of the latest Hollywood buffoonery displayed at the Oscars, I think it is time for the American public to denounce in the strongest possible terms the rampant hypocrisy of sanctimonious cretins who make their living pretending to be someone other than themselves.

Brad Pitt, Joaquin Phoenix and Barbara Streisand pop to mind as representative examples. All three are eager to  lecture the American public on the need for equality and non-discrimination. Yet, not one of the recipients of the Oscar gift bags worth $225,000 spoke out against that extraordinary excess nor demanded that the money spent purchasing these “gifts” be used to benefit the poor and the homeless. Nope, take the money and run.

It is especially galling to see how the Hollywood Community has embraced the era of red-baiting Joseph McCarthy as the new standard for what is acceptable. There was a time that a few brave souls in Hollywood (I am thinking Lucille Ball, Kirk Douglas and Gregory Peck), spoke out against the blacklisting of actors, writers and directors for their past political ties to the Soviet Union. Now I have lived long enough to see the so-called liberals in Hollywood rail against Donald Trump and his supporters as “agents of Russia.” Many in Hollywood, who weep crocodile tears over the abuses of the Hollywood Blacklist, are now doing the same damn thing without a hint of irony.

If you are a film buff (and I consider myself one) you should be familiar with these great movies that remind the viewer of the horrors visited upon actors, writers and directors during the Hollywood Blacklist:

• The Front–a 1976 comedy-drama film set against the Hollywood blacklist in the 1950s. It was written by Walter Bernstein, directed by Martin Ritt, and stars Woody Allen and Zero Mostel.

• Good Night, and Good Luck–a 2005 historical drama film directed by George Clooney, tells the story of Edward R. Murrow fighting back against the hysterical red-baiting of Senator Joseph McCarthy.

• Trumbo–a 2015 American biographical drama film directed by Jay Roach that follows the life of Hollywood screenwriter Dalton Trumbo, who was blacklisted but continued to write award winning movies in alias (e.g. Spartacus).

This was an ugly, awful and evil time in America. It was a period of time fed by fear and ignorance. While it is true that there were Americans who identified as Communists and embraced the politics of the Soviet Union, we scared ourselves into believing that communist subversion was everywhere and that America was teetering on the brink of being submerged in a red tide.

Thirty years ago I reflected on this era and wondered how such mass hysteria could happen. Now I know. We have lived with the same kind of madness since Donald Trump was tagged as a Russian agent in the summer of 2016. And the irony is extraordinary. The very same Hollywood elite that heaped opprobrium on Director Elia Kazan for naming names in Hollywood in front of the House UnAmerican Activities Committee, are now leading the charge in labeling anyone who dares speak out against the failed coup as “stooges” of the Kremlin or Putin.

Hillary Clinton’s crazy rant accusing U.S. Army Major and Member of Congress, Tulsi Gabbard, as a Kremlin puppet is not a deviation from the norm. Clinton exemplifies the terrifying norm of the political and cultural elite in this country. Accusing political opponents of being controlled by foreign enemies, real or imagined, is an old political tactic.

Makes me wonder what Edward R. Murrow or Dalton Trumbo would say if we could bring them back from the dead.

Just days after Bernie Sanders’ campaign co-chair Nina Turner blasted Democratic Party Presidential Nominee candidate Mike Bloomberg as an “oligarch,” during a furious MSNBC segment, it seems one member of the public has had enough of the juxtaposition of a billionaire blowing hundred of millions of dollars to become President with the victory last night of an avowed anti-wealth socialist.

At a rally in Chattanooga, Tennessee on Wednesday for the former New York City Mayor, a furious middle-aged woman, clinging tightly to her handbag, stormed the stage and excalimed:

“Bloomberg is trying to buy this Election… That is not Democracy! That is plutocracy!”

Protester at Bloomberg Rally: “Bloomberg is trying to buy this Election. That is not Democracy! That is plutocracy!” pic.twitter.com/ZrGKQVSDxN

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) February 12, 2020

You can see her point when you consider the massive, outsized amount of ad-spend Bloomberg has been gushing into markets nationwide…

As fivethirtyeight,com details, this amounts to almost $300 million in spending on ads by the Bloomberg campaign.

But that is a drop in the bucket considering Bloomberg is worth over $60 billion, and is one of the richest people in the world, according to Forbes.

The head of the Iowa Democratic Party resigned on Wednesday after this month’s botched caucus – in which a delegate calculation app developed by ex-Clinton and Obama staffers failed miserably, and backup procedures to phone in results manually overloaded the IDP’s resources.

“While it is my desire to stay in this role and see this process through to completion, I do believe it is time for the Iowa Democratic Party to begin looking forward, and my presence in my current role makes that more difficult. Therefore, I will resign as chair of the Iowa Democratic Party effective upon the election of my replacement,” said chairman Troy Price in a resignation letter, according to the Des Moines Register.

Price, an Iowa native, worked as political director for Barack Obama’s 2012 Iowa campaign and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Iowa campaign. He served as executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party before being elected its chair in July 2017 and re-elected in 2018.

More than a week after the party’s Feb. 3, 2020 caucuses, final results from the night are still not available. Results from Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary have already been called and Democratic presidential campaigns have moved into Nevada and South Carolina. –Des Moines Register

Following the week-plus it took to recount delegates, former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg wound up with 13 delegates, while Bernie Sanders (I-VT) received 12 despite winning the popular vote.

Both camjpaigns have requested partial recanvas of certain Iowa caucus precincts.

Authored by Sven Henrich via NorthmanTrader.com,

After getting a public twitter scolding from President Trump for letting the Dow reverse into red yesterday Jay Powell was not about to let the same mistake happen twice and came fully prepared ready to jawbone today.

Is the presumption ridiculous? What isn’t ridiculous these days?

A president watching every tick on the $DJIA and grading the Fed Chair on it?

When Jerome Powell started his testimony today, the Dow was up 125, & heading higher. As he spoke it drifted steadily downward, as usual, and is now at -15. Germany & other countries get paid to borrow money. We are more prime, but Fed Rate is too high, Dollar tough on exports.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020

Or a Fed Chair whose renewed easy money policies have propelled stocks sky high using the opportunity to jawbone markets higher by promising even more easy money:

The times we live in. pic.twitter.com/L3Sgmf7Iwp

— Sven Henrich (@NorthmanTrader) February 12, 2020

Yes this is the moment in time JayPowell assured markets to save them if there’s any trouble ever:

“Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said Wednesday the central bank would fight the next economic downturn by buying large amounts of government debt to drive down long-term interest rates, a strategy that has been dubbed quantitative easing, or QE.

In testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, Powell said the Fed had two recession-fighting tools; buying government bonds, known as QE, and communicating clearly with markets about interest-rate policy, routinely considered as “forward guidance.”

“We will use those tools — I believe we will use them aggressively should the need arise to do so,” Powell said.”

QE and jawboning. Swell. What exactly have they been doing this past year?

While ECB president Lagarde admitted yesterday that loose monetary policies are stoking asset prices higher, the very assets owned by the top 1%, Powell goes on to say how great it all is:

Powell: “it’s been a particularly good time to be at the top of the income spectrum”.

*the parties are awesome pic.twitter.com/eCfwdvIMRa

— Sven Henrich (@NorthmanTrader) February 12, 2020

Chumming it up at the Jeff Bezos party the other week he ought to know what a good time it is to be at the top of the income spectrum. After all he is there himself.

Problem is of course all these loose monetary policies have done exactly nothing for the the rest of the population since the financial crisis:

And so the solution is to do more at the first sign of trouble.

The audacity of the claim is of course pretending that this is not exactly what they have been doing ever since markets plummeted 20% in Q4 of 2018. Jawbone and QE and repo. Powell, like his processors before him has shown to be beholden to markets, to appease them, to make sure they don’t get disappointed. Another easy money shill. At the first sign of market trouble he ran scared and flipped and flopped and now he will never make the mistake of policy tightening again. He is a perma dove now, he will always ease and use “forward guidance” (jawboning) to keep markets from dropping too far.

After all that’s exactly what he has been doing since 2019:

Central bankers still pretend to deny that repo has no impact on asset prices when participant behavior clearly has shown that this is exactly what’s happening.

There is an easy way to refute the claim of course, but the Fed won’t dare:

Stop repo completely for a week.
Just try it.
Start tomorrow.
Watch what happens. https://t.co/mzALQlvMPN

— Sven Henrich (@NorthmanTrader) February 12, 2020

And so here we are in 2020, with the highest market valuations in history on many measures and all they’re talking about is more QE and jawboning.

11 years after the financial crisis there is no path to balance sheet normalization, there is no path for rate hikes, there is only the path of more intervention to disproportionally benefit the same people that have benefited for the past 11 years.

Permanent intervention. That’s their answer. That’s intellectual bankruptcy and exposes central bank policy to be an empty suit.

*  *  *

For the latest public analysis please visit NorthmanTrader. To subscribe to our market products please visit Services.

One of special counsel Robert Mueller’s former prosecutors, Brandon Van Grack, argued in a Wednesday filing that the case against Michael Flynn should not be dismissed in light of “egregious government misconduct,” because the FBI’s extensive FISA abuse uncovered by the DOJ’s Inspector General “have no relevance to his false statements to the FBI on January 24, 2017.”

“Beyond failing to identify misconduct that satisfies the legal test cited in his own brief — that the misconduct be ‘so grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice’ — the defendant fails to identify any government misconduct in this case,” Van Grack continues.

JUST IN: Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack makes a new filing in the FLYNN case, arguing that the IG’s findings of FBI FISA problems has no bearing on Flynn’s effort to throw out his guilty plea for lying to the FBI. pic.twitter.com/w1V2MpNJyJ

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) February 12, 2020

Except – Flynn attorney Sidney Powell says the FBI excluded  crucial information from his ‘302’ form – the original draft of which stated that Flynn was honest with the FBI agents who interviewed him (one of whom was Peter Strzok).

The prosecution filing also argues that a slew of failures that the Justice Department’s inspector general found in the FBI’s handling of surveillance applications merit serious attention but that the faults involved Carter Page, a Trump 2016 foreign policy adviser, and not Flynn.

“The government does not dispute the seriousness of the ‘significant errors and omissions’ described in the Report,” Van Grack wrote. “But the compliance and diligence failures and ‘significant errors’ as they relate to the Page FISA applications do not warrant or necessitate the dismissal of the charge against the defendant.” –Politico

In short – failings by the the same cabal within the FBI that handled the Clinton email investigation, the Trump investigation, and the offshoot investigations (Flynn, Stone, etc.) – don’t matter.

Flynn pleaded guilty in late 2017 to one felony charge of making false statements to the FBI during an impromptu interview held four days after Trump’s inauguration – which Flynn had no idea was an interview. He admitted misleading agents over contacts with the then-Russian ambassador regarding the Trump administration’s efforts to oppose a UN resolution related to Israel – as well as false statements to the DOJ about a lobbying project related to Turkey.

In 2019, however, Flynn switched lawyers – which was followed by allegations that his former lawyers had mishandled the case.

Flynn’s new lawyers, led by Sidney Powell, a frequent Mueller critic, urged senior officials like Attorney General William Barr to review the case against Flynn and abandon it. It’s unclear what action, if any, was taken on that request.

Powell also asked the judge overseeing Flynn’s case, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan, to grant access to almost 50 categories of information that the defense said could illuminate the unfairness of Flynn’s prosecution. Sullivan rejected that demand in December in a blistering opinion.

“The Court summarily disposes of Mr. Flynn’s arguments that the FBI conducted an ambush interview for the purpose of trapping him into making false statements and that the government pressured him to enter a guilty plea,” Sullivan wrote then. “The record proves otherwise.” –Politico

Last month, Flynn asked the court to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing that he was tricked into filing it under pressure from prosecutors.

Incredible. Both AG Barr and Durham have suggested that the underlying predicate that led to the targeting of Flynn is suspect and yet DOJ still defends and excuses this corruption? https://t.co/7xk200W9cN

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) February 12, 2020

Federal prosecutors have not fully responded to that motion.

Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.org,

“What we are seeing in global warming is the evaporation of our Great Lakes.”

That was Illinois Senator Dick Durbin in 2013 when Lake Michigan was at a record low. You can find plenty of claims to the same effect from the time. Nobel Prize winner Al Gore chimed in around then, too, saying climate change was driving Great Lakes levels down by causing evaporation.

But that was then and this is now.

What’s causing today’s record high levels? Climate change, naturally.

So now, citing “catastrophic lakefront erosion” from high water, Chicago just declared a climate emergency. It’s radical, and is reproduced in full below.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Durbin want the federal government to help Chicago pay for damage to its shoreline. Lightfoot’s accompanying statement is reproduced below. You’ll be relieved to see that she’s putting “equity” at the center.

Given that Lightfoot hasn’t exactly been friendly to President Trump, you might be concerned about what reception her request for federal help will get. Per the Chicago Tribune, Lightfoot acknowledged “some concern, of course,” that President Donald Trump won’t see the urgency in sending help to Chicago – a city he has treated as a public antagonist for years — to combat climate change, an issue he hasn’t deemed a high priority.

Why, yes, I’d have some concern, too, of course. She called Trump’s visit to Chicago “insulting, ignorant buffoonery.” Not that he’s vindictive or anything.

And since sustainability is emphasized in Lightfoot’s statement, I’d also have some concern about sustainability of claims about the causes of Great Lakes water fluctuations. I confess to being old enough to remember exceptionally high lake levels in the late 1970s when global cooling was blamed. Going back much further, levels were way up where today’s Ridge Road is in the northern suburbs, which created the ridge (but, no, I’m not that old).

*  *  *

The climate emergency resolution:

RESOLUTION DECLARING A CLIMATE EMERGENCY AND EMERGENCY MOBILIZATION EFFORT TO RESTORE A SAFE CLIMATE

WHEREAS, in April 2016 world leaders recognized the urgent need to combat climate change by signing the Paris Agreement, agreeing to keep global wamiing, “well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and to “pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C”; and

WHEREAS, the death and destruction already wrought by current average global warming of 1 °C demonstrate that thc Earth is already too hot for safety and justice, as attested by increased and intensifying wildfires;floods,rising seas, diseases, droughts, and extreme weather; and

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty, 1.5°C of global waming could expose 500 million people to water poverty, 36 million people to food insecurity because of lower crop yields, and 4.5 billion people to heat waves; and

WHEREAS, in October 2018, the United Nations released a special report which projected that limiting warming to even the dangerous 1.5°C target this century will require an unprecedented transformation of every sector of the global economy by 2030: and

WHEREAS, the United States of America has disproportionately contributed to the climate and ecological emergencies and thus bears an extraordinary responsibility to rapidly solve these crises; and

WHEREAS, climate change will continue to make basic human necessities such as food, housing, health care, transportation and energy more expensive and difficult to obtain; and

WHEREAS, in July 2019, members of Congress introduced a concurrent Congressional resolution to declare a national climate emergency in the United States, calling for a “national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization of the resources and labor of the United States at a massive scale to halt, reverse, mitigate, and prepare for the consequences of the climate emergency and to restore the climate for future generations”; and

WHEREAS, restoring a safe and stable climate requires a Climate Mobilization, an emergency mobilization on a scale not seen since World War 11 in order to reach zero greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors ofthe economy; to rapidly and safely drawdown and remove all the excess carbon from the atmosphere at emergency speed and until safe, pre-industrial climate conditions are restored; and to implement measures to protect all people and species from the consequences of abrupt climate breakdown; and

WHEREAS, such necessary measures to restore a safe climate include:

a)  A rapid, just, managed divestment and phase-out of fossil fuels; and

b)  Ending greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible to establish a zero-emissions economy; and

c)  A widespread effort to safely drawdown excess carbon from the atmosphere; and

d)  A full transition to a regenerative agriculture system; and

e) An end to the Sixth Mass Extinction through widespread conservation and restoration of ecosystems; and

WHEREAS, justice requires that frontline and marginalized communities, which have historically borne the brunt of the extractive fossil-fuel economy, participate actively in the planning and implementation of this mobilization effort and that they benefit first from the transition to a climate-safe economy; and

WHEREAS, the massive scope and scale of action necessary to stabilize the climate and biosphere will require unprecedented levels of public awareness, engagement, and deliberation to develop and implement effective, just, and equitable policies to address the climate emergency; and

WHEREAS, to slay within 1.5 degrees Celsius, niajor cities throughout the world will need to significantly reduce their per capita emissions by 2030, and as a global city, Chicago is obligated to lead by example; and

WHEREAS, lhe 2008 Chicago Climate Action Plan slates that. “Without rapid local and global action, impacts on Chicago’s climate could be adverse,” and thai “[l]he benefits of early action will improve quality of life and preserve Chicago for future generations”; and

WHEREAS, in 2017, the City ofChicago organized global leaders to sign onto the Chicago Climate Charter, with more than 50 cities worldwide, pledging to reduce carbon emissions in line with the Paris Agreement and committed to reaching 100% renewable energy for all electricity used in municipal buildings by 2025; and

WHEREAS, the City of Chicago continues to endure myriad effects of climate change, including bul not limited to catastrophic lakefront erosion, citywide fiooding.and severe unseasonal weather; and

WHEREAS, in 2019. members of City Council have called for the re-establishmenl ofthe Department of Environment to oversee the implemeniation of climatc-relalcd policies and programs: and

WHEREAS, our communities can display their resilience by creating and executing emergency planning that is tailored to address direcily the irue scope of the challenges we face; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Chicago hereby declares a state of climate emergency that threatens thc health and well-being of Chicago, its inhabitants, and its environment; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, City Council will work with the Mayor’s office and city departments to develop a budget that promotes urgent climate action; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Chicago calls on the State of lllinois, the United States Congress, the President of the United States, and all govemments and people worldwide to declare a climate emergency, initiate a Climate Mobilization to reverse global warming and the ecological crisis, and provide maximum protection for all people and species of the world; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, in furtherance of this resolution, the City Clerk shall submit a certified copy of this resolution to elected officials at the federal, state and county levels and request that all relevant support and assistance in effectuating this resolution be provided.

Mayor Lightfoot’s statement:

“Mayor Lightfoot is committed to a proactive environmental agenda that puts equity at its center and prepares Chicago to protect all of its communities, especially those most vulnerable, from pollution and other threats to our shared environment. In order to meet an ambitious climate agenda, the administration is currently in the process of hiring a Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) who will ensure a dedicated focus on current climate and environmental issues from the Mayor’s Office. The CSO will work alongside the Committee on Environmental Protection and Energy as well as community stakeholders to develop forward-looking policy solutions that focus on equity and which will focus on protecting the environmental health all of our communities for the future.”

While the rest of the world has been distracted counting their winnings from Tesla’s recent short squeeze, the company has decided to discreetly issue a recall on 15,000 Model X SUVs due to a potential issue that can lead to a loss of power steering assist.

Tesla stock slid about $15 after the bell on Wednesday after the announcement hit the wire…

The issue could “make steering harder and increase the risk of a crash,” according to Reuters.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Transport Canada pointed out the issue, stating that aluminum bolts that attach the electric power steering gear assist motor to the gear housing could corrode and break. 

This could then cause a reduction or complete loss of power steering in some model 2016 vehicles. Tesla says it’ll arrange for the replacement of the mounting bolts and will also replace the steering gear if necessary. 

Good luck getting that service appointment. And just think, these weren’t even the cars that were built in a tent.

The NHTSA claims there have been no injuries or crashes associated with the issue. Meanwhile, we reported less than 48 hours ago that the NTSB found that Autopilot played a role in the death of a Tesla driver in Delray Beach, Florida last year. 

The driver had set the car to go 69 miles per hour 12.3 seconds before the crash took place on a highway that had a speed limit of 55 mph, according to Bloomberg. The NTSB also revealed that the driver’s hands were not on the wheel for the final 7.7 seconds before the crash. 

The NTSB had also arrived at similar findings regarding a 2016 Florida crash where another Tesla driver didn’t react to a truck in the roadway. In that instance, the NTSB found that Tesla’s Autopilot design contributed to the cause of the accident.

Hilariously enough, despite the Model X recall of 15,000 vehicles, there are still hundreds of thousands of Tesla vehicles that are Autopilot-enabled, allowed on the roads.

Via SchiffGold.com,

During the Vancouver Resource Investment Conference, Peter Schiff joined Frank Holmes (US Global), Rick Rule (Sprott US), and Grant Williams (Vulpes Investment Management) on the “Ultimate Gold Panel. Daniela Cambone moderated the discussion.

Gold charted its best year since 2010 last year. The price increased by 18.4% in dollar terms. The yellow metal also reached record highs in every G10 currency except the dollar and the Swiss franc. Can this bull-run can continue into 2020?

Peter noted that he was on a gold panel the year before and he was the only person who thought gold was going to go up. Many were predicting the yellow metal would fall back to $1,000.

I thought that was very improbable. And now you’re throwing around could it go back down to $1,300. Look, it’s possible, but I think it’s highly improbable that that’s going to happen. If gold is broken out and 1,350 was a six-year high that capped every rally, I think we took it out, we’ve never looked back ever since. We now seem to be building support around 1,550, or just under 1,550, which was the high before we had a pullback to around what? 1,450. So, the market looks very strong to me. So, while it’s possible that we could get that large decline, I wouldn’t want to hope for it or bet on it. I think that there’s a lot more upside potential and I think the number that Dalio is talking about, 2,000, not only is that very probable, but depending on the outcome of this election, we could go much higher. I mean, if Bernie Sanders were to be elected president, just imagine what would happen to the price of gold. The very night the results came in.”

Cambone asked Peter how much he thought gold holding above 1,550 has to do with the underreported repo crisis and all of the liquidity being injected into the economy by the Federal Reserve.

It’s all a function of the Fed. And in fact, I think what people should take away from this recent geopolitical tension in Iran — what rallied? Because the dollar didn’t. US Treasuries really didn’t. I mean, you had a little bit of a rally in the yen and the Swiss franc. But the main rally was in gold. And that shows you that the world prefers gold to dollars.”

The panel also discussed the surging stock market. Peter pointed out that all bubbles pop.

It’s not like this bubble is any different. It’s going to pop and the thing is when it does, very few people who are in it are going to realize it. Because when you don’t know it’s a bubble, you don’t see the pin.”

Peter said the only rational thing to do is not participate and to position yourself for when the music stops.

The Perth Mint in Australia saw record sales last year, but the US Mint had a horrible 2019. What are North American investors missing? Peter said there were two factors. In the first place, gold hit new highs in virtually every currency except the dollar. That makes the bull market more apparent to people in other countries. Second, the biggest gold buyers in the US are Republicans. They were worried when Obama was president, but they’re optimistic with Trump in the White House.

So, they’re buying the stock market instead of gold … Americans don’t see the bull market and they’re wildly optimistic when they should be extremely cautious. Americans should be selling US stocks and buying gold.”

And how much gold should you have in your portfolio?

Peter said 10% is a good start and you can have more depending on where we are in the cycle.

I look at gold as liquidity, as a store of value, as an alternative to lower quality stores of value like the dollar or the euro or the yen. So, if you want to have dry powder, keep it in gold.”

The panel weighed in on the presidential election and what that could mean for the markets, gold mining stocks and bitcoin.