“End That Son Of A Bitch”: Duterte Moves To Terminate Philippines’ Military Pact With US
President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte is moving to terminate the shaky US-allied country’s military pact with the United States after Washingtonrevoked former police chief and now Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa’s US visa last month. The close Duterte ally stands accused of widespread of widespread war crimes, including ordering extrajudicial killings of thousands during the Southeast Asian Pacific nation’s brutal ongoing ‘war on drugs’ — raging since 2016.
An enraged Duterte had threatened last month: “I’m warning you… if you won’t do the correction on this, I will terminate the… Visiting Forces Agreement,” and declared provocatively “I’ll end that son of a bitch”— in reference to the pact which provides legal immunity to US military drills.
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, via Getty/NYT
Filipino Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin testified before the country’s senate this past week that termination of the agreement will “negatively impact” defense and economic ties between Washington and Manila.
“The president said he is terminating the VFA,”Defense Secretary of the Philippines, Maj. Gen. Delfin Lorenzana told ABS-CBN News on Friday. “I asked for clarification and he said he is not changing his decision.”
President Duterte previously gave Washington a month to fix its “mistake” related to punitive action against Dela Rosa and said he wasn’t bluffing. The AP described the history of the key military pact as follows:
The security accord, which took effect in 1999, provides the legal cover for American troops to enter the Philippines for joint training with Filipino troops.
A separate defense pact subsequently signed by the treaty allies in 2014, the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, allowed the extended stay of U.S. forces and authorized them to build and maintain barracks and other facilities in designated Philippine military camps.
Perhaps more significantly Duterte went so far as to declare in late January that he will ban some US senators from visiting the Philippines unless Washington backs down. He’d also told members of his cabinet not to visit the US.
Former Philippines national police chief Roland Dela Rosa (now senator) in 2017, via the AFP.
Since Manila initiated its aggressive militarized crackdown on illegal drugs starting in 2016, thousands of civilian drug suspects have been left dead across the country, mostly in deeply impoverished areas, resulting in condemnations from the United Nations and human rights groups. Most of these killings also took place outside of any courtroom or judicial setting.
Dela Rosa was tasked as President Duterte’s top enforcer, gaining him popularity among right-wingers and the military in the country, but infamy among others.
The OPCW has released a briefing note summarising the recent “independent investigation” into their recent Titanic-sized leaks.(You can read the summary at the link above, or the full “independent” report here).
It’s a fairly narrow statement, focusing entirely on the two unnamed inspectors (Inspector A and Inspector B) who worked with the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media to leak the censored reports. (There is not a word about the e-mails later released by WikiLeaks).
You won’t be surprised to know that the report finds the two leakers, Ian Henderson and “Alex”, were wrong to leak the confidential information.
In that sense, it’s entirely self-contradictory. Attempting to tell us the information is at once “sensitive”, and also incomplete, incorrect and easily refuted.
Of course, none of that refutation is present here, because that wasn’t the remit of this report. This is just an investigation into the “Possible Breaches of Confidentiality” and not the veracity of the leaks, or the pertinence of the information therein.
Sometimes an incredibly narrow purview is a sound defence against an undesirable reality.
There’s really no new information here, just six pages of waffle telling us very little we didn’t already know. It’s not a report that really means anything at all. It’s just something that the OPCW literally had to say. Institutions have immune responses, they simply must attack their critics. It’s automatic.
If a CIA whistleblower were to announce the sky was blue, the CIA would release a memo claiming to have no official records concerning the visual appearance of our atmosphere and detailing the leaker’s history of alcohol abuse.
Attacking whistleblowers is just a reflex of self-defence, the most base instinct of every lifeform.
In its content and tone, this report is a clear example of that behaviour. Far more a smear and hit piece than a refutation or investigation (at one point it even straight-up lies about Ian Henderson’s career at the OPCW).
Essentially, it’s just a series of attacks on the competence and motivations of the whistleblowers, even to the point of attempting to deny them that status:
Inspectors A and B are not whistle-blowers.”
The head of OPCW bafflingly declares, before going on to explain:
They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence. When their views could not gain traction, they took matters into their own hands and breached their obligations to the Organisation. Their behaviour is even more egregious as they had manifestly incomplete information about the Douma investigation.”
See – they’re not “whistleblowers”, they’re just individuals who believed that some documents being kept secret should be made public, and “took matters into their own hands”.
Apparently, that’s different from being a whistleblower. Somehow.
As with so much else in the current political sphere, it’s not so much an argument as an exercise in semantics.
Just as Julian Assange’s arrest became a debate over whether or not he was “really a journalist”, and “antisemitism” is redefined to increasingly ludicrous vagueness, here we are confronted by a memo essentially saying “ignore these leaks, these people are not real whistleblowers”.
It’s really not a report designed to make a case or prove a point. It won’t convert anybody or change a single mind. It’s just there to be at the other end of a link. To supply gate-keeping “journalists” with soundbites to bounce back and forth across twitter and blockquote in their articles.
A final redoubt to provide mainstream attack-dogs like Chris York or Scott Lucas some cover as they make a hasty retreat.
In that sense, it’s already doing its job:
NEW – @OPCW statement demolishes the #Douma CW conspiracy theory pushed, amongst others by @ClarkeMicah.
Damming putdown of the supposed OPCW whistleblowers championed by various British academics who claim Syria wasn’t behind Douma chemical attack. This comes from the OPCW itself: pic.twitter.com/EFsGrSzULz
Hawkish Senators Demand Twitter ‘Obey Sanctions’ By Banning Iran’s Leaders
At this rate all Iranian media sources and official accounts could soon be banned in the West, leaving journalists without a clue of what Tehran’s leaders actually think, and without official statements. The semi-official Fars news English website was knocked offline two weeks ago by US Treasury order (the international server host conformed, making Fars transfer its site hosting to within Iran), but the latest in a growing list of “purges” whether on YouTube or other platforms.
And now US senators are leading the charge to get Iran’s leaders banned from Twitter, as The Hill reports:
A group of Republican senators lead by Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) sent a letter to Twitter on Thursday asking the platform to suspend the accounts of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif to comply with U.S. sanction law.
The letter to CEO Jack Dorsey argues that an executive order from last summer imposing sanctions on Khamenei and those acting on his behalf prohibits Twitter from providing services to the two Iranian officials.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. Image source: AP.
Ironically, Twitter itself is blocked inside Iran on order of Tehran authorities, notwithstanding Iranian residents often easily getting around these restraints.
Foreign Minister Zarif is actually verified on Twitter despite being personally sanctioned by the US Treasury, and regularly uses it to issue statements to the world in reaction to White House policies or in response to President Trump’s words on Iran.
The hawkish group of Republican senators including Cruz, Tom Cotton (Ark.), Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.) wrote in the letter to Twitter: “While the First Amendment protects the free speech rights of Americans — and Twitter should not be censoring the political speech of Americans — the Ayatollah enjoys zero protection from the United States Bill of Rights.”
“And, as the leader of the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism — directly responsible for the murder of hundreds of U.S. citizens — the Ayatollah and any American companies providing him assistance are entirely subject to U.S. sanctions laws,” they added.
Iran’s top diplomat often directly engages President Trump on Twitter:
.@realdonaldtrump is better advised to base his foreign policy comments & decisions on facts, rather than @FoxNews headlines or his Farsi translators
It was also sent to the White House, as well as Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin – who previously enforced bans on Iranian media entities – and top administration officials.
The letter was first reported Friday, and Twitter did not immediately issue a response. But the US company is not expected to take action, given it announced in 2018 it would not suspend accounts of world leaders, given it “would hide important information people should be able to see and debate,” according to a prior official company statement.
“It would also not silence that leader, but it would certainly hamper necessary discussion around their words and actions,” Twitter said at the time.
Pakistan’s parliament passed a resolution Friday that calls for the public hanging of convicted child killers and rapists.
AFPreports that the resolution, which is non-binding, comes after a number of high-profile child sex-abuse cases have scandalized the South Asian nation in recent years, leading to major outbreaks of unrest and riots.
Parliamentary affairs minister Ali Muhammad Khan, who presented the resolution in the lower house of the legislature, said that child killers and rapists “should not only be given the death penalty by hanging, but they should be hanged publicly.”
“The Quran commands us that a murderer should be hanged,” the minister added.
While the resolution was swiftly passed by a majority of lawmakers, human rights minister Shireen Mazari has emphatically stated that it does not enjoy the backing of the government.
“The resolution passed in [the National Assembly] today on public hangings was across party lines and not a govt-sponsored resolution but an individual act. Many of us oppose it – our [Ministry of Human Rights] strongly opposes this. Unfortunately I was in a mtg and wasn’t able to go to NA.”
Federal Minister for Science and Technology Fawad Chaudhry also condemned the passage of the resolution.
“Strongly condemn this resolution. This is just another grave act in line with brutal civilisation practices [sic]. Societies [should] act in a balanced way, [barbarity] is not an answer to crimes. This is another expression of extremism.”
However, Pakistan has struggled to come to grips with rampant crimes of child sexual abuse.
A child rapist was hanged in October 2018 after his crime in Kasur, near Lahore, sparked days of nationwide protests and unrest.
Six-year-old victim Zainab Fatima Ameen was attacked by a 24-year-old man who later confessed to raping and murdering the young girl.
In 2015, authorities busted a huge paedophilia ring in Kasur. In the massive scandal, it was found that at least 280 children were being sexually abused by a gang who blackmailed parents with threats to publicly release the videos.
In March 2016, Pakistan criminalized sexual assault against minors, child pornography and trafficking. Only acts of rape and sodomy had previously been punishable by law.
Human rights NGO Amnesty International also condemned the recent passage of the bill by the lower house of parliament, with AI Deputy South Asia Director Omar Waraich noting that “public hangings are acts of unconscionable cruelty” with no place in a society that respects people’s rights.
Continuing, the advocate said:
“Executions, whether public or private, do not deliver justice. They are acts of vengeance and there is no evidence that they serve as a uniquely effective deterrent.”
A number of human rights groups have demanded that the country reinstate a moratorium on the death penalty. Capital punishment was reintroduced following the 2015 Army Public School massacre that claimed the lives of 151 people.
Sarah Belal, the executive director of anti-death penalty group Justice Project Pakistan, told AFP:
“There is no empirical evidence to show that public hangings are a deterrent to crime or in protecting the psycho-social well-being of children.”
“Moments Of Triggering”: Rashida Tlaib Explains Why She And Ilhan Omar Held Hands During The State Of The Union
Tuesday night’s State of the Union was a triumphant moment for President Trump, a time where he celebrated his cresting popularity at the beginning of a critical election year. Despite seizing control of the House a little more than a year ago, the Dems appear despondent and scattered – an impression not helped by the embarrassment in Iowa (how can you convince the country you’re ready to rule when you can’t even rig a goddamn caucus without the whole world finding out?).
Yet, just as we suspected, some of the most memorable moments from Tuesday’s speech happened off the podium (and we’re not talking about Nancy Pelosi dramatically ripping up Trump’s speech because the president didn’t shake her hand).
One of those moments was just shared with the public by Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who said during a discussion on Friday that she and fellow Muslim Rep. Ilhan Omar huddled together in the audience during President Trump’s speech, as the president praised American strength, industry and ingenuity – qualities that the two radical Democratic lawmakers loath.
According to Tlaib, she and Omar sat together during the speech because they fully expected to be ‘triggered’ by Trump’s words. And just as they expected, there were “moments of triggering”.
“There were moments of triggering…I kept holding your hand…we intentionally sat next to each other to support each other.”
Here’s the clip:
Rep. Rashida Tlaib says that during the State of the Union, she had to hold hands with Ilhan Omar during “moments of triggering.” pic.twitter.com/jCgrYkRG32
We have a question for ‘the triggered’. What about people who are really in danger of being triggered? What about drug addicts whose lives could literally be placed in jeopardy if they’re triggered by something that makes them want to use? What do the intersectional feminists have to say about that?
Distortion: Investors Are Un-Cautiously Optimistic
Once again they took all the pain away.
As NorthmanTrader.com’s Sven Henrich notes, what looked like the beginning of a larger market correction, amid renewed reductions in global growth outlooks, was again aborted in its tracks by renewed panic interventions by central banks, namely the PBOC which injected vast amounts of liquidity, cut rates and banned short selling as the Fed continued on its track of massive repo liquidity injections and continued treasury bill buying and voila: New market highs.
The net effect was so violent that the previous week’s sell-off was forgotten by Monday morning, by Tuesday $NDX made new highs again, by Wednesday $SPX made a new all time close highs and by Thursday $DJIA, $SPX and $NDX all made new all time highs with most of the market gains for the week driven by magic overnight gap ups and marked by tight intra-day ranges. Nothing matters or so it seems.
The liquidity wave continues to dominate the market action, yet the warning signs keep mounting, the distortions keep expanding in a market that is dominated by a handful of stocks that control the index price action via historically unprecedented market cap expansion while the broader market shows marked weakness beneath.
Yields again croaked, not confirming any notion of reflation with the 10 year closing at 1.58%, banks didn’t make new highs, neither did small caps, or transports, the laggers keep lagging.
Are central banks and their interventions leading investors off a cliffI asked this week, as sentiment indicates desperation to buy every conceivable dip abandoning all sense of risk. Yet corporate insiders are selling strength and asset managers did not buy the rally to new highs, rather continued to reduce long exposure signaling that not all are in the ‘pile in at all cost’ camp.
Indeed Mohamed El-Erian, who previously urged investors to resist the temptation to buy this dip, put out another warning out on Friday:
In riding big liquidity-driven #markets, #investors should remember the surfer analogy:
The bigger the wave …
the greater the ride;
the more tempted you are to stay on;
the more uncertain the when and how it breaks; and
Only the best of surfers get off really smoothly.
Confidence is high, as it is in every market bubble, confidence that investors all can get off the train in time. So far this confidence continues to be validated as markets are continuing to avoid any damage that the fundamental global economy would indicate while valuations remain historically stretched and central bank liquidity injections continue to control the price action.
Yet did this vertical surge in equity prices last week put in conditions for a larger sell-off still to come? Indeed did the rejection of new highs amid building negative divergences signal something more sinister? Or will the distortions in markets run unabated forever ignoring all risks?
For the technical market review please see the market video below:
Please be sure to watch it in HD for clarity. To get notified of future videos feel free to subscribe to our YouTube Channel. For the latest public analysis please visit NorthmanTrader. To subscribe to our market products please visit Services.
Markets, it is said, like to climb a “wall of worry”. Of course, the theory is that an abundance of worry on the part of market participants suggests that there is ample money “on the sidelines” available to enter the market and perpetuate a rally. Such a condition was arguably present this past fall as stocks were nearing the end of a months-long consolidation. The prolonged sideways market action seemed to inflict investors with a healthy dose of skepticism and caution towards the prospects for stock. That caution helped fuel the subsequent breakout and extended run to new highs that continues today. That caution, however, does not continue today.
In the monthly University of Michigan Survey of Consumers, one of the questions asked of respondents is their estimation of the “probability of an increase in the stock market in the next year”. In January, the mean response to the question reached 65.6%. That is the 2nd highest level on record since the inception of the survey question in 2002 (only the reading at the intermediate-term top in January 2018 was higher, at 66.7%).
Of course the concern is that once expectations get too high, it may be a sign that most of the potential investable dollars are already in the market. Therefore, there may be relatively little fuel remaining to boost stock prices.
Looking historically at the survey, we see that in addition to elevated reading in early 2018, high readings were also observed in July 2007, June 2015 and late 2018. Obviously, those immediately preceded either cyclical or major intermediate-term tops.
So is the market on the verge of a significant top? Only time will tell. Prior extreme bullish readings in the UM survey certainly have had a consistent record of preceding rough patches in the market. With that being said, sentiment can be an imprecise timing tool. There is no reason why stocks can’t continue to rally in the face of extreme optimism — temporarily. However, such a rally at this point would occur without the benefit of the proverbial wall of worry.
“Executions In Central Park”: MSNBC’s Matthews Warns Of Socialist Sanders ‘Dictatorship’ In Surreal Clip
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews shocked his fellow pundits Friday night following the New Hampshire primary debate by suggesting Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders could erect a future dictatorship in which establishment political figures would be “executed”.
In a rant that has to be seen to be believed Matthews said of a potential Sanders presidency:
“You know, I have my own views of the word socialist and I’ll be glad to tell them, share them with you in private,” Matthews said. “They go back to the early 1950s. I have an attitude about them. I remember the Cold War. I have an attitude towards Castro, and I believe if Castro and the Reds had won the Cold War, there would have been executions in Central Park and I might’ve been one of the ones executed and certain other people would be there cheering. So, I have a problem with people who took the other side.”
Did Chris Matthews just imply Bernie Sanders is going to start assassinating people?? WTF?? pic.twitter.com/yuSIr9zLyp
Matthews then immediately pivots from the historical reference to “executions in Central Park” if “the Reds had one” back to Sanders.
“I don’t know who Bernie supports over these years. I don’t know what he means by socialism. One week it’s Den-mahk, we’re going to be like Den-mahk,” the MSNBC host said, mimicking Sanders’ Brooklyn accent. “Ok, that’s harmless. That’s basically a capitalist country with a lot of good social programs. Den-mahk is harmless.”
The self-styled moderate Democrat who in the past has admitted he’s “more conservative than people think I am” set off a firestorm of controversy among progressives who’ve pointed out both MSNBC and CNN’s consistently negative coverage, which in this instance devolved into suggesting that Sen. Sanders could start political executions and assassinations if he gets in power.
During the rant, Matthews leaves his fellow MSNBC panelists somewhat speechless and surprised at how far he took the Cold War analogy, though Chris Hayes meekly pushed back a bit:
“He’s clearly in the Denmark category,” Hayes gently pointed out.
“Is he?!” Matthews shot back.
“Yeah,” Hayes replied.
“How do you know? Did he tell you that?” Matthews pressed.
Matthews had clearly implied that Sanders himself “would be there cheering” on executions in Central Park if the Communists had won.
The live commentary Friday night immediately and predictably unleashed outrage among progressives and Bernie supporters online, confirming in their minds the mainstream’s conspiring to prevent a Bernie Sanders primary nomination for president.
However, it will be interesting to see the degree to which Trump himself taps into these same arguments against Sanders’ well-known socialist agenda should the Vermont senator actually become the Democratic Party nominee.
Also imagine taking temperatures with a thermometer and spreading the virus by mouth to everyone, in a foolish attempt to determine who doesn’t have it. https://t.co/j0e2DXL2vr
China is forcing people into quarantine camps, restricting movement, locking people in their homes (literally), demanding daily temperatures updates from everyone, and now bitching about about travel restrictions of other countries.
Unfortunately, things look to get worse for at least a few more weeks.
Snoop Dogg Threatens “Funky Dog Head Bitch” Gayle King On Instagram: “Back Off Before We Come Get You”
The loss of Kobe Bryant has elicited a lot of discussions globally about the superstar.
It has also ignited a feud straight out of WorldStar Hip Hop after Gayle King chose to use Bryant’s death to remind the public that the former NBA star had been accused of sexual assault in 2003, while interviewing WNBA Champion Lisa Leslie after Bryant’s death.
“It has been said that his legacy is complicated because of the sexual assault charge which was dismissed in 2003, 2004. Is it complicated for you as a woman, a WNBA player?” King asked.
Leslie responded:
“It’s not complicated for me at all. I just have never seen him as being the kind of person that would do something violating to a woman or be aggressive in that way. That’s just not the person I know.”
While King’s choice to “go there” has resulted in tons of backlash toward the anchor, none was more pronounced – and possibly more in violation of several media sites’ terms of service – than Snoop Dogg’s, who took to Instagram to publicly berate, insult and threaten King.
Snoop said:
“Gayle King, out of pocket for that shit, way out of pocket. What do you gain from that? I swear to God, we the worst, we the f*king worst. We expect more from you, Gayle, don’t you hang out with Oprah? Why you all attacking us, we your people. You ain’t coming after f–king Harvey Weinstein asking him dumb-ass questions. I get sick of you all.”
He then continues, insulting King before threatening her: “I wanna call you one funky, dog-haired bitch. How dare you try and tarnish my motherf-king homeboy’s reputation, punk motherf–ker. Respect the family and back off, bitch, before we come get you.”
This video of Snoop threatening @GayleKing is disgusting
Referring to Gayle he says: “Funky dog head bitch…respect the family and backoff. Before we come get you.”
Seeing very few people defending Gayle…I know that if she were a white anchor she would have much more support pic.twitter.com/nPopk7uuBb
Snoop’s message was titled “P.S.A. Let the family mourn in peace” and has racked up millions of likes since it has been published. more than 1.1 million likes.
“I’ve been up reading the comments about the interview I did with Lisa Leslie about Kobe Bryant, and I know that if I had only seen the clip that you saw, I’d be extremely angry with me too. I am mortified. I am embarrassed and I am very angry.”
Last we checked, Snoop’s Twitter account with its 18 million followers and his Instagram with its 39 million followers, have not been suspended.
Maybe that double standard Snoop was complaining about makes some sense after all…
If there is one thing that is clear as we end this truly insane week it is that it was a good one for President Donald Trump.
Between his acquittal in the Senate over an impeachment that is the apotheosis of three years of patent nonsense and the fiasco that were the Iowa caucuses, Trump comes out of this first week of February in better shape than he’s been since he won the election back in 2016.
The Democrats have made a complete mockery of their candidate selection process. At least back in 2016 when Trump knocked people off one by one the GOP didn’t openly try to rig primaries against him.
Of course, Trump isn’t as much of an outsider as he portrays himself, so his real threat to the entrenched political establishment in The Swamp was never as great as someone like, say, Ron Paul’s was in 2012.
But the depths the DNC are willing to dig deep to in order to stop Bernie Sanders from being their nominee are truly breathtaking. In 2016, the Clinton machine had declared her the candidate. Bernie was getting in the way of her coronation as the first woman president.
In 2020, however, no one actually running for the Democratic nomination, except maybe Bernie Sanders in a perfect world, can actually beat Donald Trump. So, the whole process is really academic at this point.
Honestly, after this week the only person who can beat Trump nationally is Trump himself. So, that leaves me with 65/35 odds he’ll be re-elected.
But with impeachment behind him, an agenda of retribution against his accusers ahead of him and a Democratic party deep in the preparations for committing ritualistic suicide Trump should have no problem carrying at least as many states as he did in 2016.
Caitlyn Johnstone believes that the DNC’s ineptitude is a ruse, a clever ploy to look stupid and corrupt but doing so to ensure their preferred outcome, which is a brokered convention and the return of Hillary Clinton from the grave, as I said recently, “like some zombie whose head we forgot to cut off.”
While I love Ms. Johnstone’s thesis, I think she’s missing the much more salient point. As the Democrats flop from one fiasco to the next, they are doing two very important things.
First, they invalidate the idea they operate as a functional organization. This excludes them as people who can solve the country’s problems to voters who are pretty content with President Trump.
Second, it sets the stage for an irrevocable split of the party itself as the Bernie Bros become more convinced the party doesn’t represent them. I’m convinced that the end game for the DNC is to drive Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard from the party through these shenanigans.
This is why no matter who is eventually declared the winner in Iowa, the winner there is Donald Trump.
And, guess what? There’s only 49 more states like this to go!
I’m really regretting swearing off popcorn.
The good news is that, for now, the markets recognize that the biggest threat to U.S. political stability has been averted. Stocks bolted to new all-time highs after Trump’s acquittal, but couldn’t follow through to end the week.
It only gets better from here if the DNC is set on sowing distrust, chaos beneath a veneer of practiced stupidity.
So, while there are a number of sincere challenges to global growth both right in front of us (the coronavirus) and far ahead of us (the growing insolvency of the European financial system now that Brexit is finished) equity markets are more than capable of rallying for the next few sessions.
But expect volatility to increase from here. The dollar is strengthening. While the euro narrowly avoided a catastrophic January close last Friday, the dominant bear trend reasserted itself with a vengeance this week, breaking below the all-important $1.10 level.
And that should finally see eurobond prices begin to collapse. The rally we’ve seen over the past two weeks has been nothing short of ridiculous. A classic ‘false move.’
Oil is now in a bear market after 2018’s reaction high above $86 per barrel Brent and the terrible results and guidance from industry leaders this week like Exxon-Mobil (XOM) and Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A) only reinforce that view. If not for some noises from OPEC+ and the hopes that Russia will go along with extending current production cuts kept Brent from collapsing further this week as shorts piled on early.
But everything comes down to King Dollar and whether real fear which lurks just behind the headlines grips the plumbing of global markets, which had an outstanding week.
This surge in the dollar confirms the December low as significant which sets up a difficult few months. Given everything else we’re experiencing from the shutdown of major Chinese cities, travel, etc. there’s every reason to be cautious here even if the equity markets keep grinding higher, though I’d expect a whole lotta grinding sideways from both equities and gold while this goes on.
Expect a lot of this schizophrenic behavior as capital sloshes from stem to stern trying to figure out where it should best be deployed in this age of central bank heroin.
The central banks are still desperate to keep a lid on volatility to extend the lie that they have things under control, but if that’s the case then why is the Fed still having to deal with repo market interventions being oversubscribed and the rate creeping back up toward its target Fed Funds rate and IOER (Interest on Excess Reserves)?
They’ve lost control over the short end of the yield curve.
And that’s where things get interesting for this election cycle.
For Trump, the primary season should work out well as the Democrats continue imploding. And I have no doubt he will now go on the warpath to take down those who he rightly feels wronged him and the country. And he’ll be merciless on Twitter using it to goad the Democrats into even more lunacy, more mistakes.
This is what he truly excels at and it will all but guarantee him surviving any crises that appear on the horizon between now and November.
For now, New Hampshire is next. Bernie should win the most votes it in a walk. But the real winner, regardless of anything else will be Trump.
