Twitter Admits It Buried “Podesta Email”, DNC Tweets Ahead Of The Presidential Election

It was approximately one year ago, when angry tweeters alleged that Jack Dorsey et al., were purposefully censoring and "suppressing" certain content on Twitter, namely anything to do with the leaked DNC and John Podesta emails, as well as hashtags critical of Hillary Clinton while "shadow-banning" pro-Donald Trump content. We can now confirm that at least one part of the above was true, because during today's Senate hearing, Twitter admitted it "buried", which is another word for censored, significant portions of tweets related to hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign chair John Podesta in the months heading into the 2016 presidential campaign.

As Daily Caller's Peter Hasson reports, Twitter’s systems hid 48 percent of tweets using the #DNCLeak hashtag and 25 percent of tweets using #PodestaEmails, Twitter general counsel Sean Edgett said in his written testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.

Before the election, we also detected and took action on activity relating to hashtags that have since been reported as manifestations of efforts to interfere with the 2016 election. For example, our automated spam detection systems helped mitigate the impact of automated Tweets promoting the #PodestaEmails hashtag, which originated with Wikileaks’ publication of thousands of emails from the Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s Gmail account.

 

The core of the hashtag was propagated by Wikileaks, whose account sent out a series of 118 original Tweets containing variants on the hashtag #PodestaEmails referencing the daily installments of the emails released on the Wikileaks website. In the two months preceding the election, around 57,000 users posted approximately 426,000 unique Tweets containing variations of the #PodestaEmails hashtag.

 

Approximately one quarter (25%) of those Tweets received internal tags from our automation detection systems that hid them from searches.

 

As described in greater detail below, our systems detected and hid just under half (48%) of the Tweets relating to variants of another notable hashtag, #DNCLeak, which concerned the disclosure of leaked emails from the Democratic National Committee.

And yet, this glaring act of censorship was not aimed at the sources of the alleged propaganda, but the content: Just 2% of the tweets using the #DNCLeak hashtag came from “potentially Russian-linked accounts,” Edgett said.

He also explained that Twitter hid the tweets as “part of our general efforts at the time to fight automation and spam on our platform across all areas.

…And Hillary still lost?

Just over a year ago, on the same day that Donald Trump's "grab them by the pussy tape" was released, WikiLeaks dumped over 30,000 hacked Podesta emails, which were damaging to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, throughout the election. A prior Wikileak of DNC emails, which revealed party officials secretly aided Hillary Clinton during her primary battle against Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , eventually cost then-DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Shultz her job. The leaks also exposed supposedly "neutral" journalists as pro-Clinton partisans.

The U.S. intelligence community concluded that Russian operatives were behind the original hacking of both the DNC and Podesta emails, which were part of Russian influence operations meant to disrupt the American electoral system.

*  *  *
A question emerges: did Jack Dorsey, with his arbitrary decision to censor specific content damaging to Democrats, interfere with the election, and a funnier question: if Hillary lost with Twitter censoring anti-Hillary content, what would the outcome have been if Twitter actually respected the First Amendment?

via http://ift.tt/2lGLwt6 Tyler Durden

Futures Slide On Report Corporate Tax Cuts To Be Temporary, Phase Out After A Decade

When the NAR won the battle over keeping State and Local Tax deductions “as is”, in the process denying the proposed GOP tax reform more than a trillion in revenue over the next ten years, it effectively doomed the most important provision of the republican tax bill set to be unveiled tomorrow: the reduction in the corporate tax rate from 35% to 20%. Or rather the permanent reduction in the corporate tax rate. Because according to House Ways and Means Chairman, Kevin Brady, what will be revealed on Thursday is a tax proposal with a temporary corporate cut, one which reverts back to the original 35% tax rate after a decade.

As Bloomberg confirms there have been conflicting reports about when the rate cut would take effect, or how long it would last, and according to a Republican lawmaker, House tax writers will phase out the proposed corporate rate of 20% after a decade. While cutting the corporate tax rate to 20% from 35% is a key provision of the Republican tax legislation that set to be unveiled tomorrow, no matter how hard they tried, GOP legislators could not get over a key hurdle: lack of revenue.

According to Bloomberg, “Congressional tax writers are struggling to find enough revenue to help the tax package adhere to the 2018 budget Congress adopted last month. That budget would allow the legislation to add no more than $1.5 trillion to the federal deficit — before accounting for any economic growth that might result.

The problem is that the corporate tax cut is estimated to cost just over that, or $1.6 trillion over the next decade according to the Tax Foundation. One solution to the dilemma, is the notion of phasing in the corporate rate cut.  Furthermore, the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation said in an April letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan that a corporate tax rate of 20 percent would create deficits in the long run even if it remained in effect for just three years, adding further complication to the current revenue-less predicament.

Another problem: making the rate-cut temporary would limit its ability to spur economic growth, a key selling point cited by President Donald Trump and others. It is also a key factor in explaining the recent market surge, especially since Trump’s “Biggest tax cut ever” would have a 10 year shelf life, at which point things would revert back to the way they were.

And while stocks have been slow to grasp the significance of this major disruption to the GOP tax bill, the USDJPY is – gradually – waking up, or rather down, and so are futures…

via http://ift.tt/2iWCNlG Tyler Durden

Deutsche Asks A Stunning Question: “Is This The Beginning Of The End Of Fiat Money?”

One month ago, Deutsche Bank’s unorthodox credit analyst, Jim Reid published a phenomenal report, one which just a few years ago would have been anathema, as it dealt with two formerly taboo topics: is a financial crisis coming (yes), and what are the catalysts that have led the world to its current pre-crisis state, to which Reid had three simple answers: central banks, financial bubbles and record amounts of debt. 

Just as striking was Reid’s nuanced observation that it was the modern fiat system itself that has encouraged and perpetuated the current boom-bust cycle, and was itself in jeopardy when the next crash hits:

We think the final break with precious metal currency systems from the early 1970s (after centuries of adhering to such regimes) and to a fiat currency world has encouraged budget deficits, rising debts, huge credit creation, ultra loose monetary policy, global build-up of imbalances, financial deregulation and more unstable markets.

 

The various breaks with gold based currencies over the last century or so has correlated well with our financial shocks/crises indicator. It shows that you are more likely to see crises/shocks when we break from hard currency systems. Some of the devaluation to Gold has been mindboggling over the last 100 years.

The implications of this allegation were tremendous, especially coming from a reputable professional who works in a company which only exists thanks to the current fiat regime: after all, much has been said about Deutsche Bank’s tens of trillions  in gross liabilities, mostly in the form of various rate derivatives, backed by hundreds of billions in deposits and, implicitly, the backstop of the German government as Deutsche Bank discovered the hard way one year ago.

However, what shocked most readers was that at its core, Reid’s report was dead accurate, and as Reid writes in a follow up report published this morning, it is the topic of the fiat system itself as potentially the weakest link in any future crisis that generated the most debate.

In the report titled, “The Start of the End of Fiat Money?” Reid writes that “as we road-showed the document a theme that had minor billing in the report started to gain more and more prominence in the discussions and as such we wanted to expand upon it in this short follow-up thematic note. The basic premise is that a fiat currency system – the likes of which we’ve had since 1971 – is inherently unstable and prone to high inflation all other things being equal. However, for the current system to have survived this long perhaps we’ve needed a huge offsetting disinflationary shock. We think that since around 1980 we’ve had such a force and there is evidence that this influence is now slowly reversing.”

And here comes the shocking punchline: not only does Reid concede that the fiat system “may be seriously tested over the coming decade and ultimately we may need to find an alternative” but that one such alternative is none other than cryptocurrencues, i.e. bitcoin, ethereum and so on. Which, while it may be a surprise to institutional investors appears to have been all too obvious to buyers of cryptocurrencies.

If we’re correct, the fiat currency system may be seriously tested over the coming decade and ultimately we may need to find an alternative. This is not necessarily a story for the next few months or quarters but we think the trend reversal is already slowly in place. Maybe we can explore future alternatives to the current monetary system in a second part sometime in the future. Cryptocurriencies are all the rage at the moment and are as much about blockchain as anything else but there could be an increasing desire for alternative medians of exchange in the years to come if we are correct. 

Below we excerpt some of the key observations from Reid’s note:

* * *

The Future of Money Part 1 – The Start of the End of Fiat Money?

Background

In “The Next Financial Crisis” we suggested how China’s fairly sudden integration into the global economy at the end of the 1970s and a very favourable once-in-alifetime shift in demographics from around 1980 onwards could have contributed to the modern boom/bust culture that has made financial crises more regular in recent decades. The argument is based around a view that a positive labour supply shock from China and developed countries’ demographics between 1980-2015 has allowed inflation to be controlled externally as the surge in the global labour supply at a time of rapid globalisation has suppressed wages. With inflation controlled externally it has allowed governments and central banks the luxury of responding to every crisis and shock with more leverage, loose policy and latterly more and more money printing. Its not usually this easy as inflation would have normally increased with such stimulus and credit creation.

It could be argued that this external disinflation shock has perhaps ‘saved’ fiat currencies after the runaway inflation of the 1970s in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the Bretton Woods quasi Gold Standard from 1971 onwards. If this theory is correct then any reversals in this demographic super cycle could spell problems for the fiat currency system. Under this scenario inflation would pick up externally due to working age populations no longer rising and labour pricing power returning. Central banks and governments which have ‘dined out’ on the 35 year secular, structural decline in inflation are not able to prevent it rising as raising interest rates to suitable levels would risk serious economic contraction given the huge debt burden economies face. As such they are forced to prioritise low interest rates and nominal growth over inflation control which could herald in the beginning of the end of the global fiat currency system that begun with the abandonment of Bretton Woods back in 1971.

Fiat currencies and inflation

For virtually all of financial history up to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1971, most currencies were backed by precious metals for the vast majority of times. Over the preceding century or so these systems periodically broke down for many countries due to wars and notably during the Depression years of the 1930s. However, countries generally reverted to some kind of precious metal fix after experiencing high inflation in the years where they suspended membership. Figure 1 shows our global median inflation index back over 800 years and then isolates the period post 1900 where inflation exploded relative to long-term history

Figure 2 then shows this in year-on-year terms and as can be seen, in the 700 years before the twentieth century inflation and deflation were near equal bedfellows with only a gradual upward creep in inflation as new precious metals were mined or governments periodically punched holes in existing coins and thus slightly debasing the currency.

As someone that has studied economic history it always amuses me to hear that we live in times of extremely low inflation when history would suggest these are relatively high inflation times. Indeed a look at the right hand chart of Figure 2 shows we haven’t had a single year of negative (median) global inflation since 1933. What has happened though is that we saw a 35 year disinflationary period start in 1980 that took inflation down from the extremes at the start of that decade to what we think will be the secular lows around the middle of this decade.

Inflation since 1971 – a loss of control and then a positive disinflationary shock

In the first decade of global fiat currencies post 1971, global inflation saw one of its biggest climbs in history. Although the oil shocks were partly to blame, the fact that the shackles of the Bretton Woods system were removed and countries were freer to borrow and find ways of liberalising finance and credit surely contributed to the inflation surge. Gold saw an annualised nominal return of 32.2% p.a. in the 1970s way above the long term return of 1.97% p.a. from 1800.

However a miracle occurred post 1980 which many have attributed to the Volker Fed taming the inflationary dragon. Clearly their tighter policies helped but was the global structural story providing phenomenal disinflation  tailwinds from this point and is it now slowly reversing?

China and Developed Country demographics to the rescue

We think that the effective global labour force exploded from around 1980 due to natural global demographics and China opening up its economy to the outside world at the end of the 1970s. Figure 3 shows the 15-64 year olds  (working age population proxy) in the More Developed Regions + China where the second bars repeat the exercise with China zeroed before 1980 to reflect its virtually closed economy before this point and the effective surge in the global labour supply thereafter. So we first see the impact in 1990 on this graph.

Obviously, this is highly simplified and in a globalised world we should probably include more countries than China as various lower labour cost nations have transformed from relatively closed low income countries to more developed globalised ones. However, China dwarfs all these by its size. It’s also simplistic to include all of the working age population increase from China in one decade as we do in the chart. It should probably be spread out over time but it’s hard to assess the increments that they should be added over the last 35 years. The disinflationary journey would be the same though. At a developed world level there’s little doubt that labour’s share of GDP has declined over the last few decades. Figure 4 shows this decline for a selection of G20 countries from 1980.

In addition Figure 5 shows real wage growth (YoY change) over the last few decades for a selection of the largest countries around the world. As can be seen in the two decades we have data for prior to 1980, real wage growth was much higher than the post 1980-period. It’s interesting that China’s wage growth over the period was much higher which fits with our thesis that the EM workers that integrated into the global economy benefitted most from this globalisation period.

So will a falling working age population increase inflation?

As can be seen in Figure 3 above, the peak of the ‘working age population’ in the MDW plus China occurred around the middle of this decade. Going forward the supply of labour will in aggregate start to decline after rising for the last three and a half decades.

While the pace of decline will be slow, the fact that it’s not increasing at the rapid pace of the last 35 years surely must have an impact on labour costs. If economic growth simply increases at trend over the next few years and decades then all other things being equal a flat to declining labour force should bring upward pressure on wage costs.

Would fiat currencies survive if labour’s share of GDP reversed?

In terms of addressing inequality and the increasing gap between capital and labour, higher wages would undoubtedly be good news. However the problem for the current global monetary system is that over the last 45 years it has relied on governments and central banks being able to turn on the stimulus spigots at the drop of a hat when a crisis has come. This has enabled each crisis to be dealt with via increasing leverage rather than creative  destruction type policies. For this to be possible you’ve needed an offset to such stimulus to prevent such policies being inflationary. Fortunately (or unfortunately if you believe it’s an inherently unstable equilibrium) the external  global downward pressure on labour costs ensured that this has happened.

So what would happen to the global monetary system if labour costs started to reverse their 35 year trend? If central banks had their current mandates of keeping inflation around 2% then they would be duty bound to tighten policy more often regardless of the external environment. However, such an outcome is probably unrealistic given how much debt there is at a global level. Governments would surely first change their mandates to allow higher inflation or look to reduce their independence rather than allow interest rates to rise to economically uncomfortable levels given high debt levels. Ultimately, if and when labour costs rise at the margin rather than fall at the margin, we will likely have a much more difficult environment for policy makers and in a democracy where politicians have to be elected it is likely that inflation will be the casualty.

If we get higher trending inflation then bond yields would be very vulnerable, especially relative to current near record (multi-century) lows. Given the near record level debt burdens around the world, it is likely that central banks would be forced to buy more securities again to ensure that yields stayed comfortably below nominal GDP. This would likely lock in higher inflation as you would have negative real yields, very loose financial conditions and higher wages.

Eventually, it’s possible that inflation becomes more and more uncontrollable and the era of fiat currencies looks vulnerable as people lose faith in paper money. Once the value of debt has been eroded the debate would likely be live as to what replaces fiat currencies as surely the backlash would be severe against the system that allowed us to get to such a situation. Although the current speculative interest in cryptocurrencies is more to do with blockchain technology than a loss of faith in paper money, at some point there will likely be some median of exchange that becomes more universal and a competitor of paper money.

It’s far too early to fully speculate on the future of money but if there is demand we will look to add a part 2 to this series where we look at the alternatives and perhaps a more in-depth look at cryptocurriences going forward.

What if people retire later?

If populations extended their retirement well beyond 65 years old then the working age population will get a boost. However, while this is undoubtedly happening, in democracies this is proving incredibly hard to legislate on a big enough scale to seriously impact the overall natural demographic story. Maybe one day retirement ages will go up significantly and change the argument but this probably requires a major global shock and subsequent rewriting of contractual agreements between governments and their populations.

Conclusion

We would argue that fiat currencies are the rarity in financial history and are always associated with higher inflation. Perhaps the now 46 year experience with fiat currencies can be broken down into two periods; 1) The 1970s where inflation rose around the word at the fastest pace on record; and 2) the last 35 years where inflation has always been positive at a global level but has progressively fallen largely due to demographics, China and the associated globalisation trend.

Given we know that demographics are now slowly turning, it’s possible that a new era is slowly emerging towards higher wages, which will perhaps be encouraged by the rise in populism. As such, will fiat currencies survive the policy dilemma that the authorities will experience as they try to balance higher yields with record levels of debt?

That’s the multi-trillion dollar question for the years ahead.

via http://ift.tt/2zZFENP Tyler Durden

US Air Force Admits To Harvesting Russian Tissue

A day after Russian President Vladimir Putin surprised members of Russia’s human rights council by informing them that some shadowy entity – possibly with ties to the United States – had been collecting biological tissues from Russians from different ethnic groups, the group responsible for harvesting the tissue has revealed itself.

While some initially discounted Putin's remars as another loony conspiracy theory, as it turns out, he was right: The group responsible for the tissue collection was none other than the US Air Force, proving that yet another conspiracy theory has become a conspiracy fact.

A representative for the US Air Force Education and Training Command explained to Russia Today that the choice of the Russian population was not intentional, and is related to research the Air Force is conducting on the human musculoskeletal system.

Eyebrows were first raised in July when the AETC issued a tender seeking to acquire samples of ribonucleic acid and synovial fluid from Russians, adding that all samples (12 RNA and 27 synovial fluid) “shall be collected from Russia and must be Caucasian.” The Air Force said it wouldn’t collect samples from Ukrainians, but didn’t specify why.

According to AETC spokesman Capt. Beau Downey, the 59th medical group’s molecular research center is currently conducting “locomotor studies to identify various biomarkers associated with trauma.”

Downey told Russian media that the study required two sets of samples: disease and control samples of RNA and synovial membrane. The first set was provided by a “US-based company.”

Since the first set of tissue, provided by a US company, was sourced from Russia, the Air Force opted to collect the second set of data from Russians, too, to eliminate any confounding variables that could skew the results of the study. He did not say which set – the control or the diseased set – was collected first, and neglected to provide any further details about the study.

However, some suspect that this explanation is merely a ruse, and that the Pentagon is collecting the tissue for a much more sinister purpose, according to RT.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday that Russian genetic material is being harvested all over the country. “Do you know that biological material is being collected all over the country, from different ethnic groups and people living in different geographical regions of the Russian Federation? The question is – why is it being done? It’s being done purposefully and professionally. We are a kind of object of great interest,” Putin told Russia’s Human Rights Council, without specifying who might be behind the activities involving Russians’ biological samples. “Let them do what they want, and we must do what we must,” he said.

 

The fact that Russian tissue samples specifically are on the wanted list made some wonder whether the Pentagon is working on a biological weapon to target Russians. “I’m not saying that it is about preparing a biological war against Russia. But its scenarios, are, no doubt, being worked on. That is to say, in case the need suddenly arises,” Franz Klintsevich, the first deputy chairman of the Federation Council’s Committee for Defense and Security, wrote on Facebook. “It is also no secret that different ethnic groups react differently to biological weapons. Hence the collection of the biological material from Russians living in different geographical locations. In the west, everything is done extremely scrupulously and is verified up to the tiniest detail.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed on Tuesday that Russian special services are in possession of intelligence suggesting that NGOs are collecting the genetic material – intelligence that presumably prompted Putin’s initial speculation about who might be behind the collections.

“Some emissaries are really carrying out such activities, representatives of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and other bodies. Such cases were registered, and security services, the president naturally have this information,” he said.

This is not the first attempt to collect samples of Russian genetic material by foreign agencies in Russia, Igor Nikulin, a former member of the UN biological weapons commission, told RT.

“Such attempts were made back in the 90s, when there was a Human Genome program, then there were various programs in the 2000s too… under different pretexts, including the most noble, but for some reason all this happens in the interests of the US military department, and this raises suspicion,” Nikulin said.

He noted that, as a rule, “samples of Europeans of the Slavic group, mostly Russians” are sought-after. “Blood samples are taken for analysis, and if an organization is foreign, what they are doing with the results is always unknown,” he said.
 

via http://ift.tt/2im3Fr7 Tyler Durden

China Has Practiced Bombing Runs On Guam

Just as President Donald Trump is preparing to embark on a nearly two-week tour of Asia – his first since taking office – where he is expected to discuss, among other topics, the regional threat posed by North Korea, Defense News is reporting that China has reportedly been conducting bombing drills targeting the US territory of Guam.

Reports of China’s aggressive expansion of its air force – an attempt to exert its dominance over contested territories in the South China and East China seas – were relayed by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford during a briefing with reporters.

China “is very much the long-term challenge in the region,” Dunford said. “When we look at the capabilities China is developing, we’ve got to make sure we maintain the ability to meet our alliance commitments in the Pacific.”

The notion that both North Korea and China have threatened Guam, either explicitly or tacitly, speaks to the fact that China is the biggest threat to US security in the Pacific, nuclear standoff with North Korea notwithstanding, Dunford said.

To wit, a conflict with North Korea is still viewed as “a fight we can win,” military officials said during the briefing. With China, they said they “worry about the way things are going.”

Followers of US activities in the Pacific may have noticed the increase in confrontations between US and Chinese forces, both in the water and in the sky. While it hasn’t been nearly as widely publicized as the Chinese military’s buildup in the South China Sea, China has also been building its fleet of fighter jets, operating daily, aggressive campaigns to contest airspace over the East China Sea, South China Sea and further out into the Pacific, Defense News reported.

The officials described the escalatory behaviors by China in a briefing they provided to reporters traveling with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford.

China’s willingness to test boundaries has caused the number of confrontations between Japanese and Chinese fighter jets to escalate dramatically…

Over the last year Japan has scrambled 900 sorties to intercept Chinese fighters challenging Japan’s air defense identification zone, or ADIZ. In 2013 China announced borders for its own ADIZ, borders which overlapped Japan’s zone and included the disputed Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea. Since then, increased interactions between Japanese and Chinese aircraft ultimately resulted in Japan relocating two fighter squadrons to Naha Air Base on Okinawa to more easily meet the incursions, the officials said.

 

“We now have, on a daily basis, armed Chinese Flankers and Japanese aircraft” coming in close proximity of each other, the officials said, adding that intercepts between the U.S. and China are also increasing.

…While US military officials have accused the Chinese air force of provoking the US by staging intercepts of US aircraft.

“It’s very common for PRC aircraft to intercept U.S. aircraft” these days, the officials said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

 

Chinese aircraft are also testing U.S. air defense identification zones, the officials said. Chinese H-6K “Badger” bombers upgraded with 1,000 mile range air launched cruise missiles are testing U.S. defense zones around Guam.

 

The Badgers run “not infrequent” flights to get within range of the U.S. territory, they said.

 

“The PRC is practicing attacks on Guam,” the officials said.

 

The vast majority of the flights occur without an incident, such as a report of unsafe flying, for example. The officials said they follow U.S. Pacific Command guidance on how to respond in those events, so they do not further escalate.

DefenseNews noted that the military relationship between the US and China remains open, if guarded. US officials meet twice a year at the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement conference, where the incursions are discussed along with other security topics.

However, officials described China’s repeated confrontations as part of a strategy of normalization, whereby Chinese officials repeatedly test boundaries until regional gradually come to accept their expanded presence. Ultimately, the strategy is aimed at forcing the international community to accept “the nine-dash line” – the contest maritime border surrounding islands in the South China Sea that China has claimed and developed, but have been the subject of an international dispute with several of China’s regional neighbors. Last year, an international court ruled in favor of the Philippines’ claim of ownership, but the ruling was promptly ignored by the Chinese.

The expanded Chinese fighter and bomber runs are just one part of the country’s effort to “win without fighting” to gradually normalize the gains China has made in the South China Sea, the officials said.

 

There are other pressures. For example, the officials said they estimate the People’s Liberation Army Navy has placed as many as 150,000 Chinese commercial fishing vessels under its direction, even though they are not official Chinese navy. The Chinese fishing vessels make coordinated attacks on Vietnamese fishermen, the officials said, ramming and sometimes sinking boats near the Paracel Islands. China took the territory from Vietnam in the 1970s and has militarized some of the islands. The area remains a traditional fishing area for the Vietnamese.

 

Taken together, China’s activities suggest it is preparing to defend expanded boundaries, the U.S. officials worry.

 

“I think they will be ready to enforce it when they decide to declare the Nine-Dash line as theirs,” one of the officials said, referring to the territorial line China has identified that would notionally put the entire South China Sea under Chinese control if enforced.

Ultimately, the US fears that Chinese systemic provocations will erode the so-called “rules-based order” – the system of international codes and treaties that governs military relationships between sovereign states.

If unchallenged, the U.S. officials worry that China could slowly force countries away from what they describe as the “rules based order” — essentially the standing international treaties and norms — in the region and make them shift their security alliances to Beijing for their own economic survival.

 

Dunford said the U.S. would not allow that to happen.

 

“We view ourselves as a Pacific power,” Dunford said.

 

There are some who try to create a narrative that we are not in the Pacific to stay,” he said. “Our message is that we are a Pacific power. We intend to stay in the Pacific. Our future economic prosperity is inextricably linked to our security and political relationships in the region.”

 

While all of the officials stressed that there is no imminent danger of a conflict with China, U.S. forces in the region are rethinking what a Pacific fight would look like.

 

“If we find ourselves in conflict out there we will be under air attack,” the official said.

While North Korea will likely be the main topic of discussion during Trump’s Asia tour, Dunford said he expects Trump will convey the US’s displeasure with China’s increasingly aggressive posture in the Pacific.

Of course, while China has cooperated with the US in passing sanctions against North Korea, while partly acquiescing to US demands that Beijing curtail economic support for the Kim regime, Dunford seems to suggest that China’s cooperation on these issues is nothing more than a ploy to create a buffer of goodwill as it gradually expands its reach in the Pacific. The question now is: Will the US seek to more boldly counter China’s advance? Or, like the famous analogy of the frog in the pot of boiling water, will US reticence allow China to keep pushing until it is the dominant military power in the Pacific?

What do you think?
 

via http://ift.tt/2A9wZt4 Tyler Durden

Dinar Devaluation Looms As Bahrain Begs Richer Neigbors For Bailout

Despite the recent rise in oil prices, all is not well among the allies in the Gulf. The 'pegged-to-the-dollar' Bharaini Dinar has tumbled in the last few days as Bloomberg reports the nation has asked Gulf Arab allies for financial assistance as it seeks to replenish its foreign-exchange reserves and avert a currency devaluation – which could spread contagiously through MidEast markets.

Bloomber notes that the slump in oil prices has battered the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council, at times raising questions over whether a dollar peg seen as a bedrock for economic stability for more than three decades was sustainable. And while bets against the region’s currencies have subsided this year, a devaluation of a GCC member would risk shifting the attention to others. Gulf central banks, including Bahrain’s, have repeatedly brushed aside talk of abandoning their exchange-rate regimes.

But Bahrain has seen its central bank's foreign reserves collapse over 75% from 2014 highs as they have defended the currency peg.

And so, as Bloomberg reports, according to people with knowledge of the talks, Bahrain has asked for a bailout.

The request was made to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two of the people said.

 

A third person said Kuwait was also asked.

 

The countries responded by requesting the island kingdom do more to bring its finances under control in return for the money, the people said on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private.

 

The talks are at an early stage, one person said.

It appears the FX markets are not convinced as the Dinar tumbled…

The IMF estimates that Bahrain needs oil prices at $99 a barrel to balance its budget this year, compared with $73.1 a barrel for Saudi Arabia, which is overhauling its economy.

While Brent crude is trading at the highest level in more than two years, it’s still almost $40 below Bahrain’s breakeven price.

But, Bloomberg points out that economists say that a Saudi-led bailout of Bahrain will be less costly than cleaning up the mess of a devaluation.

“Most people are fully expecting the other Gulf countries to come to Bahrain’s aid,” said Jason Tuvey, a London-based economist at Capital Economics.

 

“If Bahrain was forced to devalue its currency it would probably start to raise questions about other currency pegs.”

Will this be the next ripple to spook markets? Or just another dip to buy?

via http://ift.tt/2z4IbJD Tyler Durden

On November 4th The Antifa Insurgency Against Donald Trump And His Supporters Will Begin

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

Are we about to see chaos in the streets in major cities all over America? 

Antifa and other radical leftist groups are promising that a series of protests will begin on November 4th that will never end until “the Trump/Pence regime” is “removed from power”.  And as you will see below, Antifa has openly and publicly embraced violence and the Department of Homeland Security says that they have engaged in domestic terrorism.  Hopefully these “protests” will fizzle out after a few weeks, because political organizations that believe in “the necessary use of violence” have no place in our society.

Amazingly, there are still some out there that are claiming that the radical left is not planning anything for November 4th.  The following comes directly from refusefascism.org, which is one of the key websites for Antifa and other radical leftist groups…

ON NOVEMBER 4, 2017:

 

We will gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country, at first many thousands declaring that this whole regime is illegitimate and that we will not stop until our single demand is met: This Nightmare Must End: the Trump/Pence Regime Must Go!

 

Our protest must grow day after day and night after night—thousands becoming hundreds of thousands, and then millions—determined to act to put a stop to the grave danger that the Trump/Pence Regime poses to the world by demanding that this whole regime be removed from power.

 

Our actions will reflect the values of respect for all of humanity and the world we want—in stark contrast to the hate and bigotry of the Trump/Pence fascist regime.

 

Our determination to persist and not back down will compel the whole world to take note. Every force and faction in the power structure would be forced to respond to our demand. The cracks and divisions among the powers already evident today will sharpen and widen. As we draw more and more people forward to stand up, all of this could lead to a situation where this illegitimate regime is removed from power.

That sounds pretty serious to me.

Hopefully they are not able to back up their words with actions.

I have seen various lists of cities were Antifa protests are planned floating around the Internet, but I felt that it was important to go right to the source.  According to refusefascism.org, this is the official list of cities where activists will be gathering on November 4th…

  • Austin
  • Atlanta
  • Boston
  • Chicago
  • Cincinnati
  • Cleveland
  • Honolulu
  • Indianapolis
  • Los Angeles
  • Minneapolis
  • New York City
  • Omak
  • Philadelphia
  • Pittsfield
  • Portland
  • Salem
  • San Francisco
  • Seattle
  • Tucson

Let us hope that none of these events become violent, but we have seen violence from Antifa on numerous occasions since the election, and this is an organization that says that “the use of force is intrinsic to their political philosophy”.  The following comes from a startling article in the Hill

Anti-fascist activists, or “antifa,” increasingly mobilized in the wake of President Trump’s election, are unapologetic about what they describe as the necessary use of violence to combat authoritarianism.

 

While both experts on the movement and activists within it emphasize that not everyone who participates in anti-fascist activism engages in violence, they say the use of force is intrinsic to their political philosophy.

At this point everyone knows what Antifa is all about, and my hope is that Republicans and Democrats will stand united in denouncing their violent tactics. 

For example, just consider what happened at a recent event in Minnesota

Hundreds of masked protesters at the University of Minnesota recently conducted a violent protest against a speech by conservative activist and YouTube commentator Lauren Southern.

 

Fights erupted outside the event, forcing police to intervene. Members of the conservative group Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), which hosted the event, say they were “tagged” and set upon by masked antifa activists who spat on them, hit them, shoved them off bicycles and maced them.

These crazed lunatics actually believe that Donald Trump is a modern day version of Adolf Hitler, and therefore they believe that the use of violence is justified in order to prevent a new “Nazi regime” from taking over America.

Of course that is complete and utter nonsense, and in their zeal to attack conservatives, Antifa is actually becoming what they say that they hate.  If anyone can be characterized as “brownshirts”, it is the Antifa thugs that are willing to use violence against those that would dare to disagree with their radical leftist agenda.  According to Politico, their increasingly violent tactics have caused the Department of Homeland Security to officially classify their activities as “domestic terrorist violence”…

Federal authorities have been warning state and local officials since early 2016 that leftist extremists known as “antifa” had become increasingly confrontational and dangerous, so much so that the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence,” according to interviews and confidential law enforcement documents obtained by POLITICO.

Are you starting to understand how dangerous these guys are?

And there is actually evidence that radical leftists have been cultivating ties with Islamic terrorists in the Middle East.  The following comes from a report that was published by the Daily Mail

A secret FBI investigation of the violent ‘resistance’ movement on college campuses against President Trump has led to an alarming discovery – the collusion between American anarchists and foreign terrorists in the Islamic State and Al qaeda, according to a confidential ‘Informational Report’ by FBI field offices.

 

‘There is clearly overwhelming evidence that there are growing ties between U.S. radicals and the Islamic State, as well as several [ISIS] offshoots and splinter groups,’ stated the FBI field report, which was delivered to Acting Director Andrew McCabe on July 11, 2017, and which is being published for the first time in my new book All Out War: The Plot to Destroy Trump.

An atmosphere of violence and fear creates an environment in which many conservatives are afraid to speak out.

In fact, a survey that was just released discovered that 58 percent of Americans “believe the political climate prevents them from sharing their own political beliefs”

The Cato 2017 Free Speech and Tolerance Survey, a new national poll of 2,300 U.S. adults, finds that 71% Americans believe that political correctness has silenced important discussions our society needs to have. The consequences are personal—58% of Americans believe the political climate prevents them from sharing their own political beliefs.

 

Democrats are unique, however, in that a slim majority (53%) do not feel the need to self-censor. Conversely, strong majorities of Republicans (73%) and independents (58%) say they keep some political beliefs to themselves.

But this is not what our founders intended.  Freedom of speech is in the Bill of Rights for a reason, because without it we would be in a world of trouble.

As the radical left becomes more violent, we need to become bolder than ever.  As for me, I will continue to speak out about what we need to do to turn this country around

No matter how crazy they get, we can never allow Antifa to intimidate us.

We are in a battle for the future of America, and the fate of our children and our grandchildren is hanging in the balance.  The radical left must not win, because if they do they will transform our society into a totalitarian socialist “utopia” that will look nothing like the nation that our forefathers originally founded.

*  *  *

Michael Snyder is a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional District, and you can learn how you can get involved in the campaign on his official website. His new book entitled “Living A Life That Really Matters” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.

via http://ift.tt/2z6k6Qm Tyler Durden

Amazon Registers Crypto, Ethereum Domains As Rumors Swirl It May Soon Accept Bitcoin

Over the past week, rumors have swirled that Amazon may be preparing to accept bitcoin as a form of payment, a decision which would lend immediate credibility and legitimacy to the cryptocurrency. Last week, Die Welt reported that fintech sources in Silicon Valley were suggesting that the global online retail giant could soon integrate Bitcoin as a payment option.

When questioned, an Amazon spokesman replied to the German publication in a predictably generic fashion: “(Amazon) opts to include new products or services only when these are useful for our customers – until that point, we do not engage in rough speculation”, CoinTelegraph reported.


Photo credit: Cointelegraph

Amazon has faced years of lobbying and rumors regarding its Bitcoin relationship ever since smaller competitor Overstock (which recently announced plans to raise capital via an ICO) became a pioneering virtual currency adherent in 2013. While multiple other midsize operators have since engaged with Bitcoin, Amazon’s participation would still be a first-of-its-kind move. Meanwhile, several dedicated services already exist to offer purchases with Bitcoin from their websites through the intermediary of gift cards.

And while Amazon has refused to commit on the record, rumors that the world’s biggest online retailer may be adopting cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin and ethereum, got a renewed push today when CoinDesk reported that according to industry news site DomainNameWire, Amazon has registered three cryptocurrency-related web domains, online records show.

According to information from Whois Lookup, three domains – “amazonethereum.com,” “amazoncryptocurrency.com” and “amazoncryptocurrencies.com” – were registered on Oct. 31. The domains are linked to Amazon Technologies, Inc., a subsidiary of Amazon.com, Inc. that has been attributed to past patent filings from the e-commerce company.

Phone numbers listed on the registration documents connect to Amazon’s legal department, though a representative of that office could not be reached by press time.

While coindesk admits that as of this moment, “it’s not entirely clear what purpose the domain names will serve” the mere fact that Amazon has telegraphed its intentions vis-a-vis the crypto space may be sufficient to boost demand for the digital currency even more, as the eventual acceptance by Amazon would be widely seen as a universal stamp of approval.  What is interesting is that Amazon may be branching out beyond merely the generic “bitcoin” and into its biggest competitor, which arguable has broader corporate acceptance, ethereum.

Then again, Amazon may be simply moving to safeguard its brand. Back in 2013, Amazon secured “amazonbitcoin.com,” which currently redirects to Amazon’s main page – an arrangement that further suggests the protective intent of the registration.

Alternatively, Amazon could be seeking to avoid confusion between cryptocurrencies and Amazon Coin, a virtual currency product introduced in 2013 that serves as an online payment method for customers.

via http://ift.tt/2z4gvlH Tyler Durden

“He’s F**ked”: Trump Blames Kushner For Mueller Probe As West Wing Increasingly “Fears Impeachment”

In a new bombshell report, Vanity Fair says that for the first time since the Mueller investigation began earlier this year, key Trump allies in the West Wing are starting to worry that the notion of an impeachment might be slightly more than just a Democratic pipe dream.  As former aide Sam Nunberg said, Mueller’s indictment of Paul Manafort has sparked concerns in the White House that Mueller has every intention of parsing through every Trump/Kushner financial dealing until he uncovers something incriminating.

Until now, Robert Mueller has haunted Donald Trump’s White House as a hovering, mostly unseen menace. But by securing indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, and a surprise guilty plea from foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, Mueller announced loudly that the Russia investigation poses an existential threat to the president. “Here’s what Manafort’s indictment tells me: Mueller is going to go over every financial dealing of Jared Kushner and the Trump Organization,” said former Trump campaign aide Sam Nunberg. “Trump is at 33 percent in Gallup. You can’t go any lower. He’s fucked.”

 

The first charges in the Mueller probe have kindled talk of what the endgame for Trump looks like, according to conversations with a half-dozen advisers and friends of the president. For the first time since the investigation began, the prospect of impeachment is being considered as a realistic outcome and not just a liberal fever dream. According to a source, advisers in the West Wing are on edge and doing whatever they can not to be ensnared. One person close to Dina Powell and Gary Cohn said they’re making sure to leave rooms if the subject of Russia comes up.

Kushner

While he has refrained so far from publicly criticizing Special Counsel Mueller, Vanity Fair says the President is growing increasingly frustrated and privately lashing out at his own legal team and even son-in-law Jared Kushner, who some around Trump have described as the “worst political adviser in the White House in modern history.”

Trump, meanwhile, has reacted to the deteriorating situation by lashing out on Twitter and venting in private to friends. He’s frustrated that the investigation seems to have no end in sight. “Trump wants to be critical of Mueller,” one person who’s been briefed on Trump’s thinking says. “He thinks it’s unfair criticism. Clinton hasn’t gotten anything like this. And what about Tony Podesta? Trump is like, When is that going to end?”

 

According to two sources, Trump has complained to advisers about his legal team for letting the Mueller probe progress this far. Speaking to Steve Bannon on Tuesday, Trump blamed Jared Kushner for his role in decisions, specifically the firings of Mike Flynn and James Comey, that led to Mueller’s appointment, according to a source briefed on the call. When Roger Stone recently told Trump that Kushner was giving him bad political advice, Trump agreed, according to someone familiar with the conversation. “Jared is the worst political adviser in the White House in modern history,” Nunberg said. “I’m only saying publicly what everyone says behind the scenes at Fox News, in conservative media, and the Senate and Congress.”

Focusing on the Kushner angle, Trump is reportedly increasingly blaming his son-in-law for his role in decisions that led to the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller.  In a call Tuesday to former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon, Trump put blame on Kushner for the part he took in choices to fire former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, Vanity Fair reported.

Roger Stone also recently said Kushner wasn’t giving Trump good advice — a sentiment which Trump reportedly agreed with, according to someone familiar with the conversation. Sam Nunberg, a former campaign aide to President Trump who was fired, echoed the statement.

“Jared is the worst political adviser in the White House in modern history,” Nunberg said. “I’m only saying publicly what everyone says behind the scenes at Fox News, in conservative media, and the Senate and Congress.”

Meanwhile, former Chief Strategist Steve Bannon is apparently also increasingly concerned that the establishment GOP might jump at the opportunity to “fuck over Trump” by supporting impeachment proceedings.  Among other things, Bannon has proposed that Trump hire a more aggressive head lawyer and go on the offensive to “defund Mueller’s investigation or limit its scope.”

But these soft-power approaches are being criticized by Trump allies including Steve Bannon and Roger Stone, who both believe establishment Republicans are waiting for a chance to impeach Trump. “The establishment has proven time and time again they will fuck Trump over,” a Bannon ally told me.

 

In a series of phone calls with Trump on Monday and Tuesday, Bannon told the president to shake up the legal team by installing an aggressive lawyer above Cobb, according to two sources briefed on the call. Bannon has also discussed ways to pressure Congress to defund Mueller’s investigation or limit its scope. “Mueller shouldn’t be allowed to be a clean shot on goal,” a Bannon confidant told me. “He must be contested and checked. Right now he has unchecked power.”

 

Bannon’s sense of urgency is being fueled by his belief that Trump’s hold on power is slipping. The collapse of Obamacare repeal, and the dimming chances that tax reform will pass soon—many Trump allies are deeply pessimistic about its prospects—have created the political climate for establishment Republicans to turn on Trump. Two weeks ago, according to a source, Bannon did a spitball analysis of the Cabinet to see which members would remain loyal to Trump in the event the 25th Amendment were invoked, thereby triggering a vote to remove the president from office. Bannon recently told people he’s not sure if Trump would survive such a vote. “One thing Steve wants Trump to do is take this more seriously,” the Bannon confidant told me. “Stop joking around. Stop tweeting.”

So what comes next: is the end nigh for the Trump administration, torn apart by internal strife and intrigue, especially if it fails to pass tax reform, or will the administration simply slam Vanity Fair’s reporting – as Bannon did three weeks ago after the publication reported that the former chief strategist had lost faith in Trump’s ability to complete his current term – and press on (with or without Kushner)?  And how will Mueller’s probe impact any/all of this? We look forward to the answer, knowing that no matter the final outcome, stocks will simply keep grinding to new, record highs.

via http://ift.tt/2xLLilT Tyler Durden

Police Seek Second Person For Questioning In NYC Terror Attack

In a surprising development that could undercut Gov. Andrew Cuomo's insistence that there was "no evidence of a wider plot" in connection with last night's grisly rampage in Lower Manhattan, the FBI is reportedly looking for information on a second man in connection with the attack that left eight people dead and nearly a dozen injured.

The bureau on Wednesday issued a poster saying it is seeking the public’s help with information about 32-year-old Uzbek Mukhammadzoir Kadirov. The poster doesn’t say why investigators want to know more about the man.

The poster says Kadirov was born in Uzbekistan, like 29-year-old Sayfullo Saipov, the suspected terrorist who drove a rented Home Depot truck down a bike lane on the West Side Highway running over pedestrians and cyclists before colliding with a school bus. aipov was charged Wednesday in a criminal complaint in the Tuesday afternoon attack that was the deadliest terror attack in NYC since 9/11.

 

 

via http://ift.tt/2lH9NiO Tyler Durden