Mike Masnick: In Defense of Section 230 and a Decentralized Internet

mike masnick

One of the few things that Donald Trump and Joe Biden agree on is their shared hatred of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which gives ISPs and website operators legal immunity from most user-generated content. 

Donald Trump vetoed the defense spending bill in December because the legislation didn’t include language “terminating” Section 230 and Joe Biden has said that “Section 230 should be revoked, immediately.” Conservative Republicans such as Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas) and Josh Hawley (Mo.) and progressive Democrats such as Sens. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) have called for its reform or repeal. 

Sometimes called “the internet’s First Amendment” and “the 26 words that created the internet,” Section 230 is widely accused of, on the one hand, allowing Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other social-media giants to squelch conservative voices and, on the other hand, fueling the spread of misinformation and disinformation that allowed Donald Trump to win the 2016 election. Critics also charge that Section 230 enables all sorts of social ills, from QAnon conspiracy-mongering to the global sex-trafficking of children.

Enter Mike Masnick, the 46-year-old entrepreneur and analyst behind the influential website Techdirt and the digital think tank the Copia Institute. Where others are constantly talking about how to restrict and regulate the internet and tech giants to conform to one ideological vision or another, he champions protocols and practices that he thinks would lead to a more-decentralized internet and culture, including expanding Section 230 immunity, the use of encryption, and the sorts of tools that give end users more power to control what they say and see online.

Nick Gillespie spoke with Masnick about what current debates over social media get drastically wrong, how free speech is simultaneously both empowered and imperiled by politicians here and abroad, and why a more-decentralized internet is not just possible but preferable to what we have now.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3bD21ys
via IFTTT

The Fed Sent $838 Billion in “Profits” To The Treasury In Past Decade

The Fed Sent $838 Billion in “Profits” To The Treasury In Past Decade

On Monday, the nexus of reserve currency helicopter money, the Federal Reserve, announced that it had sent $88.5 billion in so-called “profits” (i.e., interest income from all those bonds it “purchased” after creating digital money out of thing digital air) to the U.S. Treasury Department in 2020, a 61% increase from the previous year as lower rates held down the central bank’s interest expense despite the Fed’s unprecedented buying spree which boosted its balance sheet by over $3 trillion .

The Fed’s payments to the Treasury had fallen over the previous four years as interest rates rose, boosting the interest it paid on reserves, or money that private banks keep at the Fed’s regional reserve banks. The Fed also hilarious began shrinking its portfolio of assets, reducing its overall net income, an experiment which ended in catastrophic failure when it became clear that you can’t, in fact, taper a ponzi scheme as the Ghost of 1937 made an epic appearance in both Nov 2018 and then again in March 2020.

One reason why the interest payment in 2020 was so low despite the Fed’s $7 trillion balance sheet is that the Fed slashed rates to near zero sharply reducing interest payments on banks’ excess reserves, and its remittances to the Treasury.  Lower interest expense boosted the Fed’s net income to $88.8 billion in 2020, from $55.5 billion in 2019, according to preliminary estimates of the central bank’s annual financial statement, released Monday.

The Fed is required by law to use “revenue” – (ostensibly from buying stocks and never selling… we kid, we kid) to cover operating expenses such as funding its own police force, and send the rest to the Treasury’s general fund, where it is used to help cover the government’s bills. As such, the more debt the Fed monetizes and the higher rates rise, the more money the Treasury will get simply because the central bank of the world’s reserve currency has printed trillions in cash.

This, for those wondering, is literally the biggest money laundering operation in history, one which involves printing money out of thin air, using it to buy interest-paying securities, and then remitting the interest to a third party. And here it is in practice: over the past decade, the Fed has wired just over $838 billion to the Treasury.

Which again begs the question: if the Fed can simply buy securities and send back the “profits” back to the Treasury, why is anyone still paying taxes?

Actually it begs another question: when, one day, rates turn negative and the flow of funds is reversed, will the Treasury start paying the Fed for its losses on securities?

Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/13/2021 – 17:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3byAzCd Tyler Durden

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy Vetoed One Outdoor Dining Bill Because It Took Too Much Power Away From Zoning Officials. Will He Do That a Second Time?

PhilMurphy

Politics is preventing New Jersey’s restaurants, bars, and breweries from obtaining some much-needed protections and certainty about their outdoor dining operations.

Last week, Gov. Phil Murphy (D) vetoed a bill passed by the state legislature that would have guaranteed these businesses’ right to use parking lots, sidewalks, streets, and other outdoor spaces for serving food and drink while the governor’s COVID-19 emergency order remained in effect. So long as their temporary spaces or outdoor structures had been lawfully used during the pandemic, local officials had to issue them permits within 15 days.

The problem for Murphy was that the legislation, A4525, took away too much power from local zoning officials to reject permits or charge fees for the permits they would issue.

“Municipalities would have almost no ability to reject an application based on public health or safety concerns, such as a proposed expanded area’s proximity to a school or church, or a licensee’s previous violations,” said Murphy in his statement.

The veto caught many by surprise given that A4525 had been passed unanimously by the legislature back in November after months of debate during which the governor had ample time to voice objections and request changes.

This week, lawmakers fast-tracked a slightly amended version of that bill which gives municipalities more flexibility to deny permits for health or safety reasons, allows them to charge fees for these permits, and gives them more room to restrict businesses’ nighttime hours of operation.

That slightly amended bill is currently sitting on Murphy’s desk, who has 45 days to sign it or veto it. If he does neither it goes into effect by default.

“It would be great for Gov. Murphy to sign this as quickly as possible because there are thousands of small businesses and small business employees out there in New Jersey that are hurting and need as much help as possible,” says Christopher Emigholz of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association. “Here’s help the state can provide that doesn’t cost anything, that doesn’t jeopardize any health or safety standards that we have.”

New Jersey currently limits restaurants indoor operations to 25 percent capacity. No more than eight people are allowed at a single table (unless they are from the same household), and tables must be at least six feet apart.

Restaurant reservations in the state are down some 40 percent compared to this time last year, according to OpenTable. The number of small businesses open in the state has declined 34 percent from January 2020.

Outdoor dining has been one of the few deregulatory silver-linings of the pandemic. Local governments across the country have proactively waived all manner of permits, fees, and regulations that previously tripped up businesses trying to set up some tables and chairs on a sidewalk or, God forbid, a parking space.

These outdoor set-ups can be a lifeline for businesses trying to survive while their indoor dining rooms are closed or required to operate at reduced capacity and many would-be diners are playing it safe by eating at home.

The risk for business owners is that they’ll end up spending thousands of dollars converting their parking lot into a dining patio only to have the government decide to suddenly shift course and shut down their on-site operations all over again.

New Jersey’s outdoor dining bill is aimed at giving Garden State restauranters some much-needed certainty that this lifeline won’t be yanked away from them so long as their indoor operations remain restricted.

Emigholz tells Reason that it’s possible that Murphy will sign the amended bill lawmakers passed this week, but that another veto was still possible. Typical Inter-branch rivalries between the governor and the legislature, he says, played a role in stymying the legislation.

Yet there’s still hope the interests of struggling small business owners might outweigh the governor’s commitment to the preservation of zoning officials’ power and politics as usual.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/39wtlfc
via IFTTT

Capitol Hysteria, Congressional Hypocrisy, & Crackdown Hangovers

Capitol Hysteria, Congressional Hypocrisy, & Crackdown Hangovers

Authored by James Bovard via The American Institute for Economic Research,

The political hysteria unleashed by last week’s clash at the Capitol between police and Trump protestors poses a growing danger to Americans’ constitutional rights.

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer ludicrously compared the ruckus to Pearl Harbor – a “day of infamy.” Schumer complained that the “temple to democracy was desecrated… our offices vandalized” and that rioters were able to “stalk these hallowed halls.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) compared an incursion that broke some windows and furniture with the 1814 British invasion that torched the Capitol. 

The pro-Trump mob should not have charged into the Capitol.

President Donald Trump should not have fired them up with absurd claims that he won the election “by a landslide.” Even conservative firebrand Ann Coulter declared that “it was assholic [for Trump] to tell a crowd of thousands to march to the capitol.”

Trump lawyer Rudolph Giuliani should never have called for a “trial by combat” when addressing Trump supporters.

Once the protestors charged into the Capitol, Trump should have speedily called for an end to the confrontation. 

Trump deserves much of the blame for the Capitol chaos. But the debacle would have been far less without blundering by congressional leadership and their small army of protectors. A Washington Post analysis of the “disastrous failure” by Capitol Police noted, “Security at the Capitol building is controlled by Congress itself.” The Capitol Police have an annual budget of almost half a billion dollars and two thousand officers – equal to the entire police forces of Cleveland or Atlanta. Video showed police standing back as people thronged inside the Capitol. The Post noted, “ One image posted on social media showed an officer taking a selfie with one of the intruders, and a video seemed to show officers opening the security fence to let Trump supporters closer.”

Politicians have been tripling the supposed threat they faced every 24 hours since last Wednesday. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said on Sunday, “We came close to half of the House nearly dying” from the attackers. The only person who was shot at the Capitol was a 35-year-old Air Force female veteran who was killed by a Capitol policeman. Fortunately, none of the protestors showed the homicidal intent akin to the Illinois man who shot four Republican congressmen in 2017 with a semi-automatic rifle at a softball field in Alexandria, Virginia. One policeman was killed when he was dragged into a mob and beaten, and a 34-year-old female Trump supporter was reportedly trampled to death in the clash between police and protestors. Another Trump supporter died of a heart attack and another protestor died of a stroke.  

Rather than Pearl Harbor or a British invasion, last Wednesday’s ruckus was Lese Majeste, complete with a dude dressed like the Grand Poobah from Fred Flintstone cartoons. Many of the protestors looked like people who simply wanted to stomp their feet, shout, and take some selfies to show friends on social media what they did in Washington.  

But politicians’ sense of impunity took a walloping as they received no deference on their home field.

President-elect Biden said that the protestors’ action was “an assault on the citadel of liberty: the Capitol itself…. An assault on the rule of law like few times we’ve ever seen it.” But rather than a “citadel of liberty,” the Capitol is the locale where politicians have negligently authorized endless assaults on the liberties of average Americans and the lives of uncounted victims around the world. 

Contrast the violence that lawmakers suffered with the violence that their laws have inflicted. Most of the Trump protestors were less destructive than SWAT teams carrying out a no-knock raid – as happens thousands of times a year in American neighborhoods across the land. These attacks have been aided by a profusion of military-style equipment provided by Congress and federal agencies, as well as by the Justice Department constantly championing the legal prerogatives of law enforcement to use deadly force in almost any situation. An ACLU report characterized SWAT raids as “violent events: numerous (often 20 or more) officers armed with assault rifles and grenades approach a home, break down doors and windows (often causing property damage), and scream for the people inside to get on the floor (often pointing their guns at them).” Failure to instantly submit to SWAT raiders can be a capital offense. A New York Times investigation found that “at least 81 civilians and 13 law enforcement officers died in raids from 2010 through 2016. Scores of others were maimed or wounded.” The vast majority of members of Congress have ignored the perennial police carnage they helped bankroll around the nation. 

Dozens of protestors have already been charged with “unlawful entry” for stepping foot onto the sacred ground of the Capitol. Some protestors said that they were not aware they were prohibited from entering the building. Prosecutors are rushing to charge private citizens with a crime for which federal agents are practically immune. In 1984, the Supreme Court entitled government agents to intrude onto private land without a search warrant as long as they did not venture into areas where individuals were involved in “intimate activities” (i.e., nudist camps). “No Trespassing” signs no longer applied to G-men. The same court decision unleashed government helicopters to buzz low over any private land they chose to investigate – no warrant needed. (Private helicopter operators who perform the same trick over federal buildings are entitled to front-page obituaries.)

President-elect Joe Biden condemned the protestors storming the Capitol who had deigned to “occupy offices” and were “rummaging through desks… it’s an insurrection.” A few congressional offices did have their filing cabinets opened and plundered. But where was the umbrage on Capitol Hill when the National Security Agency vacuumed up millions of Americans’ emails? Where was the outrage when Edward Snowden exposed NSA documents showing that the agency turns its surveillance dynamos on anyone “searching the web for suspicious stuff“? Thanks to lavish congressional appropriations, the NSA continues devouring Americans’ privacy. 

Nor did the clashes last week compare to the violence that Congress has authorized by U.S. military forces, which are now engaged in combat in 14 nations. Most members of Congress could probably not even name half of the nations where U.S. troops are fighting. After four U.S. soldiers were killed in Niger in 2017, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Schumer admitted they did not know that a thousand U.S. troops were deployed to that African nation. Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, admitted, “We don’t know exactly where we’re at in the world militarily and what we’re doing.” Washington Post columnist David Ignatius in 2017 proudly cited an estimate from a “knowledgeable official” that “CIA-backed fighters may have killed or wounded 100,000 Syrian soldiers and their allies over the past four years.” Syria has taken no hostile action against the U.S. but few members of Congress have taken any responsibility for the carnage inflicted by the Biden-Trump intervention in the Syrian Civil War. No evidence has surfaced thus far linking Syrians to any broken windows in the Capitol. 

The protestors who swarmed the Capitol were far less disruptive than the blockades that the US government has imposed on SyriaVenezuelaIran, and other nations. US Navy ships are ready to intercede even medical supplies to those nations whose governments have raised the ire of Washington policymakers. There have been no press reports so far indicating that protestors stopped congressional offices from getting resupplied with Perrier. 

In the wake of the clashes at the Capitol, Democrats are calling for a sweeping new “domestic terrorism” law that could profoundly restrict Americans’ freedom of speech and association. Many politicians have called for charging the Trump protestors with sedition – as if a ragtag mob that bumbled into a federal building and often stayed within the velvet rope lines designating paths for visitors was a bona fide threat. Sedition quickly becomes the equivalent of political heresy, spurring prosecutions that turn into witch hunts. There are already more than enough criminal laws and the feds should concentrate on discovering and vigorously prosecuting the individuals who attacked police – not on the nonviolent Trump fans who peacefully left the Capitol after a brief occupation. 

Shortly before the protestors forced their way into the Capitol, Mitch McConnell declared that American democracy could go into a “death spiral of democracy” if the 2020 election result was not accepted. McConnell warned that challenging the 2020 election would mean “every four years would be a scramble for power at any cost.” He also said that “self-government requires a shared commitment to the truth.” But the mob violence at the Capitol may signal that the death spiral is already here. Elections have already become a scramble for power at any cost and few politicians seem to give a damn about the truth.

Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-NJ) condemned Wednesday’s protestors:

“If you just feed this beast in an effort to appease it, it just gets stronger and bolder until it comes after the very people who are trying to appease it.”

But it is possible to condemn both the protestors who rampaged in the Capitol and the career politicians whose perennial abuses have destroyed Americans’ faith in the federal government. It would be especially unwise to confuse last week’s buffoonery with a bona fide coup attempt – which could happen if Washington continues disdaining too many angry Americans.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/13/2021 – 16:39

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3qeN8qn Tyler Durden

Trump Has Been Impeached—Again

Webp.net-resizeimage (15)

The House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to charge President Donald Trump with impeachment for his role in inciting the Capitol riot on January 6.

It is the fourth time a sitting president has been impeached and the second time that Trump has faced such charges, after he was impeached in 2019 and ultimately acquitted in 2020.

Trump’s first impeachment vote fell almost entirely along partisan lines. This time, however, several House Republicans voted to move forward against the president, including Reps. Liz Cheney (R–Wyo.), Adam Kinzinger (R–Ill.), Dan Newhouse (R–Wash.), John Katko (R–N.Y.), Fred Upton (R–Mich.), Rep. Peter Meijer (R-Mich.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (R–Wash.), Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R–Ohio), Rep. Tom Rice (R–S.C.), and David Valadao (R-Calif.).

Trump’s first impeachment was plagued by complaints that it had little support from those outside the Democratic Party. Today’s impeachment measure, however, received the most bipartisan support in history. It is the only time a president has been impeached twice.

“The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the President,” said Cheney, who is the third-ranking Republican in the House, in a statement. “The President could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. He did not. There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R–Ohio) subsequently announced that Congress should reconsider leadership.

On January 6, Trump encouraged his supporters to go to the Capitol and “fight” after continuing to push theories that widespread election fraud led to President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election, though neither Trump nor his supporters can substantiate those claims.

“Donald Trump has constructed a glass palace of lies, fear-mongering, and sedition.  Last week, the nation watched it shatter into pieces,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D–Md.). “He is no patriot.”

The insurrection last week resulted in five deaths, including a Capitol Police officer and a fatal police shooting of a Trump supporter.

Some dissenting Republicans questioned whether or not Trump was really to blame for last week’s events, while others said that the need for unity was more important than accountability. “A vote to impeach would further divide this nation,” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.). “A vote to impeach would further fan the flames of partisan division. Most Americans want neither inaction nor retribution. They want durable, bipartisan justice,” McCarthy added, ignoring that this impeachment is indeed shaping up to be bipartisan and that such charges will always be divisive. “The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack by mob rioters,” he continued.

It will next move to the Senate, where a trial will begin after President-elect Joe Biden has been sworn in. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.), who is about to become the minority leader, has reportedly intimated that he may vote to convict.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3sm0F16
via IFTTT

Trump Has Been Impeached—Again

Webp.net-resizeimage (15)

The House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to charge President Donald Trump with impeachment for his role in inciting the Capitol riot on January 6.

It is the fourth time a sitting president has been impeached and the second time that Trump has faced such charges, after he was impeached in 2019 and ultimately acquitted in 2020.

Trump’s first impeachment vote fell almost entirely along partisan lines. This time, however, several House Republicans voted to move forward against the president, including Reps. Liz Cheney (R–Wyo.), Adam Kinzinger (R–Ill.), Dan Newhouse (R–Wash.), John Katko (R–N.Y.), Fred Upton (R–Mich.), Rep. Peter Meijer (R-Mich.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (R–Wash.), Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R–Ohio), Rep. Tom Rice (R–S.C.), and David Valadao (R-Calif.).

Trump’s first impeachment was plagued by complaints that it had little support from those outside the Democratic Party. Today’s impeachment measure, however, received the most bipartisan support in history. It is the only time a president has been impeached twice.

“The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the President,” said Cheney, who is the third-ranking Republican in the House, in a statement. “The President could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. He did not. There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R–Ohio) subsequently announced that Congress should reconsider leadership.

On January 6, Trump encouraged his supporters to go to the Capitol and “fight” after continuing to push theories that widespread election fraud led to President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election, though neither Trump nor his supporters can substantiate those claims.

“Donald Trump has constructed a glass palace of lies, fear-mongering, and sedition.  Last week, the nation watched it shatter into pieces,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D–Md.). “He is no patriot.”

The insurrection last week resulted in five deaths, including a Capitol Police officer and a fatal police shooting of a Trump supporter.

Some dissenting Republicans questioned whether or not Trump was really to blame for last week’s events, while others said that the need for unity was more important than accountability. “A vote to impeach would further divide this nation,” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.). “A vote to impeach would further fan the flames of partisan division. Most Americans want neither inaction nor retribution. They want durable, bipartisan justice,” McCarthy added, ignoring that this impeachment is indeed shaping up to be bipartisan and that such charges will always be divisive. “The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack by mob rioters,” he continued.

It will next move to the Senate, where a trial will begin after President-elect Joe Biden has been sworn in. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.), who is about to become the minority leader, has reportedly intimated that he may vote to convict.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3sm0F16
via IFTTT

In Final Act, Trump Admin To Present ‘Bombshell’ Findings Blaming Wuhan Lab For COVID-19, WHO Cover-Up

In Final Act, Trump Admin To Present ‘Bombshell’ Findings Blaming Wuhan Lab For COVID-19, WHO Cover-Up

The Trump administration will present ‘dramatic new evidence’ that the virus which causes COVID-19 leaked from a Wuhan lab, according to the Daily Mail, which adds that outgoing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will make a “bombshell” announcement that SARS-CoV-2 did not naturally jump from bats to humans through an intermediary species – and was instead cultured by scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), where both Chinese and foreign experts have warned of shoddy bio-security for years.

The Britsh government (Daily Mail and all), meanwhile, dismissed the claims in advance – saying that ‘all the credible scientific evidence does not point to a leak from the laboratory.’

This is of course patently false, as several prominent microbiologists – including one who worked in the Wuhan lab – have said it was likely created there and likely escaped. Two weeks ago, US National Security Adviser Matthew Pottinger said there was a “growing body of evidence that the lab is likely the most credible source of the virus,” while French intelligence warned of the possibility of a ‘catastrophic leak‘ from the lab due to poor bio-security over a decade before the outbreak.

The lab’s highest security ‘P4’ section was built with French help in a deal signed off by Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier. But after it opened in 2015, the French contingent due to work there were pushed out by China’s military. –Daily Mail

Meanwhile, China scrubbed hundreds of pages of informationspanning over 300 studies conducted by the WIV, including some which discuss passing diseases from animals to humans. Totally normal behavior from innocent people, we’re sure.

Pompeo is also set to cite close links between the Institute and the People’s Liberation Army.

He will point out its highest security section has always had a ‘dual use’ military and civilian purpose.

He is also expected to accuse the World Health Organisation of assisting in a Chinese cover-up by refusing to probe the lab’s possible role.

Its ten-person team tasked with investigating the pandemic’s origins will arrive in Wuhan tomorrow – but there is no mention of the lab in its official terms of reference. –Daily Mail

“We don’t know whether this virus was natural or artificially created, and if it came from the lab, whether this was an accident or deliberate. It would be immoral and foolish to allow any sort of cover-up,” said former Brexit Secretary David Davis, who added that it was ‘vital’ that the WHO team investigate.

“If it emerges the virus did come from the lab, China will become the pariah of the world,” he added.

That said, MIT / Harvard doctor Alina Chan, who has been investigating the origins of the pandemic, doesn’t think the WHO is suited to conduct any investigation.

“We have to take the necessary steps to do a proper investigation and, based on the available information, I don’t think the WHO is up to the task,” said Chan. Stanford professor of microbiology David Relman, meanwhile, has voiced fears that the WIV was genetically engineering natural viruses to make them more transmissible – writing in November that “If SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab to cause the pandemic, it will become critical to understand the chain of events and prevent this from happening again.”

According to Sam Armtrong, China expert with the Henry Jackson Society think-tank, “The global public has a right to know exactly what was going on prior to the emergence of this deadly pandemic. The question cannot be shirked.”

And as Edward Lucas writes via the Mail, “All the evidence points to cover-up…(but the truth can’t be hidden for ever):

*  *  *

Secrets, lies and thuggery are the hallmark of the Chinese Communist regime. And in the mystery of the devastating Wuhan virus, all three are combined.

The strongest evidence of a crime is a cover-up. And the Chinese authorities have provided that.

They have fought ferociously to prevent an international inquiry into the pandemic’s origins.

Their repeated obstruction of the World Health Organisation’s fact-finding missions has provoked even that notoriously supine body to protest.

Even now, WHO investigators are being prevented from accessing the vitally important laboratory in Wuhan that is likely to be at the heart of America’s allegations.

Experts have been questioning the Chinese authorities’ account of events for a year. Now, it appears, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is to make a direct accusation.

Was it really pure chance the virus first attacked the human race in the only city in China with a research lab specialising in manipulating the world’s most dangerous viruses?

That would be as odd as a new disease emerging in the surroundings of Britain’s top-secret biological defence research establishment of Porton Down in Wiltshire.

To this day, scientists who support the theory that the virus is a mutation that emerged from Wuhan’s ‘wet market’ have not been able to find a convincing candidate for the animal in which this mutation actually occurred.

The official explanation is the new virus was 96 percent identical to a bat virus, RaTG13, found in Yunnan province in southern China.

But as Chinese professor Botao Xiao pointed out in a paper in February, no such bats are sold at the city’s markets. And the caves where they live are hundreds of miles away.

That paper disappeared from the internet. Mr Xiao — perhaps mindful of the fate that awaits those in China who promote inconvenient truths — disavowed it.

Many scientists privately assumed an engineered virus released via a laboratory accident was at least as likely as the idea of a series of stunningly unfortunate chance mutations.

After all, Shi Zhengli, the Chinese scientist nicknamed ‘Bat Woman’ was a regular visitor to those caves. When news of the outbreak broke, she initially feared that a leak from her research institute was to blame.

That thought alone should have prompted a full-scale and searching inquiry. Instead, the Chinese Ministry of Education issued a diktat: ‘Any paper that traces the origin of the virus must be strictly and tightly managed.’

But even the Chinese regime cannot hold back the truth forever. Over the past twelve months independent research, official leaks and news reports have strengthened the lab-leak hypothesis.

In February a Taiwanese professor, Fang Chi-tai, highlighted a curious feature of the virus’s genetic code, which would make it more effective in attacking targeted cells. This was unlikely to be the result of a natural mutation, he suggested.

Much scientific research involves modifying viruses to understand how they function. Many observers have worried for years that the risks of such experiments are not properly thought through.

Lab safety procedures are riddled with potential loopholes and flaws: breakages, animal bites, faulty equipment or simple mis-labelling can all lead to a deadly pathogen reaching its first human victim. If so, such carelessness has now cost tens of millions of lives.

Yet we should be clear. The Chinese authorities are ruthless. But even they would not unleash a global plague.

Only in the fevered imagination of conspiracy theorists is Beijing deliberately waging biological warfare on the West.

Paradoxically, such speculation — promoted by among others President Donald Trump’s former adviser Steve Bannon — may have hampered the search for the truth, by making the lab-release theory seem racist and politically toxic.

In February, in Britain’s politically correct medical journal, the Lancet, scientists published an open letter denouncing ‘conspiracy theories and rumours’, urging solidarity with Chinese colleagues.

Yet it was just those colleagues who were bearing the brunt of the regime’s frantic attempts to censor the truth about the outbreak.

The Chinese regime prizes self-preservation above all — certainly over the truth, or the health of its own people, let alone the lives of foreigners.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/13/2021 – 16:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3iatIzX Tyler Durden

Make Impeachment as Bipartisan as Possible

Impeachment

The House of Representatives will almost certainly vote to impeach Donald Trump today. But for this effort to succeed in the goal of convicting Trump in the Senate and barring him from seeking office in the future, it will require substantial bipartisan support. Even after the Senate shifts to a 50-50 split, with the seating of the senators elected in the Georgia runoff election, conviction will require at least 17 votes from GOP senators.

In order for impeachment to have the desired effect of discrediting Trump and deterring similar misconduct by future presidents, it would also help if it had broad support from independents and Republicans in the general public. Making the process bipartisan can help with that, as well.

Some important progress towards building the necessary bipartisan coalition has already been achieved. Several House Republicans plan to vote for impeachment, most notably Rep. Liz Cheney, the third-ranking member of the House GOP leadership. Numerous conservative and libertarian legal scholars and political commentators are also backing impeachment (I give examples here and here, and there are plenty of others, such as Ramesh Ponnuru, Henry Olsen, and Federalist Society co-founder Steven Calabresi). Perhaps most importantly, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is reported to be supportive of impeachment, believing that it might serve the longterm interests of his party.

Nonetheless, more can be done to build a broad coalition for convicting Trump and barring him from future office-holding. In a previous post, I mentioned that congressional Republicans who oppose impeachment because of concerns that it might cause conflict or disunity can address that problem through the simple expedient of supporting impeachment themselves. In this one, I outline some steps congressional Democrats can take.

First, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should recognize that she made a mistake by naming an all-Democratic team of impeachment managers to argue the case before the Senate. She should replace at least one of them (preferably two or three) with House Republicans who voted for impeachment, such as Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. The reason is not that Cheney or Kinzinger would necessarily do a better job of arguing the issues than a Democrat would. Rather, Pelosi should take this step because of its enormous potential symbolic value—conveying the message that impeachment is not just another iteration of partisan politics as usual.

Second, if the Senate trial will include witnesses testifying about the legal issues involved, the impeachment managers should make sure to call one or two of the many conservative and libertarian legal scholars who have advocated impeachment. That could have considerable symbolic value, as well, and would be a contrast with the Democrats’ reliance on purely liberal expert witnesses during the last impeachment process.

Legal scholars Noah Feldman, Michael Gerhardt, and Pamela Karlan did a great job the last time around, in my view. But the Democrats would have done well to call at least one non-liberal witness on these issues. That would have given their efforts greater credibility with informed opinion on the right and center of the political spectrum. If expert witnesses are used this time around, the Democrats would do well to remedy that mistake.

To avoid misunderstanding, I should emphasize I am not suggesting that I should be a witness myself. To the extent Democratic leaders care what I think (unlikely, I know), I would recommend Steve Calabresi, Michael Stokes Paulsen, and VC co-bloggers Jonathan Adler and Keith Whittington for  their consideration. Any of them would be clearly better choices than me. Calabresi, in particular, would be an outstanding selection, because of his longtime role as a leader of the conservative legal movement.

These are probably not the only ways that the Democrats can do more to involve conservative and libertarian supporters of impeachment in the process.  I hope other commentators will come up with additional, and perhaps better, suggestions. The key point is to build as broad a coalition as possible, and to send a message of inclusion.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2LvcUrB
via IFTTT

Classes #1—Origin of Free Speech Doctrine and From Nature to Commons

This semester I am teaching First Amendment and Property I. Like last semester, I will post the videos to my lecture after class. Many readers write and tell me they enjoy watching these lectures. I hope others can enjoy as well.

First Amendment—Class 1—Origin of Free Speech Doctrine

  • Sedition and Prior Restraint (1301-1309) / (574-582)
  • Supplement: Chapter 51

Prop 1 Class 1—From Nature to Commons

  • Johnson v. McIntosh, 3-10
  • Notes and Questions, 10-19

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3bCtZus
via IFTTT

Bonds & Big-Tech Bid As Penny-Stock Buying-Panic Explodes

Bonds & Big-Tech Bid As Penny-Stock Buying-Panic Explodes

Bucking the recent trend, Nasdaq surged as small caps were purged today…

The Dow, helped by INTC today, clung to unchanged on the week but Nasdaq remains red…

Utes and Tech were the best-performing sectors today (barbell much)…

Source: Bloomberg

Growth stocks rebounded today after some recent pummeling… and so did bonds as yields tumbled…

Source: Bloomberg

As Trumpeachment 2.0 was underway, 30Y bonds were aggressively bid at auction, dragging yields down to one-week lows…

Source: Bloomberg

It seems the death of the bond bull market was nothing but a fleshwound…

But, what really matters is this malarkey – the total and utter explosion in speculative demand for trading penny stocks

And as Joe Saluzzi pointed out, 6 of the top 10 most active stocks yesterday were priced under $1 and combined for 2.6 billion shares or 18% of the entire stock market.

And thanks to the Robinhood’rs, Bloomberg notes that the lowest priced stocks are outperforming in 2021 (so far)…

“I thought it was pretty odd,” said Saluzzi, co-head of equity trading at Themis Trading.

“I’ve been around for a long time, I’ve seen people in chat rooms and retail investors saying ‘we can make some money – it’s easy.’ There’s a risk it may not end well.”

What is driving this speculative mania? Well that’s simple – as JPMorgan notes – “The answer is liquidity which appears to be reverberating once again in an intense manner via retail investors, in a repeat to Q2 of last year.”

Source: Bloomberg

And with a tailwind like that, who can blame the general muppetry for abandoning all protection (helped by the massive surge in XLE call buying)…

Source: Bloomberg

Treasury yields tumbled (10Y back below 1.10%) and everything 5Y out is now lower in yield on the week…

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar pushed higher as Italian politics among other things weighed on the euro…

Source: Bloomberg

Crypto was higher on the day with Bitcoin back above $36,000…

Source: Bloomberg

Gold managed to cling to gains despite dollar gains…

As Real Yields are tumbling (positively for gold) once again…

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices roller-coastered again today, ending lower with WTI losing $53…

Finally, despite CPI drooling along quietly, agricultural commodity prices are exploding higher…

Source: Bloomberg

And here’s The Fed:

*FED’S CLARIDA: WE KNOW WHAT TO DO WHEN INFLATION MOVES UP

Soon mate, soon!

Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/13/2021 – 16:01

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/35zKPGo Tyler Durden