Tag: finance

Submitted by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“There are two ways by which the spirit of a culture may be shriveled. In the first – the Orwellian – culture becomes a prison. In the second – the Huxleyan – culture becomes a burlesque. No one needs to be reminded that our world is now marred by many prison-cultures…. it makes little difference if our wardens are inspired by right- or left-wing ideologies. The gates of the prison are equally impenetrable, surveillance equally rigorous, icon-worship pervasive…. Big Brother does not watch us, by his choice. We watch him, by ours…. When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience, and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; culture-death is a clear possibility.”— Professor Neil Postman

Donald Trump no longer needs to launch Trump TV.

He’s already the star of his own political reality show.

Americans have a voracious appetite for TV entertainment, and the Trump reality show—guest starring outraged Democrats with a newly awakened conscience for immigrants and the poor, power-hungry Republicans eager to take advantage of their return to power, and a hodgepodge of other special interest groups with dubious motives—feeds that appetite for titillating, soap opera drama.

After all, who needs the insults, narcissism and power plays that are hallmarks of reality shows such as Celebrity Apprentice or Keeping Up with the Kardashians when you can have all that and more delivered up by the likes of Donald Trump and his cohorts?

Yet as John Lennon reminds us, “nothing is real,” especially not in the world of politics.

Much like the fabricated universe in Peter Weir’s 1998 film The Truman Show, in which a man’s life is the basis for an elaborately staged television show aimed at selling products and procuring ratings, the political scene in the United States has devolved over the years into a carefully calibrated exercise in how to manipulate, polarize, propagandize and control a population.

Indeed, Donald Trump may be the smartest move yet by the powers-that-be to keep the citizenry divided and at each other’s throats, because as long as we’re busy fighting each other, we’ll never manage to present a unified front against tyranny in any form.

This is the magic of the reality TV programming that passes for politics today.

It allows us to be distracted, entertained, occasionally a little bit outraged but overall largely uninvolved, content to remain in the viewer’s seat.

The more that is beamed at us, the more inclined we are to settle back in our comfy recliners and become passive viewers rather than active participants as unsettling, frightening events unfold.

Reality and fiction merge as everything around us becomes entertainment fodder.

We don’t even have to change the channel when the subject matter becomes too monotonous. That’s taken care of for us by the programmers (the corporate media).

For instance, before we could get too worked up over government surveillance, the programmers changed the channels on us and switched us over to breaking news about militarized police. Before our outrage could be transformed into action over police misconduct, they changed the channel once again to reports of ISIS beheadings and terrorist shootings. Before we had a chance to challenge what was staged or real, the programming switched to the 2016 presidential election.

“Living is easy with eyes closed,” says Lennon, and that’s exactly what reality TV that masquerades as American politics programs the citizenry to do: navigate the world with their eyes shut.

As long as we’re viewers, we’ll never be doers.

Studies suggest that the more reality TV people watch—and I would posit that it’s all reality TV—the more difficult it becomes to distinguish between what is real and what is carefully crafted farce.

“We the people” are watching a lot of TV.

On average, Americans spend five hours a day watching television. By the time we reach age 65, we’re watching more than 50 hours of television a week, and that number increases as we get older. And reality TV programming consistently captures the largest percentage of TV watchers every season by an almost 2-1 ratio.

This doesn’t bode well for a citizenry able to sift through masterfully-produced propaganda in order to think critically about the issues of the day, whether it’s fake news peddled by government agencies or foreign entities.

Those who watch reality shows tend to view what they see as the “norm.” Thus, those who watch shows characterized by lying, aggression and meanness not only come to see such behavior as acceptable and entertaining but also mimic the medium.

This holds true whether the reality programming is about the antics of celebrities in the White House, in the board room, or in the bedroom.

It’s a phenomenon called “humilitainment.”

A term coined by media scholars Brad Waite and Sara Booker, “humilitainment” refers to the tendency for viewers to take pleasure in someone else’s humiliation, suffering and pain.

“Humilitainment” largely explains not only why American TV watchers are so fixated on reality TV programming but how American citizens, largely insulated from what is really happening in the world around them by layers of technology, entertainment, and other distractions, are being programmed to accept the brutality, surveillance and dehumanizing treatment of the American police state as things happening to other people.

The ramifications for the future of civic engagement, political discourse and self-government are incredibly depressing and demoralizing.

This not only explains how a candidate like Donald Trump with a reputation for being rude, egotistical and narcissistic could get elected, but it also says a lot about how a politician like Barack Obama—whose tenure in the White House was characterized by drone killings, a weakening of the Constitution at the expense of Americans’ civil liberties, and an expansion of the police state—could be hailed as “one of the greatest presidents of all times.”

This is what happens when an entire nation—bombarded by reality TV programming, government propaganda and entertainment news—becomes systematically desensitized and acclimated to the trappings of a government that operates by fiat and speaks in a language of force.

Ultimately, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the reality shows, the entertainment news, the surveillance society, the militarized police, and the political spectacles have one common objective: to keep us divided, distracted, imprisoned, and incapable of taking an active role in the business of self-government.

If “we the people” feel powerless and apathetic, it is only because we have allowed ourselves to be convinced that the duties of citizenship begin and end at the ballot box.

Marching and protests have certainly been used with great success by past movements to foment real change, but if those marches and protests are merely outpourings of discontent because a particular politician won or lost with no solid plan of action or follow-through, then what’s the point?

Martin Luther King Jr. understood that politics could never be the answer to what ailed the country. That’s why he spearheaded a movement of mass-action strategy that employed boycotts, sit-ins and marches. Yet King didn’t march against a particular politician or merely to express discontent. He marched against injustice, government corruption, war, and inequality, and he leveraged discontent with the status quo into an activist movement that transformed the face of America.

When all is said and done, it won’t matter who you voted for in the presidential election. What will matter is where you stand in the face of the injustices that continue to ravage our nation: the endless wars, the police shootings, the overcriminalization, the corruption, the graft, the roadside strip searches, the private prisons, the surveillance state, etc.

Will you tune out the reality TV show and join with your fellow citizens to push back against the real menace of the police state, or will you merely sit back and lose yourself in the political programming aimed at keeping you imprisoned in the police state?

via http://ift.tt/2iTXo7p Tyler Durden

A Judicial Watch lawsuit seeking records related to potential collusion between the Justice Department and Hillary Clinton operatives during her email investigation has resulted in a federal judge issuing a rare order instructing the DOJ to preserve the Gmail records of the now infamous Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik.  The order came from U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Clinton appointee, and gave the DOJ until this morning to report back on steps taken to preserve the personal email accounts of Kadzik.  Per Politico:

“Defendant shall take all necessary and reasonable steps to ensure the preservation of all agency records and potential agency records between the dates of December 1, 2014 and November 7, 2016 in any personal email account of Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Peter Kadzik. Any question about whether a record is an agency record shall be resolved in favor of it being an agency record.”

Of course, as we pointed out back in the fall, various emails provided by WikiLeaks exposed Kadzik repeatedly colluding with the Clinton campaign by providing campaign manager, and long-time friend, John Podesta with inside information on the DOJ’s investigation of Hillary’s email scandal.  Moreover, proving just how close they were, in a Sept. 2008 email, Podesta emailed an Obama campaign official to recommend Kadzik for a supportive role in the campaign saying that Kadzik was a “fantastic lawyer” who “kept me out of jail”…now that’s a bond that lasts.

 

Of course, in response to Judge Sullivan’s order, the DOJ promptly noted that Mr. Kadzik was unable to locate any work-related emails on his Gmail account…well how convenient.

“It is the government’s understanding that Mr. Kadzik has located no agency records or potential agency records in his Gmail account and that, therefore, there are no such documents to preserve. Nevertheless, out of an abundance of caution and consistent with the preservation order that Judicial Watch seeks, the government has instructed Mr. Kadzik to preserve any potential agency records in his Gmail account, should any exist, and Mr. Kadzik has agreed to do so,” the Justice Department filing said.

And since we have no doubt that Kadzik performed a thorough, impartial scan of his Gmail account while resisting the urge to delete “inconvenient” records, we assume that he simply overlooked this email which provided a very timely “Heads up” to John Podesta regarding confidential information about DOJ hearings and FOIA requests.  Simple, honest mistake, no doubt.

 

How long can this farce continue on before government officials are finally forced to do what private corporations have been forced to do for years, namely requiring that their employees use secured, archived email systems for official communications and impose stiff penalties for non-compliance.  Seems simple enough.

via http://ift.tt/2jpK7Cc Tyler Durden

Submitted by Saxo Bank's Martin O'Rourke via TradingFloor.com,

• Donald Trump's inauguration to take place on Friday
• China's relationship with president-elect off to difficult start
• Trump angered China by fielding call from Taiwanese counterpart after victory
• Trump's anti-supranationalism might favour China if TPP is abandoned — Wei Li
• Currency manipulation attacks not borne out by long term — Wei Li
• Anti-trade rhetoric difficult to sustain in intricate global trade chain — Wei Li
• Trumpflation trade may boost commodity exporters out of China
• Geopolitical risk possible but markets have been adept at absorbing pain — Wei Li

Read more on Saxo's page dedicated to Trump's inauguration

via http://ift.tt/2iLq0MM Tyler Durden

Less than a month after president-elect Trump first tweeted about the F-35's high costs, and a week after he brought up the F-35 in his first press conference, Reuters reports that The U.S. Department of Defense and Lockheed Martin are close to deal for a contract worth almost $9 billion as negotiations are poised to bring the price per F-35 below $100 million for the first time.

The Washington Post notes that in recent months, the president-elect has not been shy about taking to social media to criticize or heap praise on individual companies and military programs.

A Dec. 6 tweet bashed Chicago-based Boeing for what he referred to as the “out of control” cost of the Air Force One presidential airplane. Weeks later he turned in Boeing’s favor at the expense of Lockheed, tweeting that he had asked the company to “price out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet” because of the F-35’s high costs.

Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 22, 2016

He also briefly brought up the F-35 in a Wednesday news conference intended to clarify his business conflicts, saying he would “do some big things” with the program and find a way to trim costs and improve the plane.

And then, after emerging from a meeting with President-elect Donald Trump at Trump Tower in New York last Friday, Lockheed Martin chief executive Marillyn Hewson told reporters that the Bethesda, Md.-based defense giant is close to a new contract deal that would cut the cost of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program and also create jobs.

“We had the opportunity to talk to [Trump] about the F-35 program, and I certainly share his views that we need to get the best capability to our men and women in uniform and we have to get it at the lowest possible price,” Hewson said.

 

“So I’m glad I had the opportunity to tell him that we are close to a deal that will bring the cost down significantly from the previous lot of aircraft to the next lot of aircraft and moreover it’s going to bring a lot of jobs to the United States.”

Which leads to tonight's news, via Reuters, that they are close to deal for a contract worth almost $9 billion as negotiations are poised to bring the price per F-35 below $100 million for the first time, people familiar with the talks said Wednesday.

Talks are still ongoing for the tenth batch of stealthy fighter jets with a deal for 90 planes expected to be announced by the end of the month, three people said on condition of anonymity.

 

A Lockheed representative declined to comment and a representative for the fighter program said negotiations are ongoing.

 

The U.S. Defense Department expects to spend $391 billion in the coming decades to develop and buy 2,443 of the supersonic warplanes. Though the F-35 program has been criticized by Trump as too expensive, the price per jet has already been declining. Lockheed, the prime contractor, and its partners have been working on building a more cost-effective supply chain to fuel the production line in Fort Worth, Texas.

 

The overtures from the incoming administration may have had some effect, but Lockheed's F-35 program manager Jeff Babione said last summer that the price of the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing version of the jet would drop to under $100 million per plane in this contract for the 10th low-rate production batch.

*  *  *

Another victory for Trump? Or as John Harwood would say, this would probably have happened anyway…

via http://ift.tt/2jzqCK9 Tyler Durden

We have frequently noted the precarious state of the U.S. mall REITs (see “Myopic Markets & The Looming Mall REITs Massacre” and “Is CMBS The Next “Shoe To Drop”? GGP Sales Suggest Commercial Real Estate Crashing“), but the epic collapse of the Galleria at Pittsburgh Mills paints a uniquely horrific outlook for mall operators.  The 1.1 million square foot mall, once valued at $190 million after being opened in 2005, sold at a foreclosure auction this morning for $100 (yes, not million…just $100).  According to CBS Pittsburgh, the mall was purchased by its lender, Wells Fargo, which credit bid it’s $143 million loan balance, which was originated in 2006, to acquire the property.

Pittsburgh Mills mall auctioned off for a hundred bucks. Bid by Wells Fargo which is holding 149 Mill. Debt on mall.

— PAUL D. MARTINO (@PMARTKDKA) January 18, 2017

 

Like many malls around the country, Pittsburgh Mills has suffered the consequences of weak traffic amid tepid demand from the struggling U.S. consumer resulting in massive tenant losses.  According to the Pittsburgh Tribune, the mall is only 55% occupied and was last appraised for $11 million back in August. 

The value of the mall has been plummeting since it opened in July 2005. Once worth $190 million, it was appraised at $11 million in August.

 

The mall has lost a number of key tenants over the years, including a Sears Grand store. The mall’s retail space is nearly half empty, with about 55 percent occupied.

 

 

Of course, New York Fed President Bill Dudley laid out a very compelling case for retailers yesterday if he can just convince American homeowners to commit the same mistakes they made back in 2006 by repeatedly withdrawing all of the equity in their homes to fund meaningless shopping sprees.  So it’s probably safe to keep buying those mall REITs…afterall those 3% dividend yields are amazing alternatives to Treasuries and you’re basically taking the same risk…assuming you overlook the billions of property-level debt that ranks senior to your equity position.  

via http://ift.tt/2jAYIx2 Tyler Durden

Heading into the Chinese Lunar New Year, local banks are suddenly starved for liquidity like never before. On Tuesday China’s benchmark money-market rate jumped the most in two years, with unprecedented cash injections by the central bank being overwhelmed by demand before the Lunar New Year holidays.

Demand for cash in China tends to increase before the Lunar New Year holidays, when households withdraw money to pay for gifts and get-togethers. Month-end corporate tax payments are adding to the pressure this time, with the break running from Jan. 27 through Feb. 2. At that point the PBOC usually steps in with liquidity “injections” in the form of reverse repos. However, what it has done this year is literally off the charts.

On Wednesday, the People’s Bank of China put in a net 410 billion yuan ($60 billion) through open-market operations, the biggest daily “injection” on record. Despite this massive boost in liquidity, the interbank seven-day repurchase rate still jumped 35 basis points, the most since December 2014, to 2.76 percent, according to weighted average prices. Yesterday, the overnight repo rate rose 10 basis points to 2.50 percent, the highest since April 2015, according to weighted average prices.

So, with liquidity still scarce, moments ago on Thursday morning, the PBOC added another net injection of 190 billion consisting of 100Bn in 7-day repo and 150BN in 28-day repos, offset by 60bn yuan in previous loans maturing.

As a result, the PBOC has injected a net of 1.035 trillion yuan via reverse repos so far this week, an all time high.

It was unclear if the rise in 7-day interbank repo rate had continued to rise.

“The PBOC aims to ensure that the liquidity situation remains adequate, while the 28-day reverse repo is apparently targeted at covering the holidays,” said Frances Cheung, head of rates strategy for Asia ex-Japan at Societe Generale SA. “There could also be preparation for any indirect tightening impact from potential outflows.”

Liquidity conditions are under pressure also because loans are due to mature under the Medium-term Lending Facility, according to Long Hongliang, a trader at Bank of Hebei Co. in Beijing. There are 216.5 billion yuan of MLF contracts maturing this week, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The PBOC offered 305.5 billion yuan of loans to lenders using the tool on Jan. 13, compared with 105.5 billion yuan due that day.

As Bloomberg notes, China’s central bank has been offering more 28-day reverse repos than one-week loans in the past two weeks, while curbing the injection of cheaper, short-term funds amid efforts to lower leverage in the financial system. It drained a net 595 billion yuan in the first week of January, before switching to a net injection of 100 billion yuan last week as the seasonal funding demand started to emerge. However, this week’s injection so far of over CNY 1 trillion suggests that there may be something more to the banks’ liquidity needs than simple calendar action.

 

via http://ift.tt/2jB2feH Tyler Durden

Submitted by Robert Gore via StraightLineLogic.com,

The one adjective that best describes the Deep State is “soulless.”

If you stay up with current events and read widely enough, especially non-mainstream media, you can often detect the Deep State and its works. Precise delineation is impossible, but the Deep State is the top ranks of the intelligence agencies, military, Departments of State, Homeland Security, Defense, Treasury, and Justice, the Federal Reserve, a myriad of banks, corporations, law firms, foundations, universities, and powerful behind-the-scenes string-pullers. When SLL talks about the Deep State, it is from the same vantage point as the blindfolded Indians describing the elephant: an admittedly limited and ignorant view of an amorphous entity that does its best to obscure itself to outsiders. Deep Staters often hide what they’re doing even from other Deep Staters.

The Deep State may have had its genesis in the late 1800s, when powerful business, financial, and political figures came together to push passage of the income tax amendment and the Federal Reserve Act, essentials for their desire to dramatically expand the power of the federal government. By the end of the second world war, it had coalesced around two unwavering convictions: the Deep State should run the United States government, and the United States government should run the world. These were not the whispers and murmurs of a super-secret cabal, they were openly discussed by policy makers, the media, and academia in the United States and Great Britain, the junior member of a world-dominating Anglo-American axis.

For over four decades, the Deep State depicted the Soviet Union as an existential threat, justifying their consolidation of power, US government global intervention, and repression at home. It gave itself a moral Get Out of Jail Free card: dastardly Soviet tactics had to be fought with dastardly American tactics. Despite ritualistic expressions of regret: “It’s a damn shame we have to do this, but such is the nature of our enemy,” many in the military and intelligence services relished that aspect of their jobs. Few were called to account for their reprehensible deeds, many of which will remain forever unexposed.

While it was Republican Dwight Eisenhower who warned of the “military-industrial complex” in his farewell address, most of what little public opposition that complex and the intelligence agencies have received since then has come from Democrats. After the Bay of Pigs fiasco, President Kennedy fired CIA chief Allen Dulles, reportedly vowing to shatter the agency into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds. The debate rages as to whether his vow had anything to do with his assassination, but the possibility cannot be dismissed. (Oddly, Dulles was on the Warren Commission and by most accounts stage-managed its investigation.)

Democratic senator Frank Church led a Senate select committee investigation on intelligence in 1975. His investigation gave most Americans their first glimpse into the CIA’s dirty laundry, notably assassinations and attempted assassinations of various foreign leaders. (The practice was supposedly outlawed by an executive order issued by President Gerald Ford, which was replaced by one issued by President Ronald Reagan. That order didn’t prevent US acquiescence to and complicity in the murder of Muammar Gaddafi. “We came, we saw, he died!”) Also revealed was the CIA and FBI’s interception, opening, and photographing of domestic mail. Senator Church publicly expressed grave misgivings about the government’s nascent electronic surveillance capabilities. He must be rolling in his grave over what it does now.

It was also the “Democratic” press, primarily the New York Times and The Washington Post, that took the lead in exposing scandals with intelligence angles and opposing some of America’s military interventions, notably Vietnam. Unfortunately, in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks the Democratic-dominated mainstream media climbed into bed with the Republican administration. The weapons of mass destruction and the Saddam Hussein-al Qaeda stories, based on doctored and phony intelligence, were sold to the American people as the justifications for the regime-change invasion of Iraq. There were almost no editorial objections to that or subsequent regime-change operations, the Patriot Act’s assault on the Bill of Rights, or to the muddled, impossible to define or limit concept of a global, preemptive war on terror. Although that war has been a predictable failure, the mainstream press will not even acknowledge it’s two most obvious consequences: the further spread of terrorism and the refugee flows from Middle Eastern and Northern African war zones.

The problem at the heart of intelligence agencies and their oversight is the information they collect. It invariably includes dirt that can be used against those who might question or oppose them. There is not a person on the planet who doesn’t have some aspect of his or her life they want to remain private. It’s no mystery why a former KGB agent runs Russia, why all the retirement rules were waived so J. Edgar Hoover could stay on as head of the FBI until his death, how a former head of the CIA and then his son acquired the power base that got them both elected president (and they were trying for number three). Threatened or actual blackmail is a powerful weapon, except for that .000000001 percent who lead unblemished, exemplary lives. That weapon renders a secret intelligence function incompatible with civil liberties and popular control of the government.

The recent election was a revolt by the electorate against their incompetent, corrupt rulers. Hillary’s Clinton’s nomination was the exclamation point on the Democratic party’s moral bankruptcy, a final repudiation of the party and its aligned media’s attempts, however incomplete and compromised, to check the Deep State. Given that abdication, its embrace of the intelligence agencies’ perpetration of fake news, support of an increasingly confrontational stance with Russia in hopes of provoking a war, and tacit endorsement of violence during Donald Trump’s inauguration come as no surprise. Grasping for the power they’ve been denied, they’ll try anything.

There has been much talk of a Deep State “coup” during its battle against Donald Trump, but how can those who control the government stage a coup? What they are doing is taking action against an opponent who has ripped away the facade of popular control and may pose a threat to their power and position. Deep State rule has been neither intelligent nor wise. However, it would be unintelligent and unwise to therefore conclude it’s not dangerous. That it would try to deny the duly elected choice of the American people the presidency bespeaks arrogance completely disconnected from morality. That it would try to provoke violence from nuclear-armed Russia and inauguration “demonstrators” in American cities bespeaks a disregard of extreme risks and potentially catastrophic consequences, not just to the citizenry they despise, but to themselves as well.

They must be opposed, stopped, and scattered to the winds (which would, in a perfect world, blow some of them into prison). Donald Trump may be the last, best hope. The intelligent and wise will be on full alert, prepared for the risks and dangers…should he fail or succeed.

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

Nearly three years into a “war on pollution”, in which large swathes of northern China are periodically engulfed in thick, toxic smog, with dangerous air quality readings in major cities like Beijing, Tianjin and Xian forcing many people to stay in doors and shutting down industries, causing ship traffic jams in local ports, and even adversely impacting the local economy, China has realizing that it needs to take more “innovative” measure to make sure it does not lose this particular war. Which explains why local media reported on Tuesday that China is suspending local meteorological bureaus from issuing smog alerts, raising suspicions the government is attempting to suppress information about the country’s air pollution as public anger over the issue grows.

China’s Meteorological Administration notified local bureaus Tuesday to “immediately stop issuing smog alerts”, according to a photo of a notice posted on China’s Twitter-like social media platform Weibo, AFP reports. Instead, of smog, local departments can issue alerts for “fog” when visibility is less than 10 km, according to the notice.

The notice was issued because local “meterological bureaus and the environmental protection administration often disagree when they issue smog-related information,” a representative from the China Meteorological Administration told the Chinese website The Paper. “A joint alerting mechanism will be formulated to consult how to and who should issue alerts for smog,” the representative said.

Centralizing the government’s supervision over a topic that has lead to rising popular anger over the government’s inability to takle the toxic problem, one single department will now be responsible for issuing smog alerts, The Paper reported.

Upon learing the news, online commentators who have long doubted the credibility of official data on air pollution, and any other official Chinese data for that matter, slammed the reports with stinging criticism.

“Before, they cheated us separately, and now, they are going to cheat us together,” one person said on Weibo.

“Even though they are working on a unified alert standard, they should not stop the existing alert system,” another replied.

The feud even spread to various semi-public institutions: “The meteorological administration fought the environmental protection ministry and lost,” the Nanjing Meteorological Institute said on its official Weibo account. “Thus, early warnings about smog, a kind of meteorological calamity, cannot be issued by the meteorological administration,” it said.

The Chinese government has a color-coded system of smog alerts, topping out at red when severe pollution is likely to last more than 72 hours. The notice sets off a series of emergency measures, ranging from taking cars off the road to closing heavily polluting factories.

And like with everything else in China, there is a conflict of interest that sets off the people versus some economic goal. In this case, local authorities have long hesitated to issue the notices over fears that they will harm economic performance, even when pollution levels are literally off the charts. In late 2015, China issued its first ever red alert in response to public anger over the government’s reluctance to take action after a wave of suffocating smog hit the country’s northeast.

Prior instances of smog led to transitory forced shut downs of local industries, and the paralysis of domestic infrastructure and transportation, which in turn had a depressing impact on Chinese manufacturing production, and eventually, GDP. However, with 2017 a banner year for Xi

In the past, local and national authorities have issued contradictory, confusing alerts, one ordering factories and schools to be closed and one not.

Bad air is a source of enduring public anger in China, which has seen fast economic growth in recent decades but at the cost of widespread environmental problems. In recent weeks, AFP adds, parents in particular have expressed outrage over the miasma that regularly affect hundreds of millions and has led to high levels of lung cancer, demanding that schools be equipped with air purifiers.

Earlier this month, many took to social media to express their anger about the thick smog that choked Beijing for over a week around the New Year but found their articles quickly deleted, a move that only increased their frustration.

“When people are gagged, the sky will be blue,” said one sarcasm-laced Weibo comment. Of course, as long the people don’t rise up against their government, however, Beijing could care less.

via http://ift.tt/2iDs7qP Tyler Durden

51 year-old Florida resident, Dominic Puopolo, who was arrested by Miami Beach police Tuesday for allegedly threatening President-elect Donald Trump online is, according to The Daily Mail, is a member of a prominent northeast family close to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Puopolo reportedly admitted to posting a video to Twitter, under his handle @JesusChrist1701, saying: "Yes, I will be at the review stand at the inauguration and I am going to kill President-elect Trump… what are you gonna do about it Secret Service?"

@SecretService VIDEO THREAT NOW 1809H TRUMP DEAD http://pic.twitter.com/fO8OS3viY4

— LORD JESUS CHRIST (@jesuschrist1701) January 16, 2017

And was arrested and charged after leaving a Washington Avenue Subway sandwich shop on Tuesday afternoon.

However, as The Mail notes, Puopolo is not your average Never-Trump'r…

He once gave $20,000 to the Democratic National Committee, DailyMail.com has learned.

Suspect Dominic Puopolo Jr., 51, sat near Hillary Clinton when she delivered the eulogy at the funeral of Puopolo's mother, Sonia, who died in one of the jets that flew into the World Trade Center on 9-11.

He once posted a photo of himself holding an image of his mother in front of a wall that sports a picture of him with Colin Powell and a famous shot of Ronald Reagan. Puopolo has published a number of pictures of outgoing Secretary of State John Kerry, whom he calls a friend.

According to news archives his mother, Sonia Mercedes Morales Puopolo was married to the wealthy Nantucket businessman Dominic J. Puopolo Sr. However, Sonia was among 92 people on American Airlines Flight 11 on Sept. 11, 2001, when it crashed into the World Trade Center's north tower in New York City. In an amazing twist of fate, Ground Zero cleanup crews recovered the wedding ring that Sonia's husband had given her 40 years earlier. The suspect's sister, Miami resident Sonia Tita Puopolo, wrote a book in 2010 about the ring called Sonia's Ring: 11 Ways To Heal Your Heart, Miracles Do Happen, and even ended up on Ellen DeGeneres' show to discuss it.

Dominic Puopolo posted this picture of President Clinton with his sister Sonia (left) and his mother Sonia, who was killed in one of the planes that flew into the World Trade Center

The family is also known in political circles for its generosity toward Democratic organizations and candidates.

The threat suspect, according to federal elections records, gave $20,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 1996. He also contributed to Kerry and deceased Sen. Ted Kennedy in the mid-1990s. His name popped up again in contributions in 2006 when he gave $4,000 to Florida Sen. Bill Nelson's campaign.

His sister Sonia gave $4,000 to Hillary Clinton's various campaigns.

In Miami, meanwhile, Dom Puopolo was arrested four times for petty crimes since 2006, twice for petty theft and once for defrauding an innkeeper.

Read more here…

via http://ift.tt/2jNhr6b Tyler Durden

Obviously worried that his network won’t get a seat at the “big boy” table after Jim Acosta’s recent on-air spat with President-elect Trump, CNN President Jeff Zucker defended his network’s “credibility” in a recent interview with New York Magazine.  In a blatant attempt to deflect attention away from his network’s careless, if not outright malicious, decision to promote the now infamous 35-page “intelligence report” compiled by a UK intelligence officer with some rather unflattering “fake news” about Trump and his alleged connections to Russia, Zucker said that Trump’s attacks against his network were just an attempt to “delegitimize journalism” while asserting that CNN’s “credibility is higher than ever.”  Per The Hill:

CNN President Jeff Zucker says President-elect Donald Trump’s attacks on his network are an attempt to “delegitimize journalism,” adding that CNN’s “credibility is higher than ever.”

 

“It’s just unfortunate that the most powerful person in the world is trying to delegitimize journalism and an organization that plays such a vital role in our democracy,” Zucker told New York Magazine in an interview Wednesday.

 

“I think he’s entitled to his opinion, but it’s — to use one of his favorite words — sad.”

 

Zucker reflected on Trump’s press conference last week, when the president-elect refused to let CNN reporter Jim Acosta ask a question and accuse him of “fake news.”

 

“I think the era of access journalism as we’ve known it is over,” said Zucker, who took over at CNN in 2013.

 

“It doesn’t worry me that Donald Trump hasn’t done an interview with CNN in eight months. I think our credibility is higher than ever, and our viewership is higher than ever, and our reporting is as strong as ever. … Continuing to have an adversarial relationship with that network is a mistake.”

Ironically, Zucker’s comments come just a week after Rasmussen conducted a poll on the credibility of the media finding that, at least in the opinion of their viewers, CNN is, in fact, the least trusted cable news network with only 33% of respondents saying they trust their political news.  Here is what we noted last week in a post entitled “CNN Is Now Least Trusted News Network Among Viewers“:

A recent poll of cable news network viewers found that CNN’s regular audience is far more skeptical of the political news they receive than Fox News fans.

 

In the poll published Wednesday by Rasmussen Reports, 1,000 likely voters were asked to describe their media viewing habits. Seventy-five percent said they watch at least some form of cable news each week, with 42 percent saying they most frequently watch Fox News, 35 percent usually choosing CNN, and 19 percent favoring MSNBC.

 

An even 50 percent of frequent Fox News viewers agreed with a followup question, “Do you trust the political news you are getting?” By comparison, 43 percent of frequent MSNBC viewers and just 33 percent of those who mostly watch CNN said they trust their political news.

Of course, CNN’s decision to spread the “fake news”, originally reported by BuzzFeed, resulted in the following epic exchange between CNN’s Senior White House Correspondent, Jim Acosta, and President elect Trump at last week’s press conference…

 

…which then triggered the following mini-tweetstorm from Trump who said that CNN was “in a total meltdown” while predicting that their “credibility will soon be gone!”

.@CNN is in a total meltdown with their FAKE NEWS because their ratings are tanking since election and their credibility will soon be gone!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2017

We had a great News Conference at Trump Tower today. A couple of FAKE NEWS organizations were there but the people truly get what’s going on

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2017

 

And with Trump confirming that he won’t remove the press from the West Wing of the White House but rather will choose who gets access to the limited space, one has to wonder whether the “Clinton News Network” will make the cut.

via http://ift.tt/2jptR4r Tyler Durden