Tucker 2024? Growing Chorus Of Republicans Want Fox Host To Run For President

Tucker 2024? Growing Chorus Of Republicans Want Fox Host To Run For President

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 15:00

Republicans looking to carry President Trump’s ‘America First’ momentum into the post-Trump era are excitedly eyeing Fox News host Tucker Carlson for a 2024 run.

According to Politico, “Republican strategists, conservative commentators, and former Trump campaign and administration officials are buzzing about Carlson as the next-generation leader of Donald Trump’s movement — with many believing he would be an immediate frontrunner in a Republican primary.”

Sixteen prominent Republicans interviewed by POLITICO said there’s an emerging consensus in the GOP that the 51-year-old Carlson would be formidable if he were to run. Some strategists aligned with other potential candidates are convinced he will enter the race and detect the outlines of a stump speech in Carlson’s recent Fox monologues. Others, particularly those who know him well, are skeptical that he would leave his prime-time TV gig.

“Let me put it this way: If Biden wins and Tucker decided to run, he’d be the nominee,” said former Trump aide Sam Nunberg – though Nunberg also doesn’t think Carlson will run because he’s “so disgusted with politicians.”

Carlson commands the largest audience of any cable news host in history according to ratings released this week – while Carlson clips on Fox News‘ YouTube channel have racked up more than 60 million views, according to the report.

To put it simply, Tucker tells the truth and will call out bullshit on both sides of the aisle. He also frequently treads headfirst into subject matter like few, if any, of his media peers.

On Monday, Carlson took Republican Senator Mike Braun to task, calling him out over Braun’s reform of the Qualified Immunity Act – which would expose police officers to greater liability in civil lawsuits.

When Braun tried to argue that he needed to appease Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Carlson shot back: “Who controls the Senate? I thought Republicans controlled the Senate. So you’re taking your cues from Chuck Schumer [and] saying, ‘He might criticize me, therefore I have to pass a law that makes it easier to sue police’?

Braun stammered his way through the rest of the interview as Carlson continued to land verbal jabs:

Can Tucker convert his massive following into votes? 

“There is at the very least a significant faction within the Republican Party that [Carlson] has a huge stake in and arguably leadership over,” said Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review and Politico columnist.

If he has political ambitions, he has an opening. He has a following and a taste for controversy. He’s smart, quick on his feet and personable. Political experience matters less than it once did.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZzvXnF Tyler Durden

Fed’s Balance Sheet Shrinks For Third Consecutive Week

Fed’s Balance Sheet Shrinks For Third Consecutive Week

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 14:41

After three months of unprecedented gains, which saw an increase of $3 trillion to $7.2 trillion, the Fed’s balance sheet has posted its third consecutive weekly decline since the start of the corona crisis according to the latest H.4.1 statement.

The drop in the week ended July 1 amounted to $73.2 billion, and was just shy of the decline recorded two week prior, which was the biggest weekly drop since May 2009.

However, as has been the case in the past three weeks, the drop in the balance sheet was not due to a reversal or even slowdown in QE which continues almost every single day, with the Fed adding another $15.8 billion in Treasurys even as the settlement calendar and prepays meant MBS shrank by $32 billion in the week ended July 1 (don’t worry, the Fed is also buying about $4.5BN in MBS every day), but once again due to a decline in liquidity swaps, which shrank by $49.5 billion to $225.4 billion, after a $77.5 billion in the week prior and $92 billion in the week before that.

The amount of outstanding repo agreements also declined for a second consecutive week by a modest $9 billion, after an $8.9 billion decline in the week prior.

As shown in the chart below, the total amount outstanding in the swap lines, designed to ease a surge in demand for U.S. currency in the participating banks’ jurisdictions during the early weeks of the crisis, was the lowest since early April.

Coupled with other indications of slackening demand for the Fed’s bevy of emergency liquidity facilities, the reduction in currency swap line usage is for many analysts a sign that global financial markets are returning to near-normal after being upended by the coronavirus outbreak in February and March. “We expect a more rapid decline over the coming months as the majority of the swaps will roll off,” Citigroup economists wrote in a note last Friday.

The flipside is that it also means that the system is once again seeing a shrinkage in the circulation of the world’s reserve currency, an explicit tightening in financial conditions, and the adverse global impact of any macroshock will be substantially greater when one hits in the coming weeks.

Meanwhile, with the S&P500 closely tracking the Fed’s balance sheet in the past three months, which has served as the primary factor behind the rebound in the market, the latest weekly drop coincides with the period of heightened volatility in the past three  weeks.

The shrinkage comes at a time when the Fed’s monthly liquidity injection has been tapered to approximately $120 billion, which suggests that while the balance sheet is likely to resume growing in the next week, it will be at a more gradual pace.

It also means that for the stock market to move substantially from this point on – since the market is now fully disconnected from fundamentals and is simply a derivative of endogenous liquidity and fund flow – Powell will need to find another justification to expand the Fed’s QE aggressively, as discussed in “JPMorgan Spots A Big Problem For Stocks.” Something like – for example – a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic…

Finally, those keeping track of how much corporate bonds the Fed has bought, the latest total for the Fed’s Corporate Credit Facilities LLC which includes purchases of both ETFs and corporate bonds, the Fed disclosed that as of June 25, there was $9.7 billion in book value of holdings (the Fed does not break out how many actual bonds it has bought vs ETFs), an increase of $1.4 billion from the $8.3 billion a week prior. Which means that the Fed continues to buy around $300MM in corporate bonds and/or ETFs every single day.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/31LpWXF Tyler Durden

Year Zero In America: Pulling Down Statues Is Only The Beginning

Year Zero In America: Pulling Down Statues Is Only The Beginning

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 14:35

Authored by Kurt Nimmo via Another Day In The Empire blog,

I’ll bet most Americans don’t know who Pol Pot was.

Pol Pot was a Marxist-Leninist, a student of Mao, and the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Kampuchea from 1963 to 1981. He turned Cambodia into a one-party dictatorship. He dreamed of converting his country into an agrarian socialist society he believed would evolve into a communist society. In order to realize that objective, millions were forced to toil in the countryside. “Bad elements” and “New People”—intellectuals, government officials, Buddhists, shopkeepers, disfavored ethnicities—were either worked to death in rural collectives or executed outright. 

Between 1975 and 1979, it is estimated between 1.5 and 2 million people—nearly a quarter of the population—lost their lives. The Khmer Rouge made Maximilien Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety during the French Revolution look like amateurs by way of comparison. 

Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge called their terror campaign waged against civilization “Year Zero,” the idea that culture, heritage, religion, and history must be utterly destroyed to make way for a communist vanguard and the implementation of revolutionary culture. In China and Russia, similar revolutions resulted in the death of around 100 million people. The Nazis came in a distant second—they murdered a paltry 16 million people. 

Fast-forward to 2020. The founder of Black Lives Matter proudly admits she is a “trained” Marxist.

“I see Black Lives Matter and Antifa as part of a global Marxist effort to destroy the United States,” Dr. Carol M. Swain told Sputnik.

Their goals are more about attaining political power and money than protecting minorities and improving society. Their organizational goals might be quite different from the goals of the protesters concerned about police brutality and discrimination. 

Lenin wrote, “When it comes time to hang the capitalists, they will vie with each other for the rope contract.” This is certainly the case now as transnational corporations jump on the George Floyd bandwagon. The Ford Foundation (CIA), Amazon, Citibank, Facebook, Apple, YouTube, and many other large corporations are underwriting the effort to take down America under the banner of “social justice” and the destruction of capitalism. 

BLM and Antifa are now involved in the sabotage and dismantling of American history and culture. “At its core, BLM is a revolutionary Marxist ideology,” writes Andy Ngo, a journalist attacked and beaten by Antifa goons in Portland. “The US is getting a small preview of the anarchy Antifa has been agitating, training and preparing for. Ending law enforcement is a pre-condition for Antifa and BLM’s success in monopolizing violence.”

Pulling down statues of Confederate generals and former presidents is only the beginning. The BLM-Antifa Marxists are more attuned to Herbert Marcuse than Lenin or Trotsky. 

“A policy of unequal treatment would protect radicalism on the Left against that on the Right,” Marcuse wrote in 1965. “Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left,” he continued. 

“Marcuse dismissed the idea of individual liberty protected by law in favor of a Marxist society favoring ostensibly oppressed groups at the expense of everybody else. Such a society, Marcuse wrote, would demand ‘the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements,’” notes Joseph D’Hippolito. “Marcuse even justified violence: ‘there is a “natural right” of resistance for oppressed and overpowered minorities to use extralegal means if the legal ones have proved to be inadequate,’” Marcuse wrote.

The BLM-Antifa Marxist revolution under the cover of ending “systemic racism” is controlled by the ruling elite through foundations, progressive think tanks, wealthy liberals – and corporate CEOs you’d think know better. 

Success depends on the help of opportunistic Democrat politicians who believe raising a clenched fist and parroting BLM will get them elected or re-elected, thus perpetuating a system of crony capitalism and endless war behind a kinder and gentler Democrat facade that is now falling away. 

As I have previously noted, socialism and communism—two sides of the same coin—represent a near-perfect social and political control mechanism. 

Gary Allen wrote in 1971:

If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of superrich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead it becomes the logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.

The ruling elite, the financial class that has profited so mightily from theft and violence, will not allow Marxists and black hoodie nihilists to spawn a violent revolution. 

After Donald Trump is deposed, the rulers and their political class will turn on the more radical elements of the left. A watered-down version of socialism will be rolled out to placate the masses now facing a Greater Depression and a final nail in the coffin of a battered middle class.

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

Brandon Straka’s #WalkAway Lawsuit Against LGBT Community Center Thrown Out

From Justice Kathryn E. Freed’s decision Wednesday in Straka v. Lesbian Gay Bisexual & Transgender Community Center, Inc., dismissing a lawsuit that got some news coverage in 2019:

Plaintiff Straka is the founder and executive director of #WalkAway, a New York State licensed domestic not-for-profit limited liability company, and co-plaintiffs Harlow and White are “associates” of #WalkAway’s who assist in its non-profit activities. The complaint describes those activities as holding or promoting events that are designed to promote “peaceful social discourse, political awareness and promotion of alternative expressions of gay identity and LGBT identity within the LGBT Community.” … LGBTCC … is engaged in the business of “offering the LGBT Communities of New York City, advocacy, health and wellness programs, arts, entertainment, cultural events and various social and cultural services.”

The amended complaint alleges that, on March 14, 2019, Straka executed a contract with the LGBTCC to reserve space at its New York County location to hold a proposed #WalkAway panel discussion there, and also remitted payment to the LGBTCC of $650.00…. The complaint … allege[s] that the LGBTCC cancelled the scheduled #WalkAway event on March 22, 2019 “without valid reason or prior warning,” and that the LGBTCC thereafter returned [the] $650.00 payment ….

The amended complaint further alleges that: 1) on May 19, 2019, defendant Rosenberg posted a defamatory Tweet about the scheduled #WalkAway event on the Twitter social media platform; 2) on March 21, 2019, defendant Beeferman prepared and posted a document entitled “An Open Letter to the LGBT Center” on the Airtable social media platform which contained several defamatory statements about #WalkAway, and which demanded that the LGBTCC cancel the scheduled #WalkAway event; and 3) on March 22, 2019, [defendant] Testone posted responses to the “Open Letter” on Twitter and on the LGBTCC’s website that contained defamatory statements about #WalkAway, and that acknowledged that the LGBTCC had decided to cancel #WalkAway’s scheduled event so as not to violate the LGBTCC’s policies and mission….

[1.] Plaintiffs claimed that this violated state and local bans on discrimination based on sexual and gender identity, but the court concluded that,

The LGBTCC’s announcement concerning its cancellation of the March 28, 2019 #WalkAway event stated as follows: “In recent days we have learned that certain of the panelists announced for this event have made repeated, well-documented past statements that violate our mission, values and the spirit of inclusiveness for all individuals and identities that is core to our work and who we are. Our space is a place of safety and refuge for those most vulnerable among us, and we will do everything in our power to protect that. Permitting this event to proceed would make many of our community members feel unsafe and, among other things, interfere with their ability to participate in other Center programming.”

Plaintiffs assert that the amended complaint does “not allege discrimination based upon [their] political views, but rather that they “were discriminated against because of their sexual and gender identities.” However, this assertion is belied by the text of the LGBTCC announcement, which refers to the center’s “mission,” but plainly does not mention sexual or gender identities. The court also notes that plaintiffs own ensuing assertion, that the LGBTCC “used its policies as a pretext, or cover, for not wanting to permit one of their own to express controversial views,” appears to admit that the LGBTCC objected to their political views rather than their sexual or gender identities.

[2.] Plaintiffs also claimed that the defendants “engag[ed] in a pattern of egregious cyberbullying,” but the court concluded that New York law doesn’t create a civil action for cyberbullying. Plaintiffs had pointed to New York Human Rights Law § 8-102(26), which added at one pointed defined “cyberbullying”, but that provision has apparently since been removed, and in any event was never accompanied with a prohibition of “cyberbullying.” The court added that,

[A] recent Court of Appeals decision … invalidated the cyberbullying provision of an Albany County local law (“the Dignity for All Students Act”) on the ground that it violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as overbroad. People v Marquan M., 24 NY3d 1 (2014). The Court opined that “cyberbullying is not conceptually immune from government regulation,” but it did not recognize a cause of action created by the Albany County local law. Because plaintiffs have failed to establish that New York law recognizes a cause of action for “cyberbullying,” or that HRL § 8-102 (26) creates such a cause of action, this Court grants so much of both the LGBTCC defendants’ and the individual defendants’ motions as seek dismissal of plaintiffs’ second cause of action.

[3.] Plaintiffs also claimed defamation, but the court concluded that the defendants’ statements were opinions, not actionable false statements of fact:

[The LBTCC’s allegedly defamatory statement] made passing references to plaintiffs’ previous activities in order to explain why the LGBTCC had decided to cancel the #WalkAway event; to wit: “we have learned that certain of the panelists announced for this event have made repeated, well- documented past statements that violate our mission, values and the spirit of inclusiveness for all individuals and identities that is core to our work and who we are.” However, the cancellation notice did not mention those “repeated, well-documented past statements” any further. Instead, it stated that the LGBTCC had determined that #WalkAway’s goals and values were so incompatible with its own that holding the #WalkAway event might “negatively impact people and/or organizations that use the LGBTCC, and/or cause conflict or interference with other LGBTCC programs.” The remainder of the notice’s four paragraphs were devoted to extolling the LGBTCC’s own goals and values.

This Court believes that a “reasonable reader” would be likely to derive two things from the cancellation notice: 1) the information that the LGBTCC had cancelled the #WalkAway event; and 2) the LGBTCC’s reason for doing so—i.e., that it considered that #WalkAway’s mission and methods were incompatible with its own.  Further, this Court finds that a “reasonable reader” would likely regard the former item (the cancellation) as a fact, and the latter item (the explanation for the cancellation) as a result of the LGBTCC’s low opinion of #WalkAway, which is what drove its decision. This Court does not believe that a “reasonable reader” would likely understand the cancellation notice to convey any particular negative facts about #Walkaway, since it simply does not contain any.

The LGBTCC’s subsequent Twitter posting says even less; merely informing the public that:

“Upon further review and consideration, the [LGBTCC] has cancelled the March 28 #WalkAway event. Full statement available at [LGBTCC website].”

In any event, because the court concludes that the cancellation notice contains an expression of the LGBTCC’s opinion about #WalkAway, but not any actionable false statements, and because the First Amendment protects expressions of opinion from defamation claims, the court finds that plaintiffs’ fourth cause of action must fail, as a matter of law.

Plaintiffs also sued for defamation based on the following:

Rosenberg’s March 19, 2019 Tweet consisted of the following short statement: “Like are y’all that desperate for money? This is incredibly egregious that you’d host an event where panelists have used queer slurs and stood behind policies that put the community at great risk. Stand for something. SOMETHING.”

The individual defendants first argue that “every single statement identified in the complaint is true or at the least substantially true.” Plaintiffs respond that “defendants’ statements are factually inaccurate and patently untrue.” The individual defendants’ reply papers restate their original argument, and cite to certain documentary submissions which, they assert, chronicle plaintiffs’ alleged “queer slurs.” …

Here, the individual defendants have presented documents which establish that: 1) plaintiffs Straka, Harlow and White were scheduled to be panelists at the cancelled #Walkaway event at the LGBTCC; 2) on October 22, 2018, Straka posted a Twitter comment that derided the terms “trans,” “genderfluid,” “genderqueer” and “non-binary” as “not real” and “leftist crap”; 3) on August 23, 2019 Straka posted another Twitter comment that used the pejorative term “gaystapo” in reference to the LGBTCC; 4) on November 29, 2018, Harlow posted a comment on Google’s social media platform which equated the term “queer” with “fetishized dysfunction” and “emotional instability,” and as a synonym for “worthless,” “mildly insane,” “obsessed,” and “disparaging”; and 5) since January 2017, White has intermittently created and uploaded episodes of a video series entitled “Triggering Trannies” which features taunts of people who identify as “trans.”

In this Court’s view, all of these comments may be fairly described as “queer slurs” because they were clearly intended as insults. As a result, this Court finds that the individual defendants have demonstrated, by documentary evidence, that the assertion in Rosenberg’s March 19, 2019 Tweet, that “panelists have used queer slurs,” was a true statement. Because of this, New York law immunizes it against plaintiffs’ defamation claim. Therefore, this Court grants the individual defendants’ motion to dismiss so much of plaintiffs’ fourth cause of action as is based on Rosenberg’s March 19, 2019 Tweet.

Beeferman’s March 21, 2019 Airtable post entitled “An Open Letter to the LGBT Center” (which Rosenberg also signed) is longer and more specific than Rosenberg’s Tweet. The portions of it that are relevant to this motion to dismiss are as follows:

“The speakers booked for March 28th’s Town Hall, Brandon Straka, Blaire White, Rob Smith, and Mike Harlow, espouse openly white supremacist, transphobic, xenophobic, and otherwise bigoted views that are dangerous to our communities. Straka, the organizer of the #WalkAway Campaign, has been on the programs of Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Alex Jones, all of whom give credence to violently anti-immigrant, racist, sexist, and queerphobic ideologies. Straka and Harlow even appeared on Gavin McInnes’s CRTV show to talk about #WalkAway two weeks after McInnes’s violent Proud Boys gang attacked counter-protesters on the Upper East Side, kicking and punching young queers while yelling ‘Faggot!’

“The stated goal of ‘WalkAway’ is to draw LGBTQI+ people to the right. However, as a cursory search of the speakers’ public statements shows, they are far-right provocateurs who share responsibility for incitement to violence against trans people, black people, women, immigrants, Jews, and Muslims, and who publicly associate themselves with prominent, violent members of the ‘Alt Right’ white nationalist movement. What’s more, their ‘WalkAway’ platform is the arm of a partisan propaganda machine which accuses their political opponents of supporting ‘special rights’ for gender and sexual minorities….

“Please see the link below for detailed documentation of their transphobic, Islamophobic, antifeminist, and racist incitement. Recent history from Christchurch to Charlottesville shows that giving a platform to such peddlers of hate empowers self-described white supremacists, sexists, transphobes, and homophobes, and encourages them to escalate their activity from hateful speech to physical violence against our communities. Giving a platform to these speakers is deeply irresponsible at this moment.”

Here, this Court finds that the Open Letter contains … non-actionable opinion ….

In the first quoted paragraph of the Open Letter, Beeferman states that plaintiffs “espouse openly white supremacist, transphobic, xenophobic, and otherwise bigoted views that are dangerous to our communities.” He then recites that plaintiffs have appeared on television shows hosted by Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, Alex Jones and Gavin McInnes. The first statement clearly expresses Beeferman’s opinion that plaintiffs hold views about LGBTQI+ people which he characterizes as “bigoted” and “dangerous.” The second sentence recites that plaintiffs have publicly appeared on television shows where they have discussed those views with hosts who are known to share them. The first sentence expresses an opinion. The second sentence expresses a factual basis for that opinion. Taken together, they are a “statement of opinion which is accompanied by a recitation of the facts upon which it is based.” As such, they are not actionable.

In the second quoted paragraph of the Open Letter, Beeferman states that plaintiffs “are far-right provocateurs who share responsibility for incitement to violence against trans people, black people, women, immigrants, Jews, and Muslims, and who publicly associate themselves with prominent, violent members of the ‘Alt Right.'” It also states that #WalkAway is “the arm of a partisan propaganda machine which accuses their political opponents of supporting ‘special rights’ for gender and sexual minorities.”

Leaving aside, for the moment, Beeferman’s personal characterizations of plaintiffs as “far-right provocateurs” and of #WalkAway as “the arm of a partisan propaganda machine,” the balance of the paragraph expresses Beeferman’s opinions that: 1) as a result of their views, plaintiffs “share responsibility for incitement to violence against” certain minority groups; and 2) the “propaganda machine” that #WalkAway is a part of “accuses its political opponents of supporting ‘special rights’ for gender and sexual minorities.” Although this paragraph does not supply a factual basis of the reason for Beeferman’s opinions, as the preceding one did, this Court notes that the second paragraph is qualified by the portion of the Open Letter’s last paragraph, which invites the reader to “[p]lease see the link below for detailed documentation of their [plaintiffs’] transphobic, Islamophobic, antifeminist, and racist incitement.” … [A] “remark [which is ] is prompted by or responsive to a hyperlink …is ‘accompanied by a recitation of the facts upon which it is based,’ and therefore qualifies as ‘pure opinion.'” Here, because the link in the final paragraph provides information to support the opinions alluded to in the second paragraph, this Court concludes that this portion of Beeferman’s Open Letter is not actionable either, because it “does not imply that it is based upon undisclosed facts.”

Returning now to Beeferman’s personal characterizations of plaintiffs as “far-right provocateurs” and of #WalkAway as “the arm of a partisan propaganda machine,” this Court is cognizant of the rule that “‘[e]ven apparent statements of fact may assume the character of statements of opinion, and thus be privileged, when made in … circumstances in which an audience may anticipate [the use] of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole.'” In the context of today’s hotly debated political disagreements over LGBTQI+ rights, the court believes that it is only reasonable to expect the use of “epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole,” and that is what this Court deems Beeferman’s ungenerous personal characterizations of plaintiffs to be. As a result, this Court finds that those statements do not constitute actionable defamation….

[4.] Plaintiffs also sued for breach of contact, but the court concluded that “plaintiffs’ failure to produce the alleged contract or to plead which of its terms were breached and how, is fatal to its claim against the LGBTCC defendants.”

The court’s analysis looks correct to me (except that I haven’t followed the breach of contract issue closely enough to speak to that).

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2NRdn4O
via IFTTT

Twitter Ditches “Offensive” Non-Inclusive Terms Such As “Whitelist”, “Man Hours” And “He, Him, His”

Twitter Ditches “Offensive” Non-Inclusive Terms Such As “Whitelist”, “Man Hours” And “He, Him, His”

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 14:20

Twitter on Friday announced a list of words and phrases that their engineering team will begin using in place of ‘problematic’ language which “does not reflect our values as a company or represent the people we serve.”

Now, “man hours” will be “person hours” or “engineer hours,” the word “Blacklist” will become “Denylist,” and Whitelist will be the “Allowlist.”

Don’t even think about misgendering – the ultimate microaggression.

Twitter’s new rules apply to source code, documentation, FAQs, technical design docs, “and more,” while the company is also “implementing a browser extension that will help our teams identify words in documents and web pages, and suggest alternative inclusive words.”

The reactions have been telling:

Twitter’s new rules are similar to changes at JPMorgan, which has eliminated terms such as “blacklist” and “master / slave” as well from its internal technology materials and code, according to Reuters.

The terms had appeared in some of the bank’s technology policies, standards and control procedures, as well in the programming code that runs some of its processes, one of the sources said.

Other companies like Twitter Inc (TWTR.K) and GitHub Inc adopted similar changes, prompted by the renewed spotlight on racism after the death of George Floyd, a Black man who died in police custody in Minneapolis in May. here

The phrases “master” and “slave” code or drive are used in some programming languages and computer hardware to describe one part of a device or process that controls another. –Reuters

Who will be the next company to signal their virtue in the wokelympics?

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3glpZ0o Tyler Durden

Abandoned Malls Are Now Being Turned Into Hybrid Apartment Housing

Abandoned Malls Are Now Being Turned Into Hybrid Apartment Housing

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 14:10

Over the last couple of years, we have been extensively documenting the hastening trend of abandoned malls around the country. As brick and mortar unceremoniously gives way to e-commerce, one shopping mall after the next has been left for dead, with some even starting to be reclaimed by the Earth, complete with flora and fauna. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3dVuld1 Tyler Durden

Canada Suspends Extradition Treaty With Hong Kong, Slams “Secretive” New Law

Canada Suspends Extradition Treaty With Hong Kong, Slams “Secretive” New Law

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 13:47

In massive new fallout two days after China’s new Hong Kong national security law went into effect, Canada announced Friday it will suspend its extradition treaty with Hong Kong. This effectively opens the door for Hong Kong democracy activists, who might potentially find themselves “wanted” by pro-Beijing authorities and accused of crimes, to seek out Canada as a safe-haven. No longer will Canada agree to extradite ‘criminals’ back to Hong Kong.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, via Reuters.

As we’ve noted, this week the exodus of young anti-Beijing activists has already begun over fears they could be charged on “terrorism and subversion” just for leading protests with now banned slogans and ‘revolutionary’ signs.

But the drastic Canada move – also coming at a time of rapidly worsening US-China and UK-China relations – has further implications touching on trade and military ties, as Reuters reports of the latest government statements

In a statement, Foreign Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne also said Ottawa would not permit the export of sensitive military items to Hong Kong, which is home to around 300,000 Canadians.

…Champagne condemned the “secretive” way the legislation had been enacted and said Canada had been forced to reassess existing arrangements.

This includes “closed trials” and lack of independent review or appeal, with the potential for life in prison for certain egregious crimes deemed motivated by terrorism or separatism. In his statement Champagne announced: “Canada will treat exports of sensitive goods to Hong Kong in the same way as those destined for China. Canada will not permit the export of sensitive military items to Hong Kong.”

“Canada is also suspending the Canada-Hong Kong extradition treaty,” he added. And on the day the law went into effect, Wednesday, Canada took this action:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested in a briefing to reporter that more punitive measures are likely to follow, possibly related to immigration and additional travel restrictions.

Recall too that all of this comes on the heals of the 2018 drama involving Canada’s detention of Huawei chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, at United States request.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZAIbMF Tyler Durden

US Auto Sales Plunged In Q2 With GM, Toyota, & Fiat Suffering 30% Drops In Sales

US Auto Sales Plunged In Q2 With GM, Toyota, & Fiat Suffering 30% Drops In Sales

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 13:20

U.S. vehicle sales for major manufacturers like Toyota, General Motors and Fiat were all slaughtered in the second quarter of 2020 as the U.S. deals with the brunt of the economic impact from Covid-19while already in the midst of an auto recession that we had written extensively about heading into 2020.

Sales for all three of those manufacturers were down more than 30% in the second quarter, mostly in-line with Wall Street’s predictions. Nissan, Hyundai and Porsche also suffered major drops in sales between April and June, according to CNBC

Edmunds had predicted a 34% drop in sales for the second quarter, which is expected to be the worst quarter of the year due to the pandemic. GM’s sales fell 34% on the nose, Fiat’s sales fell 38.6% and Toyota’s numbers fell 34.6%. 

Nissan’s reported Q2 sales plunged 49.5% and Hyundai’s sales fell 23.7%, including a 21.9% plunge in June. Volkswagen posted a 29% decline in sales and sold under 70,000 vehicles in the quarter. Porsche sales fell 19.9%. 

Pickup trucks were a silver lining for both GM and Fiat in the quarter. Kurt McNeil, GM’s U.S. vice president, sales operations, said: “GM entered the quarter with very lean inventories and our dealers did a great job meeting customer demand, especially for pickups. Now, we are refilling the pipeline by quickly and safely returning production to pre-pandemic levels.”

Jeff Kommor, head of U.S. sales for Fiat Chrysler, cited fleet sales as being a problem. Many of those sales have been “canceled or delayed” he said.

Similarly, Bob Carter, executive vice president of sales for Toyota Motor North America, also spoke to CNBC about fleet sales being a problem: “Retail consumers are coming out looking for cars and trucks. What hasn’t yet returned to the auto industry is the fleet commercial buyer, particularly rental car. Those sales continue to be suppressed at about 20%.”

Zero Hedge readers likely already know that we had reported on the drought in fleet sales just days ago. “Weak fleet orders for June are making it seem as though a recovery is still far away,” we wrote. “Cox Automotive is forecasting that fleet sales will fall 56% to 1.3 million vehicles in June, after plunging 83% in May and 77% in April.”

In the same piece, we noted that Cox was also predicting that further job cuts could occur if production at U.S. automakers doesn’t eventually ramp back up.  Zohaib Rahim, economic and industry insights manager at Cox Automotive, said: “If we don’t see a rebound in 2021, this will be a problem for automakers. But right now they’re using all their production to supply dealers.”

While fleet sales aren’t a main concern for automakers – higher margin sales to customers are – they can still put pressure on the industry as a whole. And with rental companies like Hertz now in the midst of bankruptcy, there is sure to be a profound effect not only on dealer sales, but the used car aftermarket. 62% of vehicles sold to fleet buyers in 2019 went to rental car companies. 

In 2019, fleet sales accounted for about 22% of GM’s sales, with about half going to rental fleets and the other half going to corporations and government agencies.

Fleet sales made up about 28% of Nissan’s 2019 sales, with 93% of those going to rental car companies. 

 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZtJXiM Tyler Durden

“The American Government Still Owes A Debt”: Reparations Bill Gaining Steam In House

“The American Government Still Owes A Debt”: Reparations Bill Gaining Steam In House

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 12:55

Authored by Ben Wilson via SaraACarter.com,

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) on Wednesday called for the passage of a bill to study slave reparations and how distribution would occur. Originally proposed in Jan. 2019, the bill has gained traction since the killing of George Floyd.

The Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act would investigate if Blacks should get reparations and what the process would look like. The Congressional Black Caucus has taken the lead on getting the bill in front of the House.

Jackson Lee said there is “no better time” for the bill to be in the national conversation.

“We now have an opportunity, through H.R. 40, to have the highest level of discussion about systemic racism and race,” Jackson Lee said on Tuesday according to The Hill.

“And we are able to do it in a manner that is bringing people together; that acknowledges that Black lives matter; and acknowledges that there has to be a response.”

Since the May 25 killing of Floyd, the House has passed bills to address racial disparities and a large number — 131 Democratic representatives — have signed on to the Reparations Bill.

“The key question here is that as the slaves were free, there was no tangible wealth given for their work of over 200 years,” Jackson Lee said in a Tuesday press conference with the Congressional Black Caucus.

“That lack of wealth, reflected in the anger and anguish of those who received them, that led into a broken reconstruction, Jim Crowism, 4,000 African Americans lynched and then a period of attempt at civil rights and the loss of the civil rights battlers, in essence on the civil rights battlefield.”

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said on Wednesday the slave reparations bill is under consideration for a vote by the House.

“The purpose of this Act is to establish a commission to study and develop Reparation proposals for African-Americans,” the bill reads.

“To address the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United States and the 13 American colonies between 1619 and 1865 and to establish a commission to study and consider a national apology and proposal for reparations for the institution of slavery.”

 

 

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

Walmart Transforming 160 Parking Lots Into Drive-In Movie Theaters

Walmart Transforming 160 Parking Lots Into Drive-In Movie Theaters

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/03/2020 – 12:30

In May, readers may recall we said social distancing would revive drive-in movie theaters in a post-corona world. And boy, were we right.  

A press release via Walmart on Wednesday (July 1) said, “Walmart is transforming 160 of its store parking lots into contact-free drive-in movie theaters where customers can safely gather to watch movies programmed by the Tribeca Drive-in team.” 

Beginning in August, Walmart will roll out this red carpet experience in towns across the country for a combined 320 showings. This family-friendly night will include hit movies, special appearances from filmmakers and celebrities and concessions delivered right to customer vehicles.

Walmart’s drive-in tour will run through October. Additional details will be announced closer to the start of the tour. More information can be found here: walmartdrive-in.com.

Ahead of each screening, Walmart will make it easy for families to fill their picnic baskets by ordering their drive-in essentials online for curbside pickup on the way to their movie. For families itching for the big screen now, Walmart is also partnering with the Tribeca Drive-in to serve as a presenting partner for its Tribeca Drive-In movie series, which begins this Thursday, July 2. – Walmart press release 

“Drive-Ins have been a signature program for Tribeca since we started the Tribeca Film Festival 19 years ago after 9/11,” Jane Rosenthal, CEO and co-founder of Tribeca Enterprises and Tribeca Film Festival said in a statement Wednesday.

“But now, the Tribeca Drive-In is much more than a fun, retro way to see movies — it’s one of the safest ways for communities to gather. We are thrilled to partner with Walmart to bring more people together around the shared cinematic experiences that Tribeca is known for.”

Walmart said stores in Arlington, Texas, Pasadena, California, Nassau County, New York, and Orchard Beach in the Bronx, New York would offer the new drive-in movie service. 

As we noted several months back, more than half a century ago, there were nearly 4,000 drive-in movie theaters across the US. Now there’s less than 300 – but that’s all expected to change in a post-corona, contactless world. 

Google search trend “drive-in movie theater near me” has erupted to a near multi-decade high.

It’s clear that Americans have little intentions in returning to a traditional movie theater as virus cases surge and states pause or reverse reopenings, have now opted for the second-best thing, that is, a drive-in movie theater, soon to be featured in Walmart parking lots. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/31CkwOK Tyler Durden